WRITTEN QUESTION P-2408/01 by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission. Issuing of visas to representatives of the Chechen people and other oppressed peoples of the world.
Date: 2001-08-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU visa policy, Schengen Agreement, admission of aliens, common foreign and security policy, competence of the Member States, external border of the EU

C 134 E/30

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

(2002/C 134 E/030)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2408/01

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission

(20 August 2001)

Subject: Issuing of visas to representatives of the Chechen people and other oppressed peoples of the world

In its otherwise very constructive answer to question H-0387/01 (1) to the granting of visas for VIPs
representing countries at war, occupied or not
the
Commission draws the following conclusions: ‘the Commission cannot accept the honourable Member’s
suggestion that a special body should be set up within the Union institutions which would be responsible
for facilitating the issuing of visas. The Community competence relating to procedures and conditions for
issuing visas, which derives from Article 62(2) (b) (ii) of the EC Treaty, means only that legal provisions in
these matters are now Community rules. The competence for taking the actual decision to grant or refuse
a visa remains a matter for the consular services of the Member States. There is no legal possibility of
superimposing on them or associating with them a specific Community body’.

recognised by the international community,

Does the Commission not consider that, with the joint action that will result in the Union drawing up a
black list of prominent citizens of the former Yugoslavia who may not enter the territory of the Union, the
Union institutions have de facto and de jure assumed a competence for the granting or refusal of visas and
that the Union institutions have therefore superimposed themselves upon or associated themselves with
the consular services of Member States?

In the light of this, does the Commission not consider that, in the same way as it has been led to draw up
a black list, it might very well take the initiative of drawing up a ‘white list’ of VIPs representing peoples
who are oppressed, the victims of war and/or not recognised by the international community in order to
enable them to defend the interests of their people or their community vis-à-vis any competent body
located in the territory of the Union and vis-à-vis the institutions of the Union and its Member States?

Finally, could the Commission draw up a proposal for a joint action in this area and submit it to the
Council and Parliament?

(1) Written answer of 15.5.2001.

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2001)

Since the Amsterdam Treaty entered into force, visa policy has been covered by Title IV of the EC Treaty,
but the Community’s powers extend mainly to adopting the legal framework and general rules in that area.
For example, pursuant to Article 62(2)(b) (ex Article 73j) of the EC Treaty, ‘the rules on visas for intended
stays of no more than three months, including the list of third countries whose nationals must be in
possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that
requirement’ are governed by Community law. That list is currently laid down by Council Regulation (EC)
No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas
when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement (1). In
addition, other general Comunity rules established by the Schengen acquis (2) lay down the conditions and
procedures whereby visas are issued to nationals of third countries.

However, it is for the national authorities of the Member States to process each visa application submitted
to them on the basis of an individual, case-by-case examination. That examination is carried out in
accordance with the rules of Community law, but decisions to issue or refuse visas are invariably taken on
the responsibility of the national authorities of the Member States (3).

6.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134 E/31

Without prejudice to Title IV of the EC Treaty, the Member States may take joint actions pursuant to
Article 14(3) of the Treaty on European Union. Within that framework, Member States may undertake
jointly to either refuse visas for certain prominent citizens of third countries or to start them on a
preferential basis if they take the view that such measures serve the objectives of the Common Foreign and
Security Policy.

(1) OJ L 81, 21.3.2001.
(2) See the Schengen Convention and the Common Consular Instructions, OJ L 239, 22.9.2000.
(3) See points V 2,2 and V 2,4 of the Common Consular Instructions.

(2002/C 134 E/031)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2415/01

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(5 September 2001)

Subject: Equitable Life and pensions

Equitable Life, a financial investment company in the UK, has had to review and, consequently, downgrade
the amount its investors can expect to receive as a pension because of its poor investment strategy.

Thousands of people have thus seen the pension, which they have saved for over many years, considerably
reduced.

Does the Commission plan to review the provision of pensions by private companies?

Does it envisage some form of regulation to ensure that pension funds are properly managed and on
course to meet their targets, or at the very least that their value is not reduced, thereby leaving recipients
badly off in their retirement?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2001)

The Commission regrets that many policyholders may see a reduction in the expected benefits of their
pensions policies as a result of the difficulties confronting Equitable Life. The Commission is aware that the
British Government has announced that a full
independent inquiry, headed by Lord Penrose, will be
conducted into the circumstances leading to the current situation of Equitable Life. The Commission does
not plan to review the provision of private pensions by life assurance undertakings.

The Commission has recently submitted a proposal for a directive of the Parliament and of the Council on
the activities of institutions for occupational retirement provision (1). It is intended to apply to institutions
operating on a funded basis for the purpose of providing retirement benefits on the basis of an agreement
between the employer and the employees. It is not intended to apply to pension schemes taken out by
individuals by contract directly with a product provider, usually a life insurance company, and where
participation is not related to employment and the exercise of a profession.

One of the primary goals of the proposed directive is to establish a sound prudential framework for the
regulation of pension funds to ensure that such funds are properly managed and their beneficiaries
interests securely protected throughout the Community. The proposal, which is a priority of the Financial
Services Action Plan, is still to be adopted by the Council and Parliament.

(1) OJ C 96 E, 27.3.2001.