WRITTEN QUESTION E-1308/02 by Kathalijne Buitenweg (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Minimum standards on detention conditions of illegal immigrants and asylum seekers.
Date: 2002-05-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU migration policy, admission of aliens, cruel and degrading treatment, illegal migration, prison system, rights of aliens

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/109

The Directive lays down minimum standards, considered sufficient to ensure a dignified standard of living,
for the reception conditions of applicants for asylum in the European Union. It contains specific provisions
on residence and freedom of movement, family unity, schooling and education of minors, employment
and access to vocational training. It also defines cases of exclusion, reduction and review.

The Directive is applicable to all third country national and stateless persons who make an application for
asylum at the border or on the territory of a Member State for as long as they are authorised to remain in
the country, and to certain members of their families.

The Member States may adopt or maintain more favourable provisions on reception conditions to the
extent that they are compatible with the Directive.

With regard to present practice in the Member States, the Council would ask the Honourable Member to
address himself directly to the national authorities concerned.

(2002/C 309 E/127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1308/02

by Kathalijne Buitenweg (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(7 May 2002)

Subject: Minimum standards on detention conditions of illegal immigrants and asylum seekers

The detention regime in the European Union goes far beyond those in custody who are charged with
criminal offences. Migrants in violation of immigration or foreigner’s laws and persons seeking asylum
now comprise a significant percentage of detainees in many EU countries. Their procedural rights are
routinely violated and the conditions of
their detention are often woefully and even dangerously
substandard, as illustrated in a recent report published by Human Rights Watch. The discussion document
of the European Commission on minimum procedural safeguards appears to apply only to criminal
suspects and avoids any mention of immigration detainees or asylum seekers, despite the fact that most of
the procedural rights that devolve upon criminal detainees also apply to migrants and asylum seekers in
detention, regardless of their legal status.

The ECHR has ruled that Article 5(4) (cid:1) procedural guarantees (cid:1) applies to immigration detainees and
asylum seekers and the United Nations Human Rights Committee has reached similar conclusions
concerning ICCPR Article 9, both documents being listed in the Appendix of relevant human rights
instruments in the discussion paper of the European Commission on minimum safeguards in criminal
proceedings.

Is the Commission of the opinion that the discussion paper on minimum procedural guarantees applies to
all detained persons?

Or is the Commission willing to issue a separate proposal for guidelines for Member States addressing the
minimum procedural safeguards of non-criminal detainees (immigration detainees and asylum seekers)?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 2002)

Owing to the different legal bases underlying asylum and immigration and judicial cooperation in criminal
matters, the Commission is obliged to cover the issue of procedural guarantees relating to the detention of
suspects/defendants in criminal proceedings and asylum seekers/illegal residents and immigration detainees
in different instruments.

C 309 E/110

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

The purpose of the Consultation Paper on procedural safeguards for suspects and defendants in criminal
proceedings was to launch a Europe-wide reflection on the areas where common standards should apply in
the treatment of suspects and defendants in criminal proceedings throughout the Union. It is meant to
help the Commission prepare a Green Paper later this year. The Consultation Paper touches upon the issue
of detention but is limited in scope to procedural safeguards for suspects and defendants in criminal
proceedings. It does cover immigration and customs officers where they suspect an asylum seeker of
having committed a criminal offence.

In the area of asylum, the Commission brought forward a proposal on minimum standards on procedures
in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status in September 2000 (1) which inter alia set a
framework for assessing the legitimacy of cases of detention and obliged Member States to introduce an
initial review and subsequent regular reviews. The Commission is currently preparing an amended
proposal, taking into account the opinion of the Parliament and the Conclusions adopted by the Justice
and Home Affairs (JHA) Council at its meeting on 7 December 2001. It is expected that the amended
proposal will include a modified provision on detention.

In June 2002 the Council should formally adopt a Directive on the reception of asylum seekers which
include some specific provision in relation to the reception of asylum seekers who are detained while the
exam of their application is still pending. According to Article 13 of this Directive Member States will have
to ensure the same quality of the reception normally granted to asylum seekers also in the specific
situation of persons who are in detention.
In addition this Directive ensures that legal advisors or
counsellors of applicants for asylum and representatives of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees as well as the relevant non-governmental organisations (NGOs) will be granted access to the
housing facilities (which include detention centres) in order to assist the applicants.

the
As regards detention pending removal of
Commission’s Green Paper on a Community return policy on illegal residents (2) invites all
interested
parties to comment on precisely the question asked by the Honourable Member: should binding standards
on detention be established for these cases? If so, should this include legal preconditions, accommodation
standards and time limits to limit the maximum duration of detention?

rejected applicants for asylum or

residents,

illegal

(1) OJ C 193, 10.7.2001.
(2) COM(2002) 175 final.

(2002/C 309 E/128)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1314/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(8 May 2002)

Subject: Swedish ban on cultivation of low-THC hemp

In view of the importance of protecting people’s lives and health by taking measures to combat drug
misuse, and of the obvious difficulties of carrying out checks involved in authorising the cultivation of
low-THC hemp, the Swedish Government has considered it warranted not to allow such cultivation in the
country. The Swedish Government and a large majority in the Swedish Riksdag have no intention of
altering the Swedish rules at the present time.

However, the Swedish ban on hemp-growing is currently under consideration in the Court of Justice and
Sweden may possibly be compelled by a court judgment to review its decision. Can the Council envisage
taking a decision which gives the Member States the right to make their own decisions whether to
authorise or ban the cultivation of low-THC hemp?

Reply

(3 October 2002)

It is not for the Council to adopt a position on the national laws of the Member States or on cases
currently before the Court of Justice.