WRITTEN QUESTION P-0747/02 by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission. Attacks on Hindu minority in Bangladesh.
Date: 2002-03-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Bangladesh, EU relations, human rights, political unrest, political violence, religious discrimination, religious group

8.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110 E/3

Thus the Commission can make available to the Honourable Member the figures for the number of
producers who have received the special premium and the suckler cow premium and the number of
animals on which it has been granted and also on the number of producers exempt from the stocking
density requirement and the number of animals involved. It can send him these figures if he needs them.

In most of the applicant countries no consideration has been given to the idea of a stocking density
requirement in connection with direct payments to beef producers. The Commission does not have any
figures on the numbers of holdings likely to be in compliance with the density set in the Community rules.

The applicant countries have asked for national ceilings to be set for direct payments in the beef sector, in
particular the special premium and the suckler cow premium. Their requests are based on national figures
giving only the number of animals potentially eligible for each of these.

The Commission’s information is that cattle farming systems in the applicant countries are in general more
extensive in nature than in the Member States.

The Commission has no plans at present to propose introduction of similar limits in other agricultural
sectors.

(1) OJ L 201, 26.7.2001.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2003/C 110 E/003)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0747/02

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(8 March 2002)

Subject: Attacks on Hindu minority in Bangladesh

What are the European Union’s views on the failure of the Bangladesh Government and the police force to
secure the rights of the Hindu community following the recent attacks? These attacks have been well
documented by the press and human rights organisations nationally and internationally.

What action will the European Union take to ensure that the Bangladesh Government acknowledges the
nature and extent of these attacks, and takes all necessary steps to prevent them from continuing (the
attacks are continuing as reported by the Bangladesh press), and to punish those responsible?

Why did the Bangladesh Government arrest human rights activist Shahriar Kabir, who was only exposing
the plight of the Hindu minority?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 2002)

Political motivated violence and confrontation as well as the prevailing law and order situation have been
for years a main concern for the Bangladesh’s population, the Union and more in general the international
donor community. The spate of politically motivated violence before and in the aftermath of the national
elections is, to some extent, a continuation of an ever present violence in Bangladesh society. However, the
unprecedented extent, brutality and duration of this recent violent activity against opposition workers and
religious minorities, particularly the Hindu community, has been particularly worrying.

However, based on cross-checked information from and analysis of different sources in Bangladesh, the
Commission is of the opinion that this violence was mainly caused by the power vacuum in the interim
period before the new government firmly established itself. The usual groups of ‘mastans’ and hoodlums
took advantage of this prolonged power vacuum and disorientation of the law and order authorities to
settle old scores and consolidate their positions under the new regime.

C 110 E/4

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.5.2003

Investigations carried out by diplomatic representations in Dhaka, found no compelling evidence that
political parties are systematically instigating violence against religious minorities. Indeed, in most cases
where there was a clear evidence that minorities were the intended target/victims of the attacks, it was
usually unclear what the motives of these attacks were.

The Commission, through its Delegation in Dhaka, has monitored and still follows very closely the post
election situation and the political developments in Bangladesh and has played an active role, together with
Member States’ and other diplomatic missions on the spot, non-gouvernmental organisations (NGOs),
Human Rights organisations and the media in denouncing the negative developments.

More in detail the Union undertook the following initiatives:

(cid:1) A public statement (October 2001), made by the Head of the Commission’s Delegation to Bangladesh,
the Union Presidency in Dhaka and the ambassadors of United States, Canada, Australia,
Japan,
Norway, Switzerland, DK, D, F, I, NL, SE, UK and the Resident Representative of the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP).

(cid:1) On 1 November 2001, the Member States’ and the Commission’s Delegation Heads of Mission met
the Home Minister to express their concern about the continuing attacks on minority groups in
Bangladesh.

(cid:1) A similar diplomatic action was undertaken with the senior leadership of the Awami League urging
the party leaders to exercise restraint and to avoid an escalation of violence by abstaining from any
revenge activities.

