WRITTEN QUESTION E-1377/02 by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Freedom of association in Romania.
Date: 2002-05-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Romania, democracy, freedom of association, human rights

C 28 E/100

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

The second man has been subjected to extra-judicial threats on his life and was shot inside the Sahiwal
Sessions Court by the complainant.

In mosques in Pakistan, it is taught that ‘blasphemers’ deserve to be killed immediately and that protecting
one is as bad as blaspheming oneself.

This law has lent itself to severe abuse: it is apparently possible to eliminate a business rival by claiming
that he ‘blasphemed’.

General Musharraf is believed to want to repeal or, at all events, revise this law, but it is feared that the
extremist lobby may make it difficult for him.

Does the Commission agree that this law poses problems for human rights?

Does the Commission believe that the Pakistan Government should be put under pressure to revise these
laws?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(7 June 2002)

The Commission remains concerned about the continued application of the blasphemy law in Pakistan.

It would appear that the blasphemy law is applied arbitrarily and basic standards of due process are often
not met. In addition, a disproportionate number of cases are brought against non-Muslims, often of the
basis on denunciations (approximately 70 % of all cases of blasphemy concern Muslims, meaning that 30 %
of all cases relate to the small non-Muslim community of 3 %). It should be said, however, that according
to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, a non-governmental organisation (NGO) active in the
human rights field, all six verdicts handed out in 2001 under the main blasphemy provision were directed
against Muslims.

On the occasion of a human rights conference organised by the Government of Pakistan in April 2000, a
procedural reform of the blasphemy law was announced. However, following protests by religious groups
the government withdrew the proposal.

The Commission is actively participating in joint Union efforts to address human rights issues in Pakistan
as part of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Within this framework, the Commission will continue
to address questions of concern,
including the blasphemy law. The new Community (cid:1) Pakistan Co-
operation Agreement, which contains a clause on human rights and democratic principles, will offer, once
it has entered into force, the possibility to re-establish the full co-operation dialogue with Pakistan,
including on sensitive human rights issues.

(2003/C 28 E/111)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1377/02

by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Freedom of association in Romania

(14 May 2002)

The Romanian authorities have publicly stated on several occasions that ‘regionally based’ political parties
will be declared unconstitutional. In 1998, a Cluj court for the same reasons outlawed even a foundation
called Transylvania Foundation.

Is the Commission of the opinion that this kind of attitudes may violate the right to freedom of
association? Has the Commission asked for any explanation to the Romanian authorities? If not, is the
Commission going to intervene?

Does the Commission consider that such a decision is compatible with the respect of the democratic
criteria established in Copenhagen?

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/101

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2002)

The Romanian constitution explicitly provides for freedom of association. Under this provision, political
parties, including regionally based parties, should be able to exist. However, the constitution does prohibit
organisations whose goals and activities are against the principles of the state (including the sovereignty
and integrity of Romania).

The Commission is aware of the specific case of the ‘Pro-Transylvania’ Foundation whose articles of
establishment were found, after several hearings in Romanian courts of Justice, to be unconstitutional. The
legal arguments related to the case are complex and involve an assessment of whether the provisions of
the Romanian constitution, as they have been interpreted in this case, constitute an unjustified prohibition
on the freedom of association. Since Romania is a party to the European Convention on Human Rights,
and considering that the domestic ways of redress have been exhausted, the appropriate body to assess
such a case is the European Court of Human Rights.

The criteria for accession to the Union, as set out at the 1993 Copenhagen meeting of the European
Council, make explicit reference to the need for ‘stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule
of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities’. The right to free association is covered
by this criterion and the Commission is fully committed to ensuring that this condition for accession is
respected. It will not hesitate to take up any relevant cases in its regular reports on candidate countries’
progress towards accession and in its bilateral relations with them.

(2003/C 28 E/112)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1378/02

by Francisca Sauquillo Pérez del Arco (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Power-sharing dialogue in the Democratic Republic of Congo

(14 May 2002)

The closure on 19 April 2002 of the power-sharing dialogue in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)
without a global agreement having been signed by all parties has left the national peace and reconciliation
process in suspense. A number of EU Member States have called on the representatives of the opposition
groups UDPS, PALU and FONUS to give their assent to the agreement signed by the DRC government, the
MLC led by Mr Bemba and other groups participating in the dialogue.

Has the Commission taken a position on this partial agreement?

Does the Commission intend to take action to encourage the launching of a further stage in the official
power-sharing dialogue in the Democratic Republic of Congo?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 2002)

The position of the Commission on the partial agreement reached in Sun City is reflected in the
Declaration issued by the Presidency on behalf of the Union on 30 April 2002.

The Commission fully supports the implementation of the Lusaka Agreement and has contributed to
funding the operational costs of the facilitation office as well as of the Intercongolese Dialogue.

The Commission strongly supports the reaching of an inclusive agreement and encourages all the parties
to continue the negotiations. The Commission strongly supports the ongoing initiatives of United Nations
Security Council.