WRITTEN QUESTION P-0689/02 by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Commission. Access to information about accusations of abuse and fraud.
Date: 2002-03-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, access to EU information, administrative reform, corruption, fraud against the EU, operation of the Institutions, regulations for civil servants

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/45

(2003/C 28 E/049)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0689/02

by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Commission

(5 March 2002)

Subject: Access to information about accusations of abuse and fraud

Despite various improvements in access to documents, for example those brought about by European
Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1) of 30 May 2001, the way in which the
Commission and Council deal with accusations of abuse and fraud still badly needs to be clarified. Will the
Commission therefore describe the procedure in detail?

In particular, as from when and in what form is it possible, firstly for Members of the European Parliament
and secondly for interested members of
to obtain information about specific written
accusations by employees of the EU institutions or to inspect the relevant documents?

the public,

(1) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 2002)

Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 and
Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999 (1) contain provisions relating to external and internal
administrative investigations to be carried out by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) (1), the service
which is mandated to conduct anti-fraud investigations and which is given full
independence in the
execution of its enquiries.

Pursuant to the above legislation, on 2 June 1999 the Commission adopted a Decision (No 1999/396/EC,
ECSC, Euratom) concerning the terms and conditions for internal
investigations in relation to the
prevention of fraud, corruption and any other illegal activity detrimental to the Communities’ interests (2).
This Decision specifies the obligation to cooperate fully with OLAF.

In addition, the Commission also adopted, within the framework of the current Reform strategy, a
Communication on ‘Raising Concerns about Serious Wrongdoing’ (Whistleblowing) (3). A new Decision
was adopted on 4 April 2002 in order to specify the legal framework and the scope of this procedure (4).
the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the Consultative
For further information,
Document on this matter, which is available on the Commission’s Reform website (5).

Further to that, in 2001 the Commission established an Investigation and Disciplinary Office (IDOC) which
conducts administrative and disciplinary investigations after consultation with the Secretariat-General. The
Office also consults OLAF in order to ensure that, on any relevant issue, the anti-Fraud Office is not
carrying out an investigation on that issue.

In recent years, therefore, the Commission has strengthened its instruments for combatting any suspected
wrongdoing and has put in place procedures which guarantee the independence of investigations.

Individual requests for access to specific written accusations by Members of Parliament or by the general
public have to be dealt with on a case by case basis in compliance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European
Parliament, Council and Commission documents (6).

Annex III of the Framework Agreement on the relations between Parliament and the Commission regulates
the transmission of confidential information to Parliament and its subsequent treatment. To obtain detail
on procedure, the Honourable Member is advised to consult that document for guidance on the form and
the circumstances in which Members of the European Parliament can have access to documents relating to
allegations and investigations. These arrangements govern the provision of information about accusations
and the form in which it may be provided. In this context it has to be noted that the framework
Agreement applies without prejudice to the legal provisions governing OLAF enquiries.

C 28 E/46

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

The Honourable Member will be aware that Parliament has repeatedly made clear that it recognises the
importance of respecting the principle of the right of presumption of innocence and understands that
precipitate public disclosure of allegations could be prejudicial to this principle. That basic consideration
has to be taken into account on all occasions in order to safeguard the civil rights of the accused and to
protect the integrity of investigations and any subsequent administrative or legal proceedings that might be
justified by the evidence established by those investigations.

The Commission and the other Institutions also have to take into account the fact that, as employing
Institutions, they have specific responsibilities under the Staff Regulations with regard to officials who are
the subject of allegations. In addition, the precipitate public announcement of allegations would be likely
to discourage officials from communicating suspicion of wrongdoing and consequently carry the risk of
preventing or hindering proper and effective investigations.

The Commission proposals made as part of the strategy for Reform of the Staff Regulations of European
officials would bring about changes which give personnel sure and effective internal channels for reporting
suspicions of wrongdoing, and also provide for such reports to be made outside the employing Institution
to the Presidents of other Institutions or to the European Ombudsman if neither the employing Institution
nor OLAF have responded to the reports in an appropriately serious way.

(1) OJ L 136, 31.5.1999.
(2) OJ L 149, 16.6.1999.
(3) SEC(2000) 2078.
(4) C(2002) 845.
(5) http://www.cc.cec/home/admref/en/ressources_disfonct.html.
(6) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001.

(2003/C 28 E/050)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0690/02

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(5 March 2002)

Subject: Wood-fired pyrolysis

Although the EU must continue to support and develop renewable sources of energy generation, this must
not be done to the overall detriment of the environment. EU and UK funding is currently being used to
research further the technologies used to harness biomass energy resources.

What steps has the Commission taken, in line with the precautionary principle, to assess the risks to the
local environment created by plants generating liquid biofuels through pyrolysis processes generally, and
wood fired pyrolysis with diesel as a supplementary fuel in particular? What is the nature of such risks and
how serious are they in respect of health and safety, both for those working with them and for the general
public, and for the environment generally?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2002)

Flash pyrolysis technologies producing bio-oil from biomass feedstocks are indeed under development by
various companies and several projects have been supported by Community programmes.

The utilisation of bio-oil, a renewable liquid fuel, for energy production results in significant reduction to
environmental emissions compared to all fossil fuels and especially coals.

Based on subsidiarity, it is the obligation of any demonstration plant, irrespectively of the type of the
biomass conversion technology,
local environmental requirements and emission limits.
Furthermore, the engine manufacturers are aware that unless they will develop engines that can combust
efficiently and with minimum emissions the bio-oil, their product will never penetrate the market.

to meet all