WRITTEN QUESTION E-1908/01 by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Trade relations with Armenia.
Date: 2001-06-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Armenia, cooperation agreement (EU), trade relations

C 40 E/138

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.2.2002

Commission considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under this Treaty, it shall
deliver a reasoned opinion on the matter after giving the State concerned the opportunity to submit its
observations. If the State concerned does not comply with the opinion within the period laid down by the
Commission, the latter may bring the matter before the Court of
Justice.(cid:146) The Commission has a
discretionary power in deciding whether to initiate such a procedure (5).

It must be stressed that the judgements of the Court of Justice only state whether there has been an
infringement. The Court of Justice cannot issue orders to administrative bodies. Only national courts can
issue orders to administrative bodies and annul a national decision.

The project concerning Lake Pergusa has not been co-financed by Structural funds.

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(3) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(4) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(5) Priorities and criteria governing the Commission(cid:146)s discretionary power are listed in the Fourteenth annual report on

monitoring the application of Community law (cid:129) 1996 (OJ C 332, 3.11.1997).

(2002/C 40 E/147)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1908/01

by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 June 2001)

Subject: Trade relations with Armenia

On 22 April 1996 in Luxembourg, the Partnership Agreement between Armenia and the European Union
and its Member States was concluded. The European Parliament delivered a favourable opinion on
28 January 1997 (recommendation by rapporteur La Malfa).

I should like to ask a number of questions to monitor implementation of that agreement in practice:

1. Can the Commission inform me of how trade between the European Union and its Member States on
the one hand and the Republic of Armenia on the other has developed since the said partnership
agreement was concluded? Can the Commission inform me more specifically on how exports of
Armenian agricultural products to the European Union have developed?

2. Article 1 of the agreement states one of its objectives as being (cid:145)to promote trade and investment and
harmonious economic relations between the Parties and so to foster their sustainable economic
development(cid:146). To what extent does the Commission consider that the stated objective has been
achieved? If the objective has been achieved, is the Commission prepared to move on to a subsequent
step? If the objective has not been achieved, to what extent is the Commission prepared to step up
investment in order nevertheless to achieve that objective?

3. The contracting parties have accorded each other the status of (cid:145)most favoured trading partner(cid:146). Does
Armenia comply with that commitment in relation to the European Union and its Member States? Has
the commitment to treat the European Union Member States at least equally with the former Soviet
states been complied with in the interim? Does the Commission agree that it would be appropriate for
the European Union to adopt more practical trade-promoting measures in favour of Armenia?

4. Are there any plans to adjust the existing contractual relations between Armenia and the European

Union and its Member States?

5. To what extent is the Commission prepared (cid:129) within the framework of a development relationship (cid:129)
to boost and support private initiatives that will help to increase trade between the two parties?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 2001)

Bilateral
trade between the Community and Armenia increased regularly since the Partnership and
Cooperation Agreement (PCA) entered into force two years ago. Trade progressed from € 226 million in

14.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 40 E/139

1998 to € 264 million in 1999 (+ 17 %) and € 368 million in 2000 (+ 40 % compared to 1999). This
produced a regular trade surplus for the Community (€ 113 million in 2000), however bilateral trade
represented only 0,01 % of Community global foreign trade. Community exports rose to € 241 million in
2000, mainly manufactured goods (16 %), and agriculture products (15 %, amounting to € 36 million),
whereas Community imports amounted to € 127 million, essentially iron and steel (5,8 %), textile products
(2,2 %) and agriculture products (2.2 %).

Community imports of agricultural products from Armenia remained modest over the period: € 2 million
in 1997, € 1 million in 1998, € 1 million in 1999, € 3 million in 2000. This can be attributed in part to
the current difficulties of Armenian agriculture, as drought in 2000 entailed the loss of one third of the
grain crop and the performance of the agricultural sector stagnated.

The current structure of bilateral trade could be improved if Armenia would manage to diversify its export
potential. This entails restructuring agriculture as well as industry and fostering foreign investment in the
country. The Commission is helping Armenia to reform its legal and regulatory framework, in particular
through the Tacis Armenia-Union Policy and Legal Advice Centre, which has produced substantial work
related to eventual accession of Armenia to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and which is
concentrating more and more on Community/Armenia legislative approximation.

The Cooperation Committee that monitors PCA implementation highlighted trade issues and the business
climate among 24 points for further work. The Cooperation Committee meeting of 15 June 2001 has
taken stock of Armenia(cid:146)s progress in amending its trade and investment legislation, however weak
enforcement remains the central, unresolved issue. Community investors still face considerable problems
such as legal and administrative barriers,
illegal competition, unreliable banking system, discriminative
government acts, corruption. Legal uncertainty remains with regard to the protection of investments and
relevant provisions related to taxation and customs regulations.

The Commission has also encouraged Armenia to pursue further legislative approximation in the field of
intellectual property rights, as this is essential to attracting foreign investment. According to the PCA,
Armenia is committed by the end of the year 2002 to providing a level of protection similar to that
provided by the Community and to accede to a number of international conventions.

In addition, the Commission is ready to support other trade promoting measures such as the business
forum that Armenia intends to organise next year. As regards the integration of Armenia internationally,
the progress of negotiations for Armenia(cid:146)s accession to the WTO currently near completion is a very
positive development.

The Commission has no indication regarding most favoured nations (MFN) incompatible measures in
Armenian trade. Regarding special trade preferences given to other Independent States, the Commission
was informed that they are no longer applicable.

There are currently no plans to modify existing contractual relations between Armenia and the Union.

(2002/C 40 E/148)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1916/01

by Jorge HernÆndez Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 June 2001)

Subject: Proceedings against dumping-ground in Torreblanca (Fuengirola, Spain)

The Spanish environment ministry has said that it is not aware of the proceedings taken out by the
Commission against the dumping-ground in Torreblanca (Fuengirola, Spain).