WRITTEN QUESTION E-1572/01 by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission. Recruitment of temporary staff to OLAF.
Date: 2001-06-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, administration of the Institutions, recruitment, servant (EU)

C 350 E/194

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

laws that regulate gambling
The Commission has not been called to harmonise the different national
activities. However, following the adoption of the e-commerce directive (2) which excluded gambling
services from its scope and in the context of its current consultation of interested parties on the basis of its
recently adopted Communication on an Internal Market Strategy for services (3),
it is being asked to
reconsider the need for harmonisation in this field. This seems to stem from the increasing cross-border
competition that is arising as a consequence of the development of on-line lotteries and casinos.

The Commission is currently awaiting further
reactions from interested parties including national
authorities in this area. Cross-border restrictions to such services as well as to all other services will be
addressed in a Report to be prepared by the Commission at the end of Phase 1 of its Internal Market
Strategy for Services. This report will be made available to the Parliament.

Meanwhile, the Honourable Member is invited to submit his views on the need and/or content for such
European harmonisation to the Internal Market and Enterprise Directorates General of the Commission
who have joint responsibility for the follow-up work on the Communication on an Internal Market
strategy for services.

(1)

Judgement of
the Court of 21 September 1999. Markku Juhani L(cid:228)(cid:228)r(cid:228), Cotswold Microsystems Ltd and Oy
Transatlantic Software Ltd v. Kihlakunnansyytt(cid:228)j(cid:228) (Jyv(cid:228)skyl(cid:228)) and Suomen valtio (Finnish State). Reference for
a preliminary ruling: Vaasan hovioikeus (cid:129) Finland. Freedom to provide services (cid:129) Exclusive operating rights (cid:129) Slot
machines. Case C-124/97.

(2) Directive 2000/31/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information
society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce) (OJ L
178, 17.7.2000).

(3) COM(2000) 888 of 29.12.2000.

(2001/C 350 E/210)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1572/01

by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Recruitment of temporary staff to OLAF

(1 June 2001)

Over the past few months the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has launched a recruitment drive for
temporary staff specialising in criminal law and anti-fraud legislation.

Will the Commission provide the following information:

(cid:129) the overall result of this recruitment drive;

(cid:129) the number and names of applicants who were already working for OLAF, and

(cid:129) the number and names of such applicants who are to be re-recruited and when this is to occur?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(18 July 2001)

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) organised three separate selection procedures in 2000 for the
recruitment of temporary staff, two for investigators (categories A and B) and one for specialists (category
A) in the area referred to by the Honourable Member (criminal law and anti-fraud legislation).

As regards the selection of investigators, the two reserve lists comprise 64 names in category A, with seven
successful candidates recruited on 31 May 2001, and 52 names in category B, with 17 candidates recruited
on the same date.

As regards the selection of specialists in criminal law and anti-fraud legislation, the reserve list contains 10
names in career bracket A7/A6, with four successful candidates recruited on 31 May 2001, and 24 names
in career bracket A5/A4, with five candidates recruited on that date. Of the nine new members of staff
recruited, one was already working for OLAF.

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/195

Recruitment from the reserve lists will continue as and when budgetary funds become available in line
with departmental requirements.

With a view to safeguarding the confidentiality of personal data, the Commission declines to provide the
names of persons already working for OLAF or likely to be recruited in future in reply to a written
question.

(2001/C 350 E/211)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1577/01

by Georg Jarzembowski (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 May 2001)

Subject: Interpretation of the second indent of Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89 of

21 June 1989 laying down common marketing standards for preserved sardines

Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89 of 21 June 1989 laying down common marketing
standards for preserved sardines (1) lays down requirements with regard to the sardine species which may
be marketed as preserved sardines. The second indent of that Article lays down that preserved sardines
must be prepared exclusively from fish of the species (cid:145)Sardina pilchardus Walbaum(cid:146).

However, WTO rules, especially those set out in Article III, Article IX(1) and Article XI(1) of the GATT,
stipulate that what are known as (cid:145)like products(cid:146) (cid:129) such as like domestic products or like products from
third countries (cid:129) may not be treated less favourably.

Is the Commission aware that the wording of the second indent of Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2136/89 breaches GATT rules, especially Article III, Article IX(1) and Article XI(1) thereof, since it
prohibits the marketing of like sardine species (such as (cid:145)Sardinops sagax(cid:146))?

Has the Commission taken on board the fact that a prohibition on such like products breaches the GATT
rule on equal treatment of like products?

What will the Commission do in order to prevent a clash between Council Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89
and the GATT rules referred to above and to create legal certainty?

(1) OJ L 212, 22.7.1989, p. 79.

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2001)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89 of 21 June 1989 lays down the common marketing standards for
preserved sardines. This Council regulation does not exclude from the Community market other types of
fishes,
like the sardinops sagax, nevertheless it reserves the use of the name (cid:145)sardine(cid:146) to the Sardine
Pilchardus Walbaum. This reserve in the use of the name (cid:145)sardine(cid:146) is in accordance with the traditional use
of (cid:145)sardine(cid:146) in the Community and it is done in order to ensure market transparency and prevent the
consumer from being mislead. However, other types of sardine-like fishes can be freely marketed in the
Community if they use another name that can distinguish them from the (cid:145)sardine pilchardus walbaum(cid:146).

Concerning the Honourable Member(cid:146)s questions as to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)
compatibility of Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89, the Commission would like to explain that in light of the
interpretation of the concept of like products provided by GATT and World Trade Organisation (WTO)
panels, sardines and sardinops are not necessarily like products. But more importantly, even if that would
be the case, Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89 does not provide less favourable treatment to sardinops than to
sardines as both can be freely marketed in the Community without any restriction. It is only because of the
is in the Community reserved for the (cid:145)sardine
need to protect the consumer that the term (cid:145)sardine(cid:146)