WRITTEN QUESTION E-1376/01 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council. Contacts between Brussels and President Mugabe of Zimbabwe.
Date: 2001-05-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Zimbabwe, democracy, human rights, the EU's international role

C 81 E/22

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.4.2002

What steps will the Council take to defend the European social model and prevent Marks and Spencer
from achieving its antisocial aims, thus ensuring that other companies of comparable size will not
unhesitatingly take decisions along similar lines in the future? Will it, without further delay, adopt the
directive on the right of workers to be informed, making provision in the text for penalties for non-
compliance?

Reply

(6 December 2001)

The Council is conscious of the fact that certain recent cases of company restructuring are likely to have
serious economic and social consequences for their employees and members of their families. The Council
is also conscious of the fact that the employers in some of these cases have been accused of not having
informed and consulted their employees and/or their representatives in accordance with national legislation
in force to that effect. It is, however, not up to the Council to determine whether or not the relevant
legislation has been violated.

The attention of the Honourable Member of the European Parliament is drawn to the fact that work on the
Commission(cid:146)s proposal for a Directive establishing a general framework for informing and consulting
employees in the European Community has now advanced to a stage where the Council, at its meeting on
11 June 2001, reached a political agreement on a common position.

(2002/C 81 E/027)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1376/01

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(21 May 2001)

Subject: Contacts between Brussels and President Mugabe of Zimbabwe

It is now more than 20 years since Zimbabwe became independent. Current press reports about that
country make dismal reading (cid:129) not least with regard to President Mugabe. He supports black occupation
of white-owned farms, the fuels racial hatred in order to divert attention away from the extreme social
deprivation into which he has led his country. In a television interview to mark his 77th birthday, he said
that he would not retire until the whites had been defeated. Draconian campaigns against the independent
judiciary and the press, as well as widespread intimidation of the opposition, are everyday occurrences.
The current situation in Zimbabwe is the result of long years of misrule, for which President Mugabe and
his ZANU-PF party are responsible.

The Belgian Foreign Minister, Mr Louis Michel, and the French President, Mr Jacques Chirac, seem to have
no qualms about cosying up to the President of Zimbabwe. Both of them officially welcomed the despot in
Brussels and Paris respectively on 6 March 2001. Mr Michel and President Chirac were among the loudest
proponents of the policy which led to 14 of the EU Member States imposing sanctions on Austria, making
a great show of their concern for democracy and human rights, yet they welcomed President Mugabe with
open arms.

Can the Council indicate whether or not:

(cid:129) the European Union loses more than a little credibility when it adopts such a cavalier attitude towards

democracy and human rights,

(cid:129) it should take measures to avoid such faux pas with a view pursuing a consistent foreign policy,

(cid:129) sanctions should also be imposed on politicians who manifestly cultivate such chummy relationships

with a despotic regime?

4.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/23

Reply

(21 November 2001)

The meeting that took place on 5 March 2001 in Brussels between the Belgian Prime Minister, Mr Guy
Verhofstadt, the Belgian Foreign Minister, Mr Louis Michel and President Mugabe of Zimbabwe was
organised at the request of President Mugabe.

the
The private meeting that
French Republic, Mr Jacques Chirac and President Mugabe of Zimbabwe was requested by President
Mugabe. The Council was neither instrumental in the setting up of either of these meetings, nor did it
participate in them.

took place on 6 March 2001 in Paris between the President of

Since the beginning of March this year the EU has decided to enter into a constructive, critical and
balanced dialogue with Zimbabwe guided by the spirit of Article 8 of the Cotonou Agreement. The EU
started this dialogue with the objective of exchanging information and fostering mutual understanding on
issues which the EU considers to be fundamental in the relationship between the parties, and which are
also covered by the text of the above Agreement (Article 9).

At its meeting on 25 June 2001, the Council noted the lack of substantial progress in the ongoing political
dialogue with the Government of Zimbabwe and expressed its deep concern over recent developments in
that country. It stressed that as a first priority the dialogue should yield rapid and tangible results in a
number of areas (an end to political violence, full access for the EU, concrete action to protect the freedom
of the media,
independence of the judiciary and respect for its decisions, and an end to the illegal
occupation of properties).

The Council agreed to closely follow developments in these areas, as well as on overall questions regarding
the rule of law, economic policies and the land reform, over the following two months, and to take
appropriate measures if substantial progress had not been made.

(2002/C 81 E/028)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1384/01

by Marco Pannella (TDI) to the Commission

(27 April 2001)

Subject: Vietnam

On 10 April 2001 the deputy leader of the Unified Buddhist Church in Vietnam, the Venerable Thich
Quang Do, informed the International Buddhist Information Office that the Vietnamese police had cut the
telephone lines of the Thanh Minh Zen monastery in Ho Chi Minh City. Communications by means of
mobile telephones were subsequently jammed, since when nothing more has been heard of Mr Thich
Quang Do.

On the eve of the Ninth Congress of the PCV [Vietnamese Communist Party], Mr Thich Quang Do issued a
call for democracy in Vietnam to the country(cid:146)s leaders, whom he asked to initiate a process, based on a
broad popular alliance of groups and individuals of every political and religious hue, which would bring
about a peaceful transition to democracy. Following this call, Mr Thich Quang Do was threatened with
arrest.

What information does the Commission hold regarding Mr Thich Quang Do(cid:146)s whereabouts and his state of
health? Has the Commission already taken (or does it intend to take) steps to remind the Vietnamese
communist authorities of their obligation to guarantee freedom of opinion and association in Vietnam?

More generally, what action does the Commission intend to take in order to ensure that the new leaders of
the PCV finally initiate the political and institutional reforms which will enable democracy, constitutional
government and a proper market economy to be established?