WRITTEN QUESTION P-1599/01 by Christos Zacharakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Condemnation of Turkey by the European Court of Human Rights.
Date: 2001-05-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Türkiye, accession criteria, application of EU law, human rights

C 350 E/198

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

There are serious concerns at present about the fate of this proposal since, although it marks the first
material and courageous step forward along the road towards the communitarisation of the third pillar,
some Member States want to backtrack and make substantial changes to it by:

(cid:129) extending to more than one year the waiting period before the end of which third-country nationals

may not apply for family reunification;

(cid:129) limiting strictly the number of family members eligible for family reunification, excluding relatives in
the ascending line, unmarried couples and dependent children who have reached the age of majority;

(cid:129) not granting family members the right to work immediately upon arrival in the host Member State;

(cid:129) allowing Member States to withdraw residence permits for reunified families if,

in the two years

following reunification, the required conditions are no longer met.

The Commission(cid:146)s draft directive, as amended by the European Parliament, is a significant text which must
receive firm and uncompromising backing from the Community institutions.

What strategy does the European Commission intend to adopt in the light of this incomprehensible hue
and cry? What is its unequivocal and precise position on this issue?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(19 July 2001)

The wide differences of opinion still remaining between the Member States prevented them from reaching
an agreement on the proposal for a directive on family reunification at the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA)
Council on 28 and 29 May 2001. The Ministers concluded that negotiations should continue in working
parties under the Belgian Presidency.

It is true that the proposals given as examples by the Honourable Member were presented during the
negotiations. However, none of them was supported by all the Member States.

During the negotiations the Commission defended its proposal as amended by Parliament(cid:146)s opinion,
without standing in the way of an acceptable compromise. It will also ensure within the limits of its
powers that the final text will have a real legal and political bearing. It has maintained repeatedly that once
persons are admitted they should be automatically integrated into the host country. Family reunification is
a powerful tool for persons already resident in a Member State, and persons admitted for that purpose
should be guaranteed adequate rights.

(2001/C 350 E/215)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1599/01

by Christos Zacharakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 May 2001)

Subject: Condemnation of Turkey by the European Court of Human Rights

In its judgment of 10 May 2001 the European Court of Human Rights condemned Turkey for continuing
large-scale violations of human rights in Cyprus since 1974 and ruled in favour of the application by the
Republic of Cyprus.

As the Turkish Government hastened to announce that it would ignore this judgment of the European
Court of Human Rights, whose jurisdiction it has by the way formally recognised since 1990, and as in the

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/199

past it ignored a similar judgment by the same court condemning it in the Loizidou case of 1996:

(cid:129) What direct action does it intend to take to ensure respect for the judgments of the European Court of

Human Rights by Turkey?

(cid:129) What will be the consequences of Turkey(cid:146)s behaviour in violating its commitments to the European
Institutions in respect of its prospects of accession to the European Union, and what specific will these
consequences take in the European Union(cid:146)s political and economic relations with Turkey?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2001)

The Commission is aware of the recent judgement by the European Court of Human Rights to which the
Honourable Member refers.

As a candidate country Turkey needs to fulfil the Copenhagen criteria, inter alia on human rights.

This is among the subjects included in the Accession Partnership and the enhanced political dialogue with
Turkey. The Commission will give its assessment of
the performance of all candidates under the
Copenhagen criteria in the regular reports on progress in preparation for membership, to be adopted in
November 2001.

It may also be recalled to the Honourable Member that mention was made of the case of Loizidou against
Turkey in the last regular report, published in November 2000 (1).

(1) COM(2000) 713 final.

(2001/C 350 E/216)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1604/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 June 2001)

Subject: Condemnation of Turkey by European Court of Human Rights

In a recent judgment on 10 May 2001, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) condemned Turkey
for wide-ranging and systematic violation of 14 articles of the European Convention on Human Rights in
Cyprus.

This judgment follows on from the same Court(cid:146)s 1998 judgment in the Lo(cid:239)zidou case, with which Turkey
has yet to comply and the Turkish Foreign Ministry has announced in regard to the new judgment that
Turkey is unable to implement it.

Since the Court(cid:146)s judgment is binding and final, will the Commission include full and unconditional
acceptance of ECHR judgments among Turkey(cid:146)s (cid:145)short-term obligations(cid:146) under the EU-Turkey partnership
agreement?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2001)

The Commission would refer
Mr Zacharakis (1).

(1) See page 198.

the Honourable Member

to its answer

to written P-1599/01 by