WRITTEN QUESTION E-3414/01 by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Council. Use of torture and inhumane treatment of terrorist suspects in the USA.
Date: 2001-12-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United States, cruel and degrading treatment, international convention, prisoner, terrorism, the EU's international role, torture

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 160 E/107

(2002/C 160 E/139)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3403/01

by Thierry Jean-Pierre (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 December 2001)

Subject: Information on EU external aid

It was emphasised in the annual report on implementation of the Commission’s external aid programmes
in 2000 that reform of the management of EU external aid was under way and would begin to bear fruit
in 2002.

The main objectives of this reform are to reduce the time lapse between commitments and payments and
to decentralise responsibilities from the Commission to the Delegations in the beneficiary countries and
territories.

In addition, the Commission’s EuropeAid Agency has published its first Annual Report, which includes
details of a reform process consisting in the establishment of a single agency with responsibility for
managing the whole operational cycle of the EuropeAid projects and the granting of specific powers to the
active Delegations, with a view to improving the Commission’s overall capacity in managing programmes
on a country-by-country basis.

In order to give greater visibility to the impact of aid on its beneficiaries, I should like to have a complete
list for 1997-2001 of the associations and NGOs involved in EU external aid to the following countries:
the Barcelona Process countries, Libya, Mauritania, Sudan, Nigeria, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Albania, Bosnia-
Herzegovina, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, the Philippines and Indonesia.

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(27 March 2002)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending the information requested for direct to the
Honourable Member and Parliament’s Secretariat.

(2002/C 160 E/140)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3414/01

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Council

(13 December 2001)

Subject: Use of torture and inhumane treatment of terrorist suspects in the USA

The measures used to combat terrorism in the USA have already resulted in many cases in the violation of
the fundamental rights of detainees. A number of reports by human rights organisations have noted that
people arrested on suspicion of engaging in terrorist acts did not have access to a lawyer and were also
deprived of the right to communicate with relatives. In some cases, moreover, according to the Secretary-
General of the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims, suspects are being tortured on the
pretext of non-cooperation with the investigative authorities.

What is the position of the European Union on the violation of the principles of international law on
human rights, and the International Convention against Torture, which the USA has ratified and which
prohibits the use of torture or inhumane treatment to extract confessions from detainees, and how will the
Council respond to the risk of a similar state of affairs arising in the Member States of the EU?

Reply

(25/26 March 2002)

As the Honourable Member is aware, all EU Member States firmly support the action to prevent and
eradicate all forms of torture and other inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment within the EU

C 160 E/108

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.7.2002

and worldwide. Torture is one of the most abhorrent violations of human rights and human dignity. In its
work towards the prevention and eradication of torture and ill-treatment, the EU is guided by the relevant
international and regional norms and standards on human rights, the administration of justice and the
conduct of armed conflict. The prohibition against
inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment is also reiterated in Article 4 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The
Council wishes to emphasise that the fight against terrorism could not under any circumstances justify the
use of torture.

torture and other cruel,

On 9 April 2001, the Council adopted Guidelines for an EU policy towards third countries on torture and
other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, with a view to strengthening the Union’s
actions towards the global eradication of torture. The Guidelines aim at providing the EU with an
operational tool to be used in contacts with third countries at all levels as well as in multilateral human
rights fora. The EU’s objective is to influence third countries to take effective measures against torture and
to ensure that the prohibition against torture is enforced. Every prisoner, regardless of his legal status,
must benefit from all the guarantees recognised under international law and must be treated in accordance
with the relevant international standards.

Finally, where preventive measures in the European Union are concerned, that is a domestic matter for the
Member States.

(2002/C 160 E/141)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3416/01

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 December 2001)

Subject: Management and payment of aid to citrus fruit growers in Greece

In paragraphs, 2.36, 2.37, 2.40, 2.41, 2.42, 2.49, 2.164, 2.165, 2.173, and 2.174 of its annual report for
the financial year 2000, the Court of Auditors highlights management errors, failings of control systems,
inadequate effectiveness of systems of checks, and a defective system for setting prices and premiums, etc.

1. What is the actual problem in managing and paying aid to citrus fruit growers in Greece?

Has that problem resulted in lower incomes for producers? How great is the reduction in income and

2.
who is responsible?

3. What measures has the Commission taken or will it take to make the system more transparent and
more profitable for producers?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2002)

The problems observed in the management and payment of aid to citrus producers in Greece are
numerous and complex.

The main ones are as follows:

B both administrative and on-the-spot checks carried out by the Greek authorities display weaknesses;

B citrus producer organisations do not always have the necessary data for them to carry out effective
checks of their members or for the Greek authorities to conduct checks of organisations and their
members;

B in the past, 3 % of the aid to be paid to producer organisations has been deducted by Greece for
it

insurance (ELGA) under a national

the Commission that

law. Greece assures

agricultural
discontinued this practice in 2001.