WRITTEN QUESTION E-3597/01 by Ilka Schröder (GUE/NGL) to the Council. So-called troublemaker letters from the police to persons deemed likely to take part in protests against the Laeken Summit.
Date: 2002-01-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, human rights, opposition, public safety, summit meeting

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/207

Therefore, on the basis of the information given by the Honourable Member, due to a lack of grounds of
complaint on the application of Community environmental law, no breach can be identified at present.
Should the Honourable Member provide detailed information enabling the Commission to assess the
situation with reference to Community law, the Commission would be able to investigate the matter
further.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2002/C 147 E/216)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3597/01

by Ilka Schröder (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(9 January 2002)

Subject: So-called ‘troublemaker letters’ from the police to persons deemed likely to take part in protests

against the Laeken Summit

According to media reports, e.g. in the issue of the Berliner Zeitung of 10 December 2001, during the first
half of December, in the run-up to the Laeken Summit, persons in a number of German Länder deemed
likely to take part in protests against the summit were warned not to leave the country or even prevented
from so doing. For example, in Baden-Württemburg individuals were banned from leaving the country and
required to report to the police, and in Berlin passports and identity cards were withdrawn.

In Göttingen, the police sent persons presumed to be anti-EU protesters a document headed ‘troublemaker
letter’. The letter urges the recipient not to take part in ‘demonstration-like events’ during the period from
13 to 15 December 2001, stating that only in this way could the person concerned avoid police measures
in the context of risk prevention (up to and including a ban on crossing into Belgium from Germany) or
criminal proceedings in response to offences committed during such events. The Göttingen police
authority referred to a file on violent offenders, set up in November 2000, as the basis for the measures.

In the light of previous answers to Members’ questions, it should be pointed out that the protests were to
take place in connection with an EU Summit. Since there is no such thing as a European police force, the
relevant police measures are carried out by national or regional forces.

Should the Council not feel responsible for the issues raised below, could it please give reasons in each
case:

B Is the Council aware of the legal basis which the German authorities have used in setting up this file

which clearly includes details of persons who must be regarded as innocent of any offence?

B What view does the Council

fundamental rights, which
represents, for example, a breach of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and
Articles 11 and 12 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

this restriction on individuals’

take of

B This practice prevents people from exercising their fundamental rights as European citizens. What

steps does the Council plan to take in order to put a stop to this practice?

Reply

(18 March 2002)

The Honourable Member of the European Parliament is informed that it is not for the Council to take a
position in respect to individual measures taken by the law enforcement authorities in the Member States.
The Council is equally not in a position to determine on which national legal rules Member States have
based certain law enforcement measures.

C 147 E/208

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

The provisions of the Human Right instruments referred to in the question recognise the possibility of
applying restrictions to the exercise of the freedom of expression and of assembly and association, as
presented by law and necessary in a democratic society in the interests of, inter alia, the prevention of
disorder and crime. Whether the application by Member State of such restrictions in individual cases is
justified, is not for the Council to asses.

(2002/C 147 E/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3599/01

by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Shipments of animals on the world market

What is the situation regarding the shipment of animals on the world market? Are shipments of animals to
third-country regions from the EU, which have fallen by more than half in recent years, being replaced by
shipments from other countries? If so, from which countries and to which regions/countries?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 February 2002)

Egypt and Libya used to be traditional importing countries of slaughter cattle from the Community and
have reoriented their purchases towards Australia.

For Egypt during the years 1995 and 1996 on average 78 700 tonnes (live weight) of bovines were
from Australia. For the period
exported from the Community, against 14 800 tonnes (live weight)
1999-2000 the Community exported on average 18 600 tonnes (live weight), compared to 112 000
tonnes from Australia.

Libya stopped the import of cattle from the Community in 1997. As from 1996 until 1999 the country
switched its purchases towards Australia (no export to Libya in 2000).

In addition, during the last years Australia has been developing its slaughter cattle trade with countries
such as Jordan and Israel. Since 1995 (year for which there was hardly any export of cattle) till 2000 this
trade expanded and reached 41 000 heads of cattle exported to Jordan and 15 800 heads destined to Israel.

(2002/C 147 E/218)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3603/01

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Plan to restore and develop the dolmens in Estepona (Spain)

(8 January 2002)

Recent excavations in the Andalusian town of Estepona have led to the discovery of a nècropolis dating
from the time between the end of the Neolithic Age and the start of the Copper Age, containing five small
tombs.

This discovery has led to proposals that a plan be drawn up to restore and develop the megalithic
nécropolis in which the five well-preserved dolmens were found.

Bearing in mind the importance of this discovery, does the Commission believe that it should play an
active part in the plan to restore and develop these dolmens, thus making its own contribution to the
stroke of good fortune which this significant archaeological find represents for Estepona?