(cid:1) During the first Community (cid:1) Bangladesh Joint Commission meeting, held in Dhaka on
20 November 2001,
the Commission, early expressed the
the delegation of
Community’s concern over the post election spate of seemingly politically motivated violence and
asked the Government of Bangladesh to make all necessary efforts to address this issue.

the chairman of

(cid:1) Similar demarches were made in meetings of the Member States’ and the Commission’s Delegation

Heads of Mission with the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

(cid:1) Law and order situation, human rights issues (including minorities), good governance are among the
topics that were discussed with the government of Bangladesh in the forthcoming World Bank
sponsored Bangladesh Development Forum in Paris (13-15 March 2002).

However, since the beginning of 2002, although the law and order situation is hardly improved, reported
violence against and intimidation of minorities have decreased.

It is also to be noted that the Government of Bangladesh has already taken or it is about to take steps
which indicate a determination to stop any violence against minorities. An inquiry committee headed by
the Principal Secretary of the Prime Minister, has been set up, arrests have been made including a
notorious villain who was elected as Bangladesh National Party (BNP) Member of Parliament, and a
legislative proposal for the establishment of an independent Human Rights Commission has been brought
on its legislative way

In spite of these improvements, the Commission has instructed its Delegation in Dhaka to continue closely
monitoring the Human Rights situation in the country, to actively participate in all diplomatic initiatives in
close co-ordination with the Union Presidency representative and Member States’ diplomatic missions in
Bangladesh, and to raise this issue with the Government of Bangladesh when and where appropriate.

With regard to the case of writer and columnist Shahriar Kabir. He was arrested on 22 November 2001
under th Special Powers Act (SPA) on charges of involvement in anti-state activities. On 8 December 2001
a sedition case was filed against him. Finally, after two months in prison he was released on bail on
19 January 2002. Media, press associations, human rights organisations, opposition parties etc. strongly
condemned the detention of Mr Kabir.

8.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110 E/5

The fact that Mr. Kabir clearly belongs to the camp opposed to the present government, has worked
against the BNP during the election, has strongly criticised Jamaat (an Islamic party of the coalition) and
written against fundamentalism and communalism has led many observers to conclude that his arrest is
politically motivated.

It is up to the judiciary now to judge this matter.

(2003/C 110 E/004)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0802/02

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Reconstruction of Kambia Hospital, Sierra Leone

(20 March 2002)

What funds is the Commission providing to fulfil its commitment to reconstruct Kambia Hospital?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2002)

The Commission was approached by the Kambia Hospital Appeal launched from Cheltenham hospitals in
England. But until today no official request was made by the Government of Sierra Leone (the National
Authorising Officer) to the Commission and accordingly no formal commitment was ever made from the
Commission side.

As the basis for use of European Development Fund (EDF) funds is partnership, after receiving an official
request from the government, the Commission will examine carefully the possibility in the light of the
current situation. If eligible and depending on the budget of the operation, it could be financed from the
actual Health Sector Support Programme or the Resettlement and Rehabilitation Programme, both of
which are under implementation and have funds available. Reconstruction of social infrastructure and
support to the health sector in Sierra Leone are both priorities for Community-Sierra Leone co-operation.
A EUR 30 million Resettlement Programme was signed with the government in December 2000.

The overall objectives of the programme are:

(cid:1) to assist war-affected populations and communities in resettling in their areas of origin through

agricultural assistance programmes;

(cid:1) to support the reintegration into society of ex-combatants by means of paid employment concentrat-

ing on rehabilitation of infrastructures;

(cid:1) to improve the provision of basic social services in health, sanitation and education fields.

The activities to be realised are:

(cid:1) infrastructure rehabilitation of primary education/health and water/sanitation facilities. The iden-
tification of the infrastructures to be rehabilitated is carried out in collaboration with the local
communities, the ministries concerned and in co-ordination with other donor agencies;

(cid:1) job creation and training schemes for the unemployed, resettling communities and ex-combatants.

Important internal reallocations of the programme took place in December 2001, in order to take into
account the economic, military and social conditions in the country. A EUR 10 million contribution from
the programme was pledged into a Multi-Donor Trust Fund managed by the World Bank. This decision
came after the World Bank Conference held on 11 and 12 June 2001 in Paris to call for new funding for
the Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration Programme of ex-combatants in Sierra Leone.