WRITTEN QUESTION P-1118/02 by André Brie (GUE/NGL) to the Council. Reaction to a statement by the British Defence Secretary, Mr Geoff Hoon, about Britain's policy towards Iraq and the potential use of nuclear weapons.
Date: 2002-04-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Iraq, UN resolution, United Kingdom, defence policy, international law, law of war, nuclear weapon

C 309 E/86

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

(2002/C 309 E/099)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1110/02

by Christos Zacharakis (PPE-DE)
and Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 April 2002)

Subject: Protection of human rights in Algeria

In the light of the flagrant violations of human rights which have occurred in Algeria and of the new
framework for cooperation between the EU and the Mediterranean countries which, in accordance with
the Union’s decision, must be based on the principles of human rights, how will the Commission ensure
that the human rights situation in Algeria is taken up as a specific topic for discussion at all meetings held
in the context of the EU-Algeria Association Council, in application of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation
process (Barcelona process)?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(27 May 2002)

the Association Agreement signed on 22 April

Article 2 of
for the
democratic principles and fundamental human rights established by the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights shall inspire the domestic and international policies of the Parties and shall constitute an essential
element’ of the Agreement.

in Valencia states that

‘respect

The manner in which this commitment is respected by the parties will be examined as part of the political
dialogue between them once the Agreement enters into force. This dialogue will take place at various
levels: at ministerial level, principally within the Association Council, at the level of senior officials within
the Association Committee, and through diplomatic and other channels. The Commission will make full
use of these arrangements to further the objectives set out in Article 2 of the Agreement.

Pending entry into force of the Agreement, a regular political dialogue is taking place on an ad hoc basis
between the EU troika and the Algerian Government. The issue of human rights is systematically discussed
at these meetings and will be raised at the upcoming political dialogue meeting in Algiers.

The Commission will also be carrying out activities in Algeria to promote human rights.

In December 2001 the Commission adopted a ‘programming paper 2002-2004’ under the ‘European
Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights’ which covers all third countries,
including those in the
Mediterranean. Algeria is among the 29 ‘focus’ countries. The main beneficiaries of this initiative are NGOs
and international organisations. The schemes to be funded in Algeria are currently at the programming
stage.

Finally, under the MEDA programme, of which Algeria is one of the beneficiaries, cooperation is planned
on the rule of law and good governance, notably the reform of the justice system.

(2002/C 309 E/100)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1118/02

by André Brie (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(11 April 2002)

Subject: Reaction to a statement by the British Defence Secretary, Mr Geoff Hoon, about Britain’s policy

towards Iraq and the potential use of nuclear weapons

I should like to draw the Council’s attention to a statement made recently by the British Defence Secretary,
Mr Geoff Hoon, (see the Financial Times of 25 March 2002), where he maintained that Britain would be
perfectly entitled to use force without a United Nations mandate, including the use of nuclear weapons in
extreme circumstances, if Saddam Hussein were perceived as a threat.

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/87

Does the Council take the view that this statement is in accordance with international law, especially in the
light of:

(cid:1) UN Security Council Resolution 984 (1995), adopted at its 3514th meeting (on 11 April 1995), and
particularly point 1 thereof:
’Takes notewith appreciation of the statements made by each of the
nuclear-weapon States (S/1995/261, S/1995/262, S/1995/263, S/1995/264, S/1995/265), in which
they give security assurances against the use of nuclear weapons to non-nuclear-weapon States that
are Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons’;

(cid:1) the statement made by the United Kingdom that it ‘will not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-
weapon States Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons except in the case of
an invasion or any other attack on the United Kingdom, its dependent territories, its armed forces or
other troops, its allies or on a State towards which it has a security commitment, carried out or
sustained by such a non-nuclear-weapon State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State’;

(cid:1) the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (8 July 1996) on the request made by the
United Nations General Assembly on the question of the legality of a threat or use of nuclear
weapons, and particularly its judgments that ‘a threat or use of force by means of nuclear weapons
that is contrary to Article 2 paragraph 4 of the United Nations Charter and that fails to meet all the
requirements of Article 51, is unlawful’, and ‘that the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally
be contrary to the rules of international
law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the
principles and rules of humanitarian law’; furthermore, the ICJ interpreted the UN Charter to the effect
that ‘the notion of’threat‘and’use‘of force in Article 2, paragraph 4 of the Charter stand together in the
sense that if use of force itself in a given case is unlawful (cid:1) for whatever reason (cid:1) the threat to use
such force will be likewise unlawful’?

Reply

(3 October 2002)

It is not for the Council to comment on statements by the Defence Secretary of the United Kingdom.

The Council remains convinced that Iraq must apply fully and without any conditions or preconditions the
Resolutions of the UN Security Council, in particular Resolutions 687, 1284 and 1382.

(2002/C 309 E/101)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1125/02

by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Council

(18 April 2002)

Subject: Adoption of children in Romania

The Romanian Government’s change of attitude over finalising the adoption of children has caused parents
in some Member States some distress.

Everybody knows that some Community couples had gone through all the necessary official paperwork for
adoption through the Romanian authorities, paperwork which takes a certain time to conclude; but a
Child Protection Law recently adopted in Romania quite unexpectedly and incomprehensibly is holding up
the government’s final decision. The coming into force of this law goes hand in hand with claims of
violations of adoption legislation by the Romanian Government, which has produced a disproportionate
outcry in Romania. All this makes it impossible for Community couples, particularly in Spain, to legally
adopt Romanian children, including parents whose requests had already been processed by the Romanian
Adoptions Committee and who had been assigned specific children. The result is uncertainty and concern
within these families, whose hearts are set on adopting children, and who find that they are being
prevented from doing so.