WRITTEN QUESTION E-2479/01 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. Abolition of duty-free goods.
Date: 2001-09-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: duty-free sale, economic consequence, employment statistics, job cuts, labour market

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/139

(2002/C 93 E/167)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2478/01

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(14 September 2001)

Subject: School milk subsidies

In the Community budget for 2001, € 89 m was allocated to school milk. This has been cut from next
year’s draft budget. Does this mean that the Council no longer considers it necessary to provide this
subsidy, and if it does consider the subsidy necessary, what is done to ensure that the funds are used only
for school milk and not for other purposes? How are the funds distributed among the Member States? If
some countries do not use the subsidy, might it be appropriate to increase the shares of those countries
which do use it by the amount available to countries which decline to do so?

Reply

(10 December 2001)

Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 (1) on the common organisation of the market in milk and
milk products provides for the grant of Community aid for supplying milk and certain processed milk
products to pupils in educational establishments.

To that end, as the Honourable Member has pointed out, an amount of EUR 89 million intended to
finance that aid in 2001 was entered in the Community budget under the heading ‘milk products’.

It would appear that for the financial year 2002 this expenditure has been transferred from the heading
‘milk products’ to the heading ‘food programme’, Chapter 31, budget heading 312, and that for 2002 an
amount of EUR 81 million appears under that heading (2).

Moreover, Article 15 of the aforementioned Regulation states that the detailed rules for its application,
relating, in particular, to the conditions under which the aids may be granted, their amounts, the list of
products concerned and the other decisions and measures are to be adopted by the Commission in
accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 42 (Management Committee procedure).

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48.
(2) Smaller amount than in 2000 following the decision taken in 2000 to reduce the Community contribution from

95 % to 75 %.

(2002/C 93 E/168)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2479/01

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 September 2001)

Subject: Abolition of ‘duty-free’ goods

Those campaigning against the abolition of ‘duty-free’ goods prophesied that the measure would result in
the loss of tens of thousands of jobs.

Is the Commission able to estimate what has in fact been the net loss in jobs, if any, across Europe as a
result of the measure?

C 93 E/140

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 2001)

Regarding the impact of abolition of intra-Community duty-free sales on employment, the Commission
would refer the Honourable Member to it’s answer to Written Question P-403/00 by Mr Langen (1).

That answer is still valid.

(1) OJ C 26 E, 26.1.2001.

(2002/C 93 E/169)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2481/01

by Marco Pannella (TDI) to the Commission

(5 September 2001)

Subject: Dr Yunis Shaikh sentenced to death in Pakistan

On 18 August 2001 Dr Yunis Shaikh was imprisoned in Adiala jail and sentenced to death for blasphemy
by a Pakistani court. He is convicted of blasphemy for expressing the view that Mohammed and his family
could not have been Muslims before the Prophet was inspired and other similar opinions, deemed
offensive by the Pakistani clergy.

The trial was attended by a screaming crowd, whose feelings were whipped up by members of the clergy,
while witnesses were called to court despite having stated that they had not been present when Dr Shaikh
had made the alleged statements. He was given only one week to appeal to the Supreme Court instead of
the usual thirty days. Even if nobody has hitherto been hanged for blasphemy in Pakistan, hundreds of
people, charged with or convicted of blasphemy languish in prisons, inside the ‘death cells’, where they can
barely stand up.

Did the Commission follow Dr Yunis Shaikh’s trial through the presence of its own representative? Has the
Commission reacted officially to the death sentence passed on Dr Yunis Shaikh? Which initiatives has it
taken or does it intend to take vis-à-vis the increase in convictions for blasphemy in Pakistan and, more
generally, violations of fundamental human rights?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 2001)

The Commission is very concerned about the application of the blasphemy law in Pakistan. Blasphemy
related to the Prophet Mohammed is subject to the death penalty, whereas blasphemy of the Koran is
punishable by life imprisonment. To date a disproportionate number of cases have been brought up
against religious minorities and the press.

The Commission is fully aware of the lawsuit against Dr. Yunis Shaikh, a Muslim, as raised by the
Honourable Member. Dr. Shaikh was sentenced to death on blasphemy charges on 18 August 2001 and
has since appealed the judgement, a lengthy process in Pakistan which can last years. Whereas todate,
verdicts in blasphemy cases were revoked by higher benches, on 24 July 2001 a potentially dangerous
precedent was set when in the case of Ayub Masih the appeal court upheld an earlier judgement.

On the occasion of a human rights conference organised by the Government of Pakistan in April 2000, a
procedural reform of
following strong protests from
religious groups the government withdrew the proposal.

the blasphemy law was announced. However,