WRITTEN QUESTION E-2572/01 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Protection of designations of origin outside Community territory.
Date: 2001-09-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: TRIPS, World Trade Organisation, designation of origin, international trade, international trade law

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 160 E/23

There is no question of third countries participating in the Police Unit any more than in any other
3.
part of the Council Secretariat. Cooperation with third countries (cid:28) and international organisations, notably
the UN and OSCE (cid:28) along with their possible participation in EU police operations is another matter and
is being developed as part of the EU’s development of its police capability.

(2002/C 160 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2572/01

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(21 September 2001)

Subject: Protection of designations of origin outside Community territory

‘Queijo de São Jorge’ cheese is the main product of the island of São Jorge and within the Community has
a protected designation of origin (PDO).

One of the most important markets for the cheese is North America, and there are increasing reports that
imitations are being manufactured in the United States.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Are PDO products protected outside the Community under WTO agreements?

2.

3.

If so, is the Commission responsible for enforcing that protection in relation to non-Community
countries?

Should the case arise, what evidence does the Commission consider necessary to enable it to take legal
action in the event of an infringement?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 2001)

Protected Designations of Origin (PDOs) belong to a wider category of geographical

1.
indications
defined under the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs-Agreement)
under the World Trade Organisation (WTO). To the extent that PDOs pertain, under Council Regulation
(EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992, on the protection of geographical indications and designations of
origin for agricultural products and foodstuff, to certain agricultural products and foodstuff other than
wines and spirits, the TRIPs Agreement obliges WTO Members to provide the means for PDO right-
holders to prevent certain uses of the protected names that may mislead the consumer. Likewise, the
registration of
It should be
trademarks that mislead the consumer vis-à-vis a PDO are prohibited.
nonetheless noted that the protection offered to Community PDOs or protected geographical indications
(GIs) under Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 is more stringent than that required under the TRIPs Agreement.
Consequently, Community GIs are protected in the Community beyond the minimum standards of the
TRIPs Agreement. The Commission is ready to assist any Community producers whose PDO or GIs are
adversely affected in any WTO Member.

Each WTO Member is responsible for ensuring that the level of GI protection required by the TRIPs
2.
Agreement is available to all legitimate GI right-holders in their territory. Accordingly; right-holders are
themselves responsible for the enforcement of their GI rights within each WTO Member’s administrative
and judicial system. The TRIPs Agreement, however, enables the WTO Members (including the European
Communities and their Member States) to monitor that other WTO Members’ legislation is in conformity
with the TRIPs Agreement.

C 160 E/24

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.7.2002

The type of evidence required to substantiate a violation of the TRIPs Agreement by other WTO

3.
Members varies from case to case.

(2002/C 160 E/025)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2583/01

by Feleknas Uca (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(24 September 2001)

Subject: Police brutality in Turkey on World Peace Day

On 1 September 2001, designated as World Peace Day, the Turkish authorities banned peace rallies
organised by the pro-Kurdish HADEP Party. None the less, thousands of people took to the streets in order
to express their desire for peace. The Turkish police reacted thereto with a massive show of force,
attacking the peaceful demonstrators with wooden batons and tear gas. More than 3000 HADEP members
were arrested in nine cities. Hundreds of people were injured and several thousand arrested. A 19-year-old
man fell to his death while fleeing from the police.

Is the Commission aware of these outrages in Turkey?

What is the Commission’s view of the repressive action taken by the Turkish authorities against the pro-
Kurdish HADEP Party and its members?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(31 October 2001)

Freedom of expression, freedom of association as well as the principle of protection of minorities are part
of the Copenhagen political criteria to be fulfilled by candidate countries. The strengthening of legal and
constitutional guarantees of the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly is a short-term
priority in the Accession Partnership with Turkey. The Commission has been monitoring closely the
situation in the field of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Turkey. A detailed assessment will be
given in its upcoming Regular Report due on 13 November 2001.

With respect to the facts mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission can confirm that it has
received information about mistreatments and brutalities by the Turkish police and security forces against
demonstrators. It deplores such behaviour.

Moreover, the Commission considers that the actions to be in sharp contrast with the circular of the
Minister of Interior of 24 July 2001, which explicitly prohibits ‘excessive use of force’ by the security
forces and the police.

(2002/C 160 E/026)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2597/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 September 2001)

Subject: American administration of the European town of Brcko and how that town might be reintegrated

into its administrative environment

1.
Does the Commission recall that the 1995 Dayton Peace Accords laid down the borders between two
federal states in Bosnia-Herzegovina, with 49 % of the territory being awarded to the Republika Serpska
and 51 % to the Muslim-Croat Federation?