WRITTEN QUESTION E-0469/02 by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Council. Use of EU safety marks for the promotion of weapons of torture.
Date: 2002-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU trade mark, electrical process, impact of advertising, marketing, non-lethal weapon

26.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 229 E/91

(2002/C 229 E/102)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0468/02

by Bob van den Bos (ELDR) to the Council

(27 February 2002)

Subject: State of the Union address given by President Bush on 29 January 2002

What is the reaction of the Council to the State of the Union address which the President of the United
States gave on 29 January 2002?

On what points does the Council share the opinion of the American President, on what issues does it
disagree with Mr Bush, and why?

Does it share my concern that no reference at all was made to the European Union in the address? If so,
what will it do to address this issue? If not, why not?

Reply

(26 June 2002)

The EU’s reaction after deplorable events of 11 September 2001 was swift and efficient, and highly
appreciated by the United States. In trying to prevent a repetition of those despicable actions, the approach
of the Union has been to try to ensure greater security for the well-being of all while respecting the
fundamental freedoms which form the basis of our civilisation.

The Council did not take a position on President Bush’s State of the Union address, which was primarily
addressed to an American audience. The EU shares the US preoccupations on international terrorism, the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the potential spillover of regional conflicts. This does not
mean that the Council always agrees with the United States on how to handle a particular situation. Where
there is no agreement, the differences should be discussed calmly and rationally.

The Council has welcomed the recognition by President Bush in his speech of 11 March 2002 of the
including those of the European Union, in the fight
important contribution of many other countries,
against terrorism.

(2002/C 229 E/103)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0469/02

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Council

(27 February 2002)

Subject: Use of EU safety marks for the promotion of weapons of torture

I am told that, since 1990, electro-shock devices have been used to torture or ill-treat people in prisons,
detention centres and police stations in at least 76 countries, in every region of the world. It seems that
several stun weapon manufacturers are advertising that their products have been ‘awarded’ the European
CE standard mark and European guarantee.

1.

How many stun weapon manufacturers are using the CE mark on their products?

2. Which EU Member States are effectively allowing stun weapon manufacturers to use the European
Commission’s CE safety marks on their stun weapons as a quality selling point?

Can the Council clarify the process by which European CE standard marks are awarded to stun

3.
weapon manufacturers?

C 229 E/92

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.9.2002

4.

Does the Council consider that CE safety marks on stun weapons are a quality selling point?

Does the Council consider that action should be taken to prevent stun weapon manufacturers from

5.
using the CE mark to promote the sale of their products?

Reply

(26 June 2002)

The Council invites the Honourable Member to put her question directly to the Commission.

(2002/C 229 E/104)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0483/02

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(27 February 2002)

Subject: Political trial of the journalist Dede Abdulhalim in Greece

Recently, legal proceedings have been brought against a number of democratic journalists in Greece. One
example is the prosecution and conviction of Dede Abdulhalim of Komotini
in Thrace, a journalist
specialising in minority affairs and proprietor of the newspaper Trakianin Sesi and of the local radio
station ISIK FM.

The circumstances were as follows. On 14 January 2000, during a music programme on the local radio
station ISIK FM, a piece of music was broadcast at the request of a listener who identified himself as
Boskurt (Grey Wolf). Next day, a complaint was lodged against the journalist because of this request. The
accusation was that the request referred to the Turkish-based extreme right-wing organisation the ‘Grey
Wolves’, which was described as a ‘criminal act’ and a ‘national betrayal of Greece’. The recording of the
broadcast in question proves that only the name of the listener, Mr Boskurt (Grey Wolf), was mentioned
without any further details.

On 25 February 2000, Mr Karaiskos brought proceedings against Mr Dede Abdulhalim before the court of
Komotini for alleged ‘insulting behaviour’. The case was heard on 6 September 2001. The judge decided by
judgment No 1 071 to sentence Mr Dede in absentia to four months’ imprisonment. The appeal is to be
heard on 12 February 2002 at the Appeal Court in Komotini.

Is the Council aware of this case?

Did these proceedings respect the right to freedom of expression and freedom of the press?

Will the Council request information about this from the Member State concerned?

Reply

(25 June 2002)

The Council can inform the Honourable Member that it is unaware of the facts of this case and that in any
case, it has no authority to comment on judicial decisions.