WRITTEN QUESTION E-2378/01 by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission. Purification of fish products.
Date: 2001-08-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: cereal substitute, fish oil, food contamination, food industry, food technology, technological process, toxic substance

C 81 E/164

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.4.2002

(2002/C 81 E/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2372/01

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Council

(28 August 2001)

Subject: Extraordinary operation to receive Chechen refugees living in inhuman conditions in both

Chechnya and Ingushetia

In the wake of a recent decision by the German authorities on Chechen refugees requesting political
asylum in Germany, all refugees who have been refused asylum-seeker status are to be deported to their
country of origin. That decision follows a statement by the German Minister for the Interior considering
fears of reprisals by Russian military and paramilitary forces against deportees to be unfounded.
Consequently, the repatriation of people seeking political asylum is no longer to be deemed an anti-
humanitarian act.

Nevertheless, numerous reports from Chechnya point to an extremely worrying humanitarian situation
with a growing shortage of supplies and drugs, a lack of hospitals and outbreaks of epidemics. Even more
seriously, a number of reports by the media and by NGOs speak of systematic and extremely severe acts of
violence committed by Russian occupation forces, both military and paramilitary, and in particular the
constant harassment of civilians living in the area, a large number of summary executions, widespread use
of torture and abduction of civilians, including for purposes of extortion.

Can the Council provide information on the number of Chechens granted refugee status in each of the 15
EU member countries? Does the Council not believe that, in the face of the tragic humanitarian situation
in Chechnya, the Union should launch an extraordinary operation (cid:129) along the lines of the action taken for
Bosnia (cid:129) to receive all Chechen refugees living in inhuman conditions in both Chechnya and Ingushetia,
who would be distributed fairly among the 15 Member States?

Reply

(29 November 2001)

The Council has no information concerning the number of Chechens benefiting from refugee status in the
Member States. It should be said that no distinction is made between asylum applicants according to their
ethnic origin. Thus, it is the Russian Federation which would have to be considered as the country of
origin of the applicants.

In the case in point, an extraordinary operation to receive refugees has not been initiated as neither the
Member States nor the Commission have considered it necessary. It should be noted that no international
organisation has called for it.

In this connection, it should be noted that on 20 July 2001 the Council adopted Directive 2001/55/EC on
minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and
on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing
the consequences thereof (1). The Member States will have to bring into force the provisions necessary to
comply with this Directive by 31 December 2002 at the latest. It stipulates that the existence of such a
mass influx is to be established by a Council Decision adopted on a proposal from the Commission, which
will also examine any request by a Member State that it submits a proposal to the Council.

(1) OJ L 212, 7.8.2001, p. 12.

(2002/C 81 E/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2378/01

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 August 2001)

Subject: Purification of fish products

Following the speech by Commissioner Byrne to the Fisheries Committee of the European Parliament on
10 July, could the Commission outline precisely what possibilities exist for purifying fish meal and fish oil
with the aim of reducing dioxin levels? Furthermore, is the Commission able to offer any indication of the
likely costs involved in employing such methods?

4.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/165

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 2001)

Refining and hydrogenation of fish oil result in a considerable decrease in the content of dioxins and
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). However these processes also eliminate the valuable 3-omega poly-
unsaturated fatty acids which nutritionists consider indispensable in feed. Refined fish oils can therefore be
used for the manufacture of margarine and cooking fats but are not suitable for animal feed.

Another very promising technique is the purification of fish oils with active carbon. The first large-scale
purification plants based on this technique have been put in place. Contrary to hydrogenation, the 3-
omega polyunsaturated fatty acids are not removed by this technique; the decontaminated fish oil remains
suitable for the production of animal feed. The cost of this technique is estimated at present at € 35-40 per
tonne of fish oil; the current world market price of fish oil is approximately € 250 per tonne.

For the time being, no suitable industrial techniques exist for the removal of dioxins from fishmeal. In
order to remove dioxin from fishmeal, the 6-12 % oil present in the fishmeal has to be removed by petrol
extraction. This process considerably lowers the quality of the fishmeal. The Commission is aware that
industry is carrying out trials in order to develop a suitable method of reducing dioxin in fishmeal.

(2002/C 81 E/193)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2379/01

by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(28 August 2001)

Subject: Events in Genoa between 19 and 23 July 2001 (cid:129) infringements by the Italian Government of

Article 6(1) and (2) of the Treaty on European Union

The convincing television and video documentation, published by the international press and confirmed by
thousands of eye-witness accounts given by those taking part in the demonstrations accompanying the G8
repeated and continual violations of human rights,
summit
fundamental freedoms and the rule of law perpetrated by the police forces and the Italian Government in
the Ligurian capital between 19 and 23 July this year.

is evidence of

large-scale,

in Genoa,

These violations, which culminated in the killing of a demonstrator, beatings and serious injuries suffered
by hundreds of Italian nationals and foreigners who were detained, the denial of their right to legal
assistance and the disappearance of some of them, which has not yet been explained by the local or
national authorities, are now the subject of protests and requests for clarification by the other governments
of the European Union and inquiries launched by the Italian judiciary, but are being denied by the
Government, which has defended the behaviour of the police, accepting responsibility for this behaviour
itself and, because of its majority in the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, has rejected requests for a
parliamentary inquiry.

1.
Does the Council not consider that it must recognise that the Italian Government has committed a
serious and persistent breach of the principles set out in Article 6(1) and (2) of the Treaty on European
Union concerning respect for fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and sanctioned by the constitutional traditions
shared by the Member States as general principles of Community law?

2.
Does the Council not consider that, after ascertaining the facts, it should initiate the procedures
provided for in Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, with a view to deciding, by a qualified majority,
whether to suspend some of the rights of the Member State responsible for infringements of the Treaty?