do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1747/01 by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) and Dimitrios Koulourianos (GUE/NGL) to the Council. Turkish research in the Aegean.
Date: 2001-06-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Aegean Sea, Cyprus, Türkiye, earthquake, ethnic conflict, research project

C 81 E/56

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.4.2002

Rules on the storage of documents and measures relating to staff:

(cid:129) Safeguards and precautions are taken at national level to prevent the improper issue of passports, visas

and residence permits.

(cid:129) Community law contains provisions relating to visas. The Common Consular Instructions require the
head of the consulate to ensure that the service is organised in such a way as to prevent any type of
negligence that might facilitate theft or forgery. Staff should be shielded from local pressures and there
should be regular rotation of officials to prevent the development of lax practices. The Instructions
also require security measures to be taken on the storage and use of visa stickers.

(cid:129) Criminal penalties for those who facilitate the illegal entry or residence of non-EU nationals.

(cid:129) Criminal penalties for those who fraudulently obtain administrative documents, particularly by actively

corrupting public officials.

(cid:129) Criminal penalties and disciplinary sanctions for public officials who improperly issue administrative

documents, particularly when they are guilty of passive corruption.

The Commission is not in a position to comment on the facts of the matters referred to by the Honourable
Member. It would point out that if administrative documents are found to have been issued fraudulently it
is for the authorities of the Member State concerned to select the most appropriate measures from
amongst those listed above. In the event of a recurrence of the apparently isolated and localised incidents
referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission would undoubtedly act to ensure that the
Member State in question was not persisting in an administrative practice that was contrary to Community
law.

(2002/C 81 E/066)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1747/01

by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) and Dimitrios Koulourianos (GUE/NGL) to the Council

Subject: Turkish research in the Aegean

(15 June 2001)

On 4 June 2001, the Turkish Government dispatched the vessel Piri Reis to the Aegean to carry out
seismological research.

The navigation charts reveal that the vessel was also to survey both the Greek and Cypriot continental
shelves which, were it to happen, would give rise to a major crisis in the region, for which Turkey, a
country eligible for accession to the European Union, would be solely responsible.

What immediate measures will the Council take to call Turkey to order given that Turkey undertook
through the Helsinki decision to seek a peaceful settlement of disputes as a condition of accession to the
European Union?

Reply

(27 November 2001)

The case of the vessel Piri Reis, being dispatched to the Aegean for the purpose referred to in the question,
has not been raised in the Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1752/01 by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Commission. Cancellation of the White Paper on European Union youth policies.
Date: 2001-06-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU policy, youth policy

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/219

In view of

1.
construction of the school will have on an important part of the European cultural heritage?

the EU is funding the project, has it considered the impact which

the fact

that

2.
Given that the proposed project does not meet the required specifications for a school (lack of
a school yard), has consideration been given to the alternative sites for the Ralleios School proposed by
local organisations?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(13 July 2001)

The Honourable Member is requested to refer to the answer by the Commission to Oral Question
H-0395/01 by Mr Alyssandrakis at Question Time during Parliament(cid:146)s May II 2001 part-session (1).

(1) Written answer, 15.5.2001.

(2001/C 350 E/245)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1752/01

by Isidoro SÆnchez Garc(cid:237)a (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 June 2001)

Subject: Cancellation of the White Paper on European Union youth policies

The Spanish Youth Council has criticised the cancellation of one of the main projects embarked on by the
Commission in relation to young people: the White Paper on European Union youth policies. According
to the Youth Council, the Commission decided to cancel the project after two years of intensive work with
thousands of young people, experts, researchers and EU governments.

The project responded to the calls made by European youth organisations and appeared to open up the
possibility of providing youth policies with a structure at Community level.

Bearing in mind the expectations raised and the initial date of November 2001 for the project(cid:146)s
submission, why has the project been cancelled?

Will the Commission continue with the preparatory work on the White Paper on EU youth policies, and
what date will it set for its finalisation and presentation?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2001)

The Commission feels that the policy of co-operation on matters concerning European youth must be
strengthened.

For this reason, at the initiative of the Member of the Commission responsible for education and culture,
the Commission embarked upon the preparation of a White Paper on the subject.

The Commission wished this to be preceded by widespread consultation on an unprecedented scale. It is
therefore aware of young people(cid:146)s expectations and of the responsibilities such expectations give rise to,
not only at EU level but also (cid:129) in fact especially (cid:129) in the Member States.

Bolstered by the support of young people and the Member States, the Commission is continuing with the
preparatory work on the White Paper, which should be published by the end of the year.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.2432 — Angelini/Phoenix/JV) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-06-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: distributive trades, economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control, pharmaceutical product, production

C 171/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

15.6.2001

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.2432 (cid:151) Angelini/Phoenix/JV)

(2001/C 171/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1.
On 5 June 2001 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to
Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/97 (2),
by which the undertakings Adivar SpA (Adivar), belonging to the Italian Angelini group (Angelini), and
Comifar Distribuzione SpA (Comifar), belonging to the German Phoenix group, acquire, within the
meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of
the undertaking Newco, by way of
purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.

joint control of

the Regulation,

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

(cid:151) Angelini: pharmaceutical and parapharmaceutical wholesaling and production,

(cid:151) Phoenix: pharmaceutical and parapharmaceutical wholesaling,

(cid:151) Newco: pharmaceutical and parapharmaceutical wholesaling,

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified concentration could fall within

3.
the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit

4.
proposed operation.

their possible observations on the

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication.
Observations can be sent by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference
COMP/M.2432 (cid:151) Angelini/Phoenix/JV, to:

European Commission,
Directorate-General for Competition,
Directorate B (cid:151) Merger Task Force,
Rue Joseph II/Jozef II-straat 70,
B-1000 Brussels.

