WRITTEN QUESTION E-2009/01 by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Checks on Belgian visas.
Date: 2001-07-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Belgium, EU migration policy, EU visa policy, admission of aliens, free movement of persons, illegal migration, migration control

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/235

normally low in comparison to the intake via herbs and spices. The Commission is currently working on
an amendment of Directive 88/388/EEC, including an update of the list of these substances of toxicological
concern and their maximum levels in foodstuffs. For this reason, the Commission has requested the advice
of the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF). The respective SCF opinions are expected by the end of 2001,
after which the Commission intends to submit a proposal to the Parliament and the Council.

Regulation (EC) No 2232/96 of the Parliament and the Council of 28 October 1996 (2)
lays down
a procedure for establishing a positive list of flavouring substances intended for use in or on foodstuffs2.
The procedure includes a full scientific evaluation by the SCF of flavouring substances which are used in
the Member States (Regulation (EC) No 1565/2000 (3)). This evaluation began in July 2000. After the
evaluation has been completed, the Commission will propose a list of flavouring substances the use of
which will be authorized to the exclusion of all others in the Community. If, during this evaluation, it
becomes apparent that a flavouring substance does not comply with the general use and safety criteria, it
shall be deleted from the list of flavouring substances used in the Member States.

(1) OJ L 184, 15.7.1988.
(2) OJ L 299, 23.11.1996.
(3) OJ L 180, 19.7.2000.

(2001/C 364 E/259)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2009/01

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 July 2001)

Subject: Checks on Belgian visas

Under the third pillar if the European Union (justice and home affairs) the improper issuing of Belgian
visas merits particular attention, not least because a temporary residence permit for the Belgian Federation
also gives access to all the Schengen countries. Such residence permits are worth their weight in gold to
criminals and make the migration sector enormously vulnerable to corruption.

In answer to two Questions to the Council on this matter (E-0621/01 and E-0622/01 (1)) I was informed
by the Council on 30 May that (cid:145)with the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, matters relating to
immigration, visas and asylum fall within the Community(cid:146)s sphere of competence under Title IV of the
TEC. It is therefore for the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to verify whether Member States fulfil
their obligations in respect of those matters(cid:146).

In the past year, Belgium issued approximately 9 500 visa to Moroccan applicants; some 88 % of those
visas (short- and long-term alike) were issued by the Department for Alien Affairs in Belgium despite an
unfavourable opinion from the consular services in Morocco. That unfavourable opinion, on the grounds
of failure to comply with the criteria, was thus systematically ignored.

Some of the applicants say openly that it forms no part of their intention to travel to Belgium but to some
other Schengen country, where the issue of visas is more strictly controlled. That results in an
unfavourable opinion that is forwarded to the Department for Alien Affairs. The latter invariably sends
back a report to the effect that the visas should be issued in any event. It is to be feared that more and
more people-traffickers will try to use Morocco as a point of entry to the EU.

That will nullify the effect of any action by the EU to bar lucrative routes to human-trafficking.

Is the Commission aware of the irregular issuing of Belgian visas?

C 364 E/236

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

If so, what steps has the Commission taken to ensure that the Belgian Federation will seek a solution to
this problem?

If not, will the Commission seek further information about the swindle in Belgian visas, given their
importance to the third pillar of the European Union (justice and home affairs) and the policy of the
Schengen countries?

(1) OJ C 261 E, 18.9.2001, p. 163.

(2001/C 364 E/260)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2010/01

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 July 2001)

Subject: Checks on Belgian visas

Under the third pillar if the European Union (justice and home affairs) the improper issuing of Belgian
visas merits particular attention, not least because a temporary residence permit for the Belgian Federation
also gives access to all the Schengen countries. Such residence permits are worth their weight in gold to
criminals and make the migration sector enormously vulnerable to corruption.

In answer to two Questions to the Council on this matter (E-0621/01 and E-0622/01 (1)) I was informed
by the Council on 30 May that (cid:145)with the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, matters relating to
immigration, visas and asylum fall within the Community(cid:146)s sphere of competence under Title IV of the
TEC. It is therefore for the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to verify whether Member States fulfil
their obligations in respect of those matters(cid:146).

In the past year, Belgium issued approximately 9 500 visa to Moroccan applicants; some 88 % of those
visas (short- and long-term alike) were issued by the Department for Alien Affairs in Belgium despite an
unfavourable opinion from the consular services in Morocco. That unfavourable opinion, on the grounds
of failure to comply with the criteria, was thus systematically ignored.

Some of the applicants say openly that it forms no part of their intention to travel to Belgium but to some
other Schengen country, where the issue of visas is more strictly controlled. That results in an
unfavourable opinion that is forwarded to the Department for Alien Affairs. The latter invariably sends
back a report to the effect that the visas should be issued in any event. It is to be feared that more and
more people-traffickers will try to use Morocco as a point of entry to the EU.

That will nullify the effect of any action by the EU to bar lucrative routes to human-trafficking.

Has the Commission (cid:129) in the light of the above (cid:129) urged the Belgian Federation to incorporate essential
prevention measures into its visa policy, such as a rotation system for sensitive duties, or double-checking
and screening of officials?

If so, when did the Commission make such a request to the Belgian Federation?

If not, why has the Commission still not urged essential preventive measures in the Belgian Federation(cid:146)s
visa policy, given its importance to the third pillar of the European Union (justice and home affairs) and
the policy of the Schengen countries?

Will the Commission continue to urge such measures?

(1) OJ C 261 E, 18.9.2001, p. 163.