WRITTEN QUESTION E-0607/02 by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Commission. Arbitrary arrests and the political situation in Laos.
Date: 2002-03-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Laos, cooperation policy, government violence, human rights, political prisoner, political violence, right to justice

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/3

governance in general, and made a point of meeting the Leader of the Opposition, the Reverend.
Wavel Ramkalawan. This meeting not only provided a more rounded vision of the political and social
reality of Seychelles, but also conveyed to Government the importance attached to opposition parties as
guardians and monitors of good governance.

(2004/C 51 E/003)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0607/02

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Commission

(5 March 2002)

Subject: Arbitrary arrests and the political situation in Laos

On 15 November 2001 the European Parliament adopted and forwarded to the Commission a topical and
urgent resolution on arbitrary arrests and the political situation in Laos (1) in which it

(cid:1) pointed out that the Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and Lao PDR is based
on ‘respect for the democratic principles and fundamental human rights established by the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights’ (Article 1), and that failure to respect this condition must be considered
a ‘case of material breach of the Agreement’ with respect to Article 19 and Annex 1;

(cid:1) said that the arrest and disappearance of five leaders of the 26 October 1999 Movement, Keuakoun,
Sisa-At, Phengphanh, Chanmanivong and Keochay, was a clear and visible case of violation of the
democratic principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and must therefore be considered
a case of non-respect of the Cooperation Agreement between the Community and Laos.

Commissioner Patten, replying on behalf of the Commission to question P-0019/02 (2), said on 7 February
2002 that the Commission did not intend to convene an emergency meeting of the Joint Committee
provided for by Article 14 of the Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the Lao
People’s Democratic Republic and explicitly called for in Parliament’s resolution of 15 November 2001
because there were continuing opportunities to raise Human Rights concerns with the Lao Government
through other channels.

1. What other channels are used by the Commission to ask the Lao authorities to ensure that the
political and civil rights recognised by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are observed? On the
basis of what criteria are these channels selected? How do they operate?

2.
On what occasions has the question of the arrest and disappearance of the five leaders of the
‘26 October 1999 Movement’ been raised? What answers were obtained from the government of Lao
PDR?

(1) OJ C 140 E, 13.6.2002, p. 577.
(2) OJ C 160 E, 4.7.2002, p. 166.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(17 April 2002)

As already indicated in the reply by the Commission to the Honourable Member’s Written Questions
P-3175/01 (1) and P-0019/02 (2), the Commission has the possibility of raising human rights issues with the
Government of Lao People’s Democratic Republic (PDR) in bilateral meetings and when participating in
Union political démarches agreed with the Member States. These channels are additional to the Union-Lao
Joint Committee and can (cid:1) in practice (cid:1) be used at any time, while the Joint Commission normally meets
only once every two years.

The question of the arrest and disappearance of the five leaders of the ‘26 October 1999 Movement’ has
been raised through these channels. Unfortunately,
it has been impossible so far to receive clear
information from the Government on the five missing Laotians. The Commission will therefore continue
to raise the issue through the available channels.

(1) OJ C 160 E, 4.7.2002, p. 67.
(2) OJ C 160 E, 4.7.2002, p. 166.