WRITTEN QUESTION P-2556/01 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Council. European law enforcement unit.
Date: 2001-09-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU police cooperation, United States, cooperation policy, globalisation, group of leading industrialised countries, international meeting, opposition, public safety

C 93 E/158

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

The use of genetically modified organisms would have adverse effects not only on producers, but also and
above all on consumers and consumer health.

What policies does the Commission intend to pursue to support and develop the high quality of typical
agricultural products?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2001)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that, under the new arrangements introduced by
Council Regulations (EC) Nos 2702/1999 of 14 December 1999 on measures to provide information on,
and to promote, agricultural products in third countries (1) and 2826/2000 of 19 December 2000 on
information and promotion actions for agricultural products on the internal market (2), the Community
plans to implement a comprehensive and coherent policy providing information on and promoting
agricultural products, including foodstuffs, on the internal and third-country markets.

Such a policy that supplements and provides useful back-up for measures implemented by the Member
States is intended in particular to promote the image of these products with regard to quality, typical
character, nutrition, food safety and methods of production.

(1) OJ L 327, 21.12.1999.
(2) OJ L 328, 23.12.2000.

(2002/C 93 E/188)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2556/01

by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Council

(14 September 2001)

Subject: European law enforcement unit

Following the events of the Genoa Summit, the German Minister of the Interior, Mr Otto Schily, and his
Italian counterpart, Mr Claudio Scajola, recommended the creation of a European law enforcement unit
(similar to the European cross-border police forces) and the setting up of a database listing the particulars
of violent protestors. The idea has recently received support from the German Chancellor, Mr Schröder, as
reflected by the proposed creation of an operational police unit with executive authority within Europol.
The individual proposals, however, have caused great confusion and met with an unfavourable response in
all Member States.

Does the Council intend to include this project as part of overall Community anti-terrorist strategy and
table the matter immediately at a forthcoming meeting of the Council of Ministers responsible or, on the
contrary, does it take the view that the measures currently being envisaged to further develop direct
operational cooperation between the Member State police forces and give greater powers to Europol will
provide a sufficient response to increased crime and violence?

What measures does the Council think it can take to strengthen law enforcement at European level
without prejudice to individual rights?

Reply

(10 December 2001)

1.
The Council draws the attention of the Honourable Member of the Parliament to the reply given to
the written question P-2352/01. This reply referred to the conclusions of 13.7.2001, adopted by the
Council and the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, on security at meetings of the
European Council and other comparable events (10608/01 Presse 281).

2.
In the light of the attacks in the United States on 11.9.2001 and following on from the decisions
taken since the Tampere European Council, the Council met on 20.9.2001 to take the necessary measures
to maintain the highest level of security and any other measure needed to combat terrorism. The Council
has decided to harness all the measures already adopted at European Union level to combat terrorism.

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/159

The seriousness of recent events has led the Council to speed up the process of creating an area of
freedom, security and justice and to step up cooperation with its partners, especially the United States.

3.
To this end, the Council has agreed on certain measures to be taken with respect to judicial
cooperation, cooperation between police and intelligence services, financing of terrorism, border control,
civil protection and cooperation with the United States.

As concerns Europol, the Council is examining a list of possible amendments to the Europol Convention
as well as an extension of Europol’s mandate to deal with the serious forms of international crime in
general.

(2002/C 93 E/189)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2557/01

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission

(13 September 2001)

Subject: Arrest of the pro-democracy militants Mu Chuanheng and Yan Peng in the People’s Republic of

China

The pro-democracy militants Mu Chuanheng and Yan Peng were officially arrested by the Chinese
authorities on 28 August for ‘incitement to subversion’. Mr Mu Chuanheng had been detained since
13 August for protesting against the illegal detention of the activist Yan Peng. The latter had been detained
since 11 July on suspicion of ‘illegal emigration’. The two men are at risk of being sentenced to long terms
of imprisonment, given the charges brought against them. Mr Mu Chuanheng, who has been a leading
figures in the pro-democracy movement since 1979, was first arrested in 1981 and sentenced to a year’s
imprisonment for counter-revolutionary activities. He has been unable to work for 20 years and has lived
under constant police surveillance. He has written many articles on social and political reconciliation and
the need to launch a process of democratisation in China, but his repeated calls for people to protest
against the arrest of Yan Peng were the immediate reason for his arrest. Mr Yan Peng, a leading dissident
from Shandong province, was arrested on 11 July in the province of Guangxi, where he was travelling on
holiday. He was charged with circulating, and publishing on the internet, articles by Mr Mu. To ensure that
Beijing was selected for the 2008 Olympic Games and to prevent his family from publicising Yan Peng’s
arrest, the police had claimed that he would be released the next day. However, as soon as Beijing’s victory
had been announced, Yan Peng’s arrest became official.

What information does the Commission have concerning the conditions of detention, and the state of
health, of Mr Mu and Mr Yan, and what initiatives has the Commission taken, or does it intend to take, to
obtain their immediate release by the authorities in Beijing?

Secondly, does the Commission not agree that the arbitrary arrest of these men, which follows a long
series of such cases, provides further confirmation of the failure of the policy of ‘critical dialogue’ on
human rights, the absurdity of the programmes of judicial cooperation between the EU and the PRC and
the risk, if not certainty, that the only purpose they ultimately serve is to sanction the Beijing authorities’
authoritarianism and their profound contempt for the law, and hence for the rule of law?

More generally, does the Commission not agree that strong support, including financial support, for the
activities of the democratic opposition to the Beijing regime might contribute more effectively to the
development of fundamental freedoms and democracy in the PRC and would be much better suited to the
promotion of the rule of law to which the EU claims to be committed?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 2001)

The Commission is aware of the arrests of Mr Mu and Mr Yan but does not have any new information
about their current situation or their state of health.

The Commission is aware that there have been many arrests in China recently as a result of a government
‘strike hard’ campaign against alleged offenders. The Commission is following very closely the human
rights situation in China and shares the concern expressed by the Honourable Member.