WRITTEN QUESTION P-0024/02 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Naturalisation in Greece and illegal conferral of Union citizenship.
Date: 2002-01-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU statistics, European citizenship, Greece, application of EU law, national law, naturalisation, statistics

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 160 E/167

arrested on that day and subsequently disappeared. It called on the Laotian authorities to release all
prisoners of conscience and to guarantee that they can exercise fully their fundamental rights, as well as
guaranteeing fundamental political and civil rights, by ratifying and implementing the United Nations
conventions on the subject.

Commissioner Patten, answering Written Question P-3175/01 (2) on behalf of
the Commission on
6 December 2001, said that the Commission was determined to stress the need to step up respect for civil
and political rights in Laos.

How does the Commission intend to respond to the requests made in Parliament’s resolution of

1.
15 February?

2.
Has the Commission officially requested precise information from the Laotian authorities on the fate
of the five student leaders arrested on 26 October 1999, who have not been heard of since? If not, why
not, and if so, what response did it receive?

Does the Commission consider it necessary to convene an emergency meeting of

3.
the Joint
Committee envisaged in Article 14 of the Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and
the Lao PDR, in order to ask the Laotian authorities to guarantee respect for the civil and political rights
recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and to meet
the demands contained in
Parliament’s resolution of 15 February 2001?

(1) OJ C 276, 1.10.2001, p. 281.
(2) See page 67.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(7 February 2002)

As was mentioned in the reply by the Commission to the Honourable Member’s Written Question
P-3175/01, the Commission has participated in Union ‘démarches’ requesting information on political
prisoners, including the group of persons arrested in October 1999. The Commission has also raised the
issue of political prisoners and other questions related to Human Rights in its bilateral meetings with
Laotian authorities.

The Commission does not intend to convene an emergency meeting of the Joint Committee at this point,
as there are continuing opportunities to raise Human Rights concerns with the Lao Government through
other channels.

(2002/C 160 E/208)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0024/02

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 January 2002)

Subject: Naturalisation in Greece and illegal conferral of Union citizenship

The answer (1) given on 1 November 2001 by the Minister for the Interior, Public Administration and
Decentralisation, Mr Skandalidis, to Mr Lambropoulos, a member of the Greek Parliament, concerning the
number of naturalisations between 1 January 1994 and 10 April 2000 states that Greek citizenship was
conferred on a total of 74 456 persons, while a further 13 442 have been registered since the day after the
general elections of 9 April 2000, i.e. a total of 87 798 for the period 1 January 1994 to 1 November
2001.

A comparison of these figures with those provided by the Commission in response to my previous
questions, H-0087/01/rev (2), E-1437/01 (3), H-0706/01 (4), E-1438/01 (5) and P-2945/01 (6), concerning the
number of naturalisations between 1994 and 1998 reveals a manifest discrepancy and an inexcusable lack
of
for the years 1999-2000 owing to ‘technical problems’
(E-2526/01 (7), 12 November 2001). Beyond these omissions there are also the findings of the Public
Prosecutor’s Office, Athens Court of First Instance, which were forwarded to the Greek Parliament under
reference number 3965/20.12.2001 and drew on the conclusions of an administrative inquiry carried out

information on the Commission’s part

C 160 E/168

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.7.2002

under oath by Charalambos Dimitriou, a deputy minister plenipotentiary, concerning the number of illegal
immigrants entering Greece from the former Soviet Union, which concludes that Greek citizenship has
been conferred illegally on a massive scale.

What is the exact number of naturalisations in Greece for the period 1 January 1994 to 10 April 2000 in
view of the discrepancy in the figures which the Greek Government has forwarded to the EU in response
to a question by an MEP (E-2526/01 D 5 897 naturalisations for the period 1993-1998) and the figures
given to the Greek Parliament in reply to a question by a national MP? What steps has the Commission
taken to ensure that the naturalisation figures for 1999 and 2000 are forwarded to the Union?

What measures does the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, propose to take in response to the
infringement of the Treaties and law deriving therefrom represented by the illegal conferral of Union
citizenship, which complements and does not replace national citizenship (Article 17 of the EC Treaty), by
virtue of which offenders enjoy Community rights to which they are not entitled (right of freedom of
movement and residence in other Member States, the right to vote and stand as candidates in local and
European elections, consular protection, etc.)?

How many of the 87 798 naturalised persons have been stripped of Greek citizenship or actually deported
for illegally acquiring Union citizenship pursuant to the Treaty on European Union and Community
legislation deriving from the Schengen Agreement, and has the Greek Government duly notified the Union
of those cases?