(1) OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 257, 21.9.1990, p. 13.
(2) OJ L 180, 9.7.1997, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 40, 13.2.1998, p. 17.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.2409 — Rail Gourmet Holding/Narvesen) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-06-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Publications Office of the European Union, database, dissemination of EU information, economic concentration, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation

15.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 171/5

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2409 (cid:151) Rail Gourmet Holding/Narvesen)

(2001/C 171/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 17 May 2001 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it
compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in English and will be made public after it is
cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CEN(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 301M2409. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations,
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 427 18, fax (352) 29 29 427 09.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2445 (cid:151) NIB Capital/Internatio-Muller Chemical Distribution)

(2001/C 171/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 21 May 2001 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it
compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in English and will be made public after it is
cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CEN(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 301M2445. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations,
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 427 18, fax (352) 29 29 427 09.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1759/01 by Brian Simpson (PSE) to the Commission. Supplying lights as standard on new cycles.
Date: 2001-06-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law, competence of the Member States, road safety, two-wheeled vehicle, vehicle parts

C 350 E/220

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

(2001/C 350 E/246)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1759/01

by Brian Simpson (PSE) to the Commission

(15 June 2001)

Subject: Supplying lights as standard on new cycles

Will the Commission consider bringing forward legislation to make the fitting of front and rear lights on
cycles compulsory at the time of manufacture in order to prevent accidents?

Answer given b Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(18 July 2001)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that no specific Community legislation
covering the type approval of bicycles has yet been introduced. Nor are there any plans to introduce
specific legislation at Community level.

The design and construction standard and the fitting of lighting and ensuing use requirement of such
lighting fall within the legislative competence of the Member States.

However, the revised Directive on General Product Safety (1) provides for the use of voluntary standards as
a means for ensuring effective and consistent application of the safety requirement. The Commission will
examine, during the period for transposition of the revised directive, whether the issue of fitting lighting
on new cycles could be dealt with by a standardisation mandate.

(1) Will be adopted in September 2001.

(2001/C 350 E/247)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1761/01

by Niall Andrews (UEN) to the Commission

(12 June 2001)

Subject: Ratification of Cotonou Partnership Agreement

On 23 January last year the 15 Member States of the European Union and the 77 countries of the ACP
group of nations, agreed and signed the Cotonou Partnership Agreement in Benin.

This agreement replaces the LomØ Convention and shows an unprecedented commitment on the part of
the EU to developing nations in the African, Caribbean and Pacific regions for the next 20 years.

The Commission and Member State governments placed great
importance on the signature of this
document almost twelve months ago. Can the Commission confirm that at present more than 13 ACP
States have ratified the Cotonou Agreement but that, as yet, not a single EU country has ratified Cotonou?

When taking into account the importance of this agreement to the ACP, can the Commission inform
members of what practical measures it has taken to speed up the process of ratification and tell us when
they expect the agreement to enter into force?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2001)

The Cotonou Agreement was signed by most parties on 23 June 2000, although it remained open for
signature until the end of the year during which time a further four parties signed.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1177/2001 of 15 June 2001 fixing the maximum subsidy on exports of husked long grain rice to Réunion pursuant to the invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 2285/2000
Date: 2001-06-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Réunion, award of contract, export subsidy, rice

L 161/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.6.2001

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1177/2001

of 15 June 2001

fixing the maximum subsidy on exports of husked long grain rice to Réunion pursuant to the
invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 2285/2000

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22
December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in
rice (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1667/2000 (2),
and in particular Article 10(1) thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 of
6 September 1989 laying down detailed rules for exports of
rice to Réunion (3) as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1453/
1999 (4), and in particular Article 9(1) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2285/2000 (5) opens
an invitation to tender for the subsidy on rice exported
to Réunion.

Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 allows the
Commission to fix,
in accordance with the procedure
laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95
and on the basis of the tenders submitted, a maximum
subsidy.

(3)

(4)

The criteria laid down in Articles 2 and 3 of Regulation
(EEC) No 2692/89 should be taken into account when
fixing this maximum subsidy. Successful tenderers shall
be those whose bids are at or below the level of the
maximum subsidy.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
the Management
accordance with the opinion of
Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

A maximum subsidy on exports to Réunion of husked long
grain rice falling within CN code 1006 20 98 is hereby set on
the basis of the tenders lodged from 11 to 14 June 2001 at
338,00 EUR/t pursuant to the invitation to tender referred to
in Regulation (EC) No 2285/2000.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 16 June 2001.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 15 June 2001.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 329, 30.12.1995, p. 18.
(2) OJ L 193, 29.7.2000, p. 3.
(3) OJ L 261, 7.9.1989, p. 8.
(4) OJ L 167, 2.7.1999, p. 19.
(5) OJ L 260, 14.10.2000, p. 19.