WRITTEN QUESTION E-2043/01 by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission. Forwarding to the Commission of misleading information relating to a fraud case.
Date: 2001-07-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, financial control, fraud against the EU

C 40 E/170

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.2.2002

(2002/C 40 E/182)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2043/01

by Herbert B(cid:246)sch (PSE) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Forwarding to the Commission of misleading information relating to a fraud case

According to estimates drawn up by Parliament, in the so-called MED case losses totalling roughly € 20
million were run up as a result of mismanagement, the manipulation of contract award procedures and
nepotism. The case was brought to light on 30 May 1996 through the publication of the European Court
of Auditors(cid:146) Special Report No 1/96 (1).

However, the matter was submitted to the Belgian state prosecutor(cid:146)s office only on 13 December 1999,
i.e. more than three-and-a-half years later and shortly before the statute of limitations took effect (letter
No 008035 from the Director of the European Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, to the Belgian State Prosecutor,
Mr Djemeppe).

Since when has the Commission been aware that the forerunner organisation to OLAF, UCLAF, had
previously, in a note dated 19 November 1996 (register number 6039), forwarded false information to the
Secretary-General and Financial Controller of the Commission, the Private Office of the President of the
Commission, Mr Santer, and Commissioners Mar(cid:237)n and Gradin, giving the impression that the Belgian
legal authorities had already been asked to investigate?

Can the Commission state why this misleading information was forwarded?

Can the Commission state whether and when this misleading information was corrected and, if possible,
forward a copy of the corresponding letter?

Can the Commission state what steps it has taken, or what steps it plans to take, against the officials
responsible for misleading senior members of staff of the Commission and Commissioners in this matter?

Can the Commission confirm that the letter of 13 December 1999 failed to provide the Belgian legal
authorities with comprehensive information about the case, not drawing attention, for example, to the
manipulation of tender procedures?

Can the Commission forward to me a copy, including all annexes, of the letter sent to the Belgian state
prosecutor(cid:146)s office?

(1) OJ C 240, 19.8.1996.

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(14 September 2001)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that the MED case was looked into by the
Committee of Independent Experts, which reported its findings in its report of 15 March 1999.

Regarding the two points raised by the Honourable Member relating to the transmission of
false
information by UCLAF to senior levels within the Commission and the incomplete information given to
the Belgian judicial authorities, the Commission considers that the two documents referred to do not
support the interpretation placed on them by the Honourable Member.

Therefore:

(cid:129) For one thing, the information note dated 19 November 1996 concluded that UCLAF has (cid:145)approached
the Belgian judicial authorities to evaluate the conditions for launching a prosecution for conflict of
interest under section 245 of the Belgian Criminal Code(cid:146). The outcome of the consultation led UCLAF
to the view that the facts were not such as to warrant a conclusion that there was an offence against
Belgian criminal law.

(cid:129) For another, the letter referring the case to the Royal Prosecutor in Brussels on 13 December 1999
explicitly referred to that consultation and, as is clear from the annexes to it, all the requisite
information. The Supervisory Committee of
the European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF) has been
informed.

14.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 40 E/171

The Commission accordingly considers that it cannot answer the Honourable Member(cid:146)s questions, which
proceed from a different analysis.

As regards the letter of 13 December 1999 and its annexes, the Commission, on the basis of the relevant
Community and national law, will examine whether and how it might be released to Parliament.

(2002/C 40 E/183)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2052/01

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Loans to immigrants for business activity

(13 July 2001)

There is experience in the Member States of providing special forms of loan to promote business activity
by women. These have, obviously, been aimed only at women and have fostered greater enterprise among
them.

Do similar loan schemes exist in the Member States for business activity by immigrants?

If they do, what effect have they had on immigrants(cid:146) social situation and in helping them to put down
roots in their new environment?

If such schemes do not exist, would it be possible to launch a common EU project to introduce them in
the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(12 September 2001)

The Commission is considering the opportunity to put forward new proposals in 2002 to promote the
integration of immigrants. Subject to the adoption of these proposals and to the provision of the necessary
resources, the suggestion made by the Honorable Member could be considered within the context of the
activities to be supported.

(2002/C 40 E/184)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2054/01

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Programmes for the integration of immigrants

(13 July 2001)

Various different programmes have been introduced in the Member States to promote the integration of
immigrants into society in their new homeland. However, all
the
programmes only benefit those members of the country(cid:146)s own population who organise them; as a rule,
not even the implementation of the programmes has been entrusted to immigrants.

too often immigrants find that

Has the success of programmes for the integration of immigrants been assessed?

In which countries have the best results been achieved in terms of immigrants putting down new roots,
and what factors have been conducive to such success?

Has the commercial value of the programmes and of education etc. associated with them been assessed,
and has consideration been given to the possibility of making immigrants responsible for such business
activity?