WRITTEN QUESTION E-2648/01 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission. The legality of the Commission's discrimination directives.
Date: 2001-09-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: administrative procedure, anti-discriminatory measure, employment policy, equal treatment, judicial proceedings, racial discrimination, social policy

16.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 115 E/139

The Committee issued an opinion on 28 and 29 June 2001, which was updated on 6 and 7 September
2001, and which, while pertaining only to the fats from products derived from ruminants, contributes to
the general knowledge on the processing of fats of animal origin into animal feedingstufffs.

In view of the above, the Commission needs to examine the implications of this opinion for Community
law before defining its position on the national measures mentioned by the Honourable Member.

(2002/C 115 E/143)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2648/01

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 September 2001)

Subject: The legality of the Commission’s discrimination directives

Leaving aside the libertarian issue of whether it is appropriate in a free society for the Commission or
national governments to tell employers who they should and should not employ, and also the legal and
efficiency costs of compliance, which led employers’ organisations across Europe to oppose the
implementation of the directives in their current form, could the Commission confirm whether or not a
company which has been brought before a tribunal set up under the terms of the directives introduced by
Commissioner Diamantopoulou will be presumed innocent and legally entitled to expect that it will not be
found guilty of infringing the terms of either directive unless the company is clearly shown to have
breached the directive, even if the company chooses not to offer any defence, and, if not, how are the
directives compatible with Article 6.2 of the Convention For The Protection Of Human Rights And
Fundamental Freedoms (1950), with the Consolidated Treaties or, indeed, with Article 48(1) of the Charter
of Fundamental Freedoms?

Can the Commission also clarify who will have responsibility for setting up the relevant tribunals and that
such persons will not have an institutional interest in initiating prosecutions?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(31 October 2001)

The Commission would firstly recall that Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000, implementing
the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (1), and Council
Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in
employment and occupation (2) were agreed unanimously by all Member States, on 29 June and
27 November 2000 respectively, following strong endorsement of the Commission’s proposals by the
Parliament.

It should be noted that, as in Council Directive 97/80/EC of 15 December 1997 on the burden of proof in
cases of discrimination based on sex (3), the provisions of the Directives concerning the sharing of the
burden of proof do not apply when Member States choose to provide redress for cases of alleged
discrimination through a criminal procedure or through proceedings in which it is for the Court or
competent body to investigate the facts of the case. As Article 6(2) of the European Convention of Human
Rights concerns only those ‘charged with a criminal offence’,
there is no incompatibility with the
Directives.

With regard to the Honourable Member’s last question on the establishment of relevant tribunals, the
framework Directives set general principles for minimum standards. The Member States therefore remain
free to use existing administrative or
the victims of
judicial procedures
discrimination, or to introduce a new procedure, provided that
the procedure adopted meets the
requirements of the Directives. The Member States have until 19 July 2003 to transpose Directive

to provide redress for

C 115 E/140

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

16.5.2002

2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic
origin and until 2 December 2003 to transpose Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for
equal treatment in employment and occupation (with a possibility of an extension of up to a further three
years for the provisions on discrimination on grounds of disability and age).

(1) OJ L 180, 19.7.2000.
(2) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.
(3) OJ L 14, 20.1.1998.

(2002/C 115 E/144)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2653/01

by Frank Vanhecke (TDI) to the Commission

(1 October 2001)

Subject: Combating terrorism

In response to the growth of terrorism in Europe and worldwide, and more particularly following the
recent attacks in the USA, Parliament, the Commission and the Council have announced that they will
shortly adopt new legislation to combat terrorism.

Yet the Union’s existing instruments relating to this subject are already very extensive: a succession of
resolutions, recommendations, conventions, declarations, charters etc. have been adopted, in many cases
overlapping. During the recent debate on the Watson report in the EP, no fewer than 52 existing
documents were cited in the proposal for a recommendation.

Does the Commission intend to do something about this plethora of conventions and declarations in order
to establish a clear and effective set of instruments?

Will the Commission streamline and consolidate all these documents?

If so, within what time-frame?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2001)

The Commission presented two proposals at the extraordinary Justice and Home Affaires (JHA) Council on
20 September 2001 in Brussels:

B A draft proposal

for a Framework Decision on combating terrorism (1), which is based on
Article 34(2)(b) of the Treaty establishing the European Union, aimed at establishing minimum rules
relating to the constituent elements and penalties in the field of terrorism, implementing Article 31 (e)
of the Treaty establishing the European Union. Provisions to facilitate judicial cooperation are also
included. The proposal is in the ‘Scoreboard’ for the implementation of an area of freedom, security
and justice, the last version of which was presented in May 2001 (2).

This proposal provides a broad list of offences indicating when they are to be regarded as terrorist
offences. It also includes offences related to terrorist groups. It places an obligation on the Member
States to ensure that these offences will be punishable as terrorist offences.

B A draft proposal

for a Framework Decision for a European arrest warrant (3) and a surrender
procedure between Member States. The European arrest warrant covers the compulsory transfer of a
person from one Member State to another. The proposal to create a European arrest warrant is also in
the ‘Scoreboard’ for the implementation of an area of freedom, security and justice.

The Commission proposes a horizontal system which would replace the current extradition system in all
matters, and is not limited to certain offences. The mechanism is based on mutual recognition of judicial
decisions. The basic idea is as follows: when the authority of a Member State requires that a person be
handed over, either under the terms of a final judgment, or because the person is the subject of criminal
proceedings, its decision has to be recognised and implemented on all the territory of the Union.