(1) Document 1957/227/10.10.2001.
(2) Written answer of 13.2.2001.
(3) OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001, p. 111.
(4) Written answer of 2.10.2001.
(5) OJ C 350 E, 11.12.2001, p. 154.
(6) OJ C 115 E, 16.5.2002, p. 197.
(7) OJ C 93 E, 18.4.2002, p. 151.

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(14 February 2002)

As the Honourable Member mentions in his question, the subject has been discussed in some previous
questions. The Commission confirms the views presented in those cases.

A nationality of Member States is entirely a matter for the Member States concerned, as the Declaration on
nationality of a Member State appended to the Treaty of Maastricht confirms (1). As rightly underlined by
the Honourable Member, Article 17 of the Treaty of the European Community establishes citizenship of
the Union, this does not replace but complements the national citizenship.

It is therefore for each Member State, having due regard to the Community law, to lay down the
conditions for acquisition and loss of nationality (2). It follows that Greece lays down the conditions for
acquiring and losing the Greek nationality and the Greek authorities control the correct enforcement of
those conditions. This concerns also the matter of naturalisation referred to by the Honourable Member.

Community statistics on the acquisition of citizenship are based on data supplied by national authorities to
the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) as part of an annual collection of statistical
data relating to migration and asylum. Data on acquisition of citizenship are not the subject of Community
statistical legislation. The data collection takes place on the basis of a gentleman’s agreement. Whilst the
Statistical Office of the European Communities will make every effort to ensure the quality of the statistics,
under a gentleman’s agreement it remains dependent on the efforts and goodwill of the national authorities
to deliver the relevant data. Inconsistencies between the national practice and the data delivered to the
Statistical Office of the European Communities by national authorities on this practice, will therefore
remain the responsibility of these authorities.

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 160 E/169

According to the information made public by the Greek authorities, Greek citizenship was conferred on a
total of 87 798 persons for the period of 1 January 1994 to 1 November 2001, of which about 440 cases
have been under investigation.

(1) Declaration no 2 on nationality of a Member State, OJ C 191, 29.7.1992, p. 98.
(2) See judgement of the European Court of Justice in case C-369/90 Micheletti of 7.7.1992, ECR 1992, p. I-4239.

(2002/C 160 E/209)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0031/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(23 January 2002)

Subject: Variation of prices

Will the Commission provide figures for the euro-area on a comparable basis to those given for the
European Union (from 1990 to 2000) on the coefficient of variation of prices (private consumption
including indirect taxes) for each Member State in the report from the Commission ‘Economic Reform:
Report on the functioning of Community product and capital markets’ (1)?

Will the Commission also provide comparable figures for the Member States outside the euro-area?

(1) COM(2001) 736 final.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 2002)

Table 1 showing the co-efficient of variation for the Union as a whole and for the 12 Member States
participating in the European Monetary Union (EMU) for private final consumption in the period from
1992 to 2000 (1) is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat. The co-efficient
of variation for the 12 Member States has been calculated for the whole period although, the third stage of
EMU did not start until 1 January 1999 (1 January 2001 for Greece).

Since 1992 prices have converged for both the 15 Member States and 12 Member States. However, most
of the convergence took place in the first half of the nineties and in recent years, convergence seems to
have come to a halt.

The convergence among the 15 Member States seems to have been slightly stronger than for the 12
Member States, but price differences are still greater in the Union as a whole. Currently, the co-efficient of
variation is around 15 percent for the whole of the Union and 12 percent for the 12 Member States.

Table 2 showing the price level in the three countries not participating in the EMU with respect to the 15
is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to
Member States average in the period since 1990,
Parliament’s Secretariat. Price convergence to the Union average has been relatively strong in Denmark and
Sweden, while the United Kingdom has moved from below to above the Union-average (2). The strong
convergence in Denmark and Sweden explain a large part of the price convergence among the 15 Member
States.

(1) The co-efficient of variation measures the average variation in the price levels around the mean and is a measure of
the price dispersion across Member States. It has been identified by the Ecofin Council as one of the Structural
indicators of economic reform, to measure price convergence. For instance, a co-efficient of variation equal to 0,15
means that on average prices varies with ± 15 percent around the mean. Thus, if the coefficient of variation of the
relative price levels for the Union decreases (increases) over time, the national price levels in the Member States are
converging (diverging).
It should be recalled here that for comparison purposes, prices are expressed in the same currency (i.e. euros) and
therefore, these prices are sensitive to exchange rate variations between the euro and national currencies outside the
euro area.

(2)