WRITTEN QUESTION E-1632/02 by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission. Malta.
Date: 2002-06-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Malta, freedom of expression, human rights, national law

6.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52 E/83

Although the submission of balance sheets is undoubtedly a sensible transparency measure, placing a
notification of this submission in a national gazette is inappropriate and is,
in addition, an annually
recurring financial burden, particularly for small limited liability companies.

How does the Commission justify the requirement of publication of a notification of submission of balance
sheets and the associated costs for SMEs?

(1) OJ L 222, 14.8.1978, p. 11.
(2) OJ L 65, 14.3.1968, p. 8.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2002)

The requirements in respect of compulsory filing and disclosure of a series of documents and particulars
by limited liability companies are set out in the First Council Directive 68/151/EEC of 9 March 1968
(‘the First Company Law Directive’) (1).

Article 3 of this Directive provides that all documents and particulars shall be kept in the file or entered in
the register, and that disclosure of these documents and particulars ‘shall be effected by publication in the
national gazette appointed for that purpose by the Member State, either of the full or partial text, or by
means of a reference to the document which has been deposited in the file or entered in the register’.

The requirement for such a publication is justified by the need to make sure that third parties will be duly
informed of the fact that new documents or particulars have been deposited in the file or entered in the
register. Without such a publication, third parties would have to consult registers every day, for all
companies in which they are interested, with the aim of checking whether modifications have arisen. This
would be extremely burdensome and costly in practice, particularly in Member States where registration of
documents and particulars is organised on a decentralised basis.

The Commission nevertheless shares the view, expressed in a Report presented in September 1999 by a
Working Group set up in the context of the SLIM process (Simplification of the Legislation on the Internal
Market), that several requirements contained in the First Company Law Directive can be simplified by the
use of modern technology. To this end, the Commission has adopted on 3 June 2002 a Proposal for a
Directive amending the First Company Law Directive (2). The proposed modernisation of the First Directive
will not only help to meet the important objective of making company information more easily and
rapidly accessible to interested parties, but will also simplify significantly the disclosure formalities imposed
upon companies.

More particularly, with respect to the requirement for a publication in a national gazette, Member States
will be able to decide to keep this national gazette in electronic form or to replace this publication with
equally effective means (subject to the provision of a central and chronological access to company
information, which is the main function performed by a national gazette).

(1)

First Council Directive 68/151/EEC of 9 March 1968 on co-ordination of safeguards which, for the protection of
the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second
the
paragraph of Article 58 of
Community, as last amended by the 1994 Act of Accession (OJ C 241, 29.8.1994).

the Treaty, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent

throughout

(2) COM(2002) 279 final.

(2003/C 52 E/094)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1632/02

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(10 June 2002)

Subject: Malta

Can the Commission confirm that, in Malta, it is illegal to criticise the Prime Minister in public? Does the
Commission agree that this is an infringement of Article 10 (Freedom of Expression) of the European
Convention on Human Rights, which states that ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of expression.’?

Does the Commission agree that such infringements of human rights may affect Malta’s application to
accede to the European Union?

C 52 E/84

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.3.2003

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2002)

The Commission is not aware of the existence of any Maltese piece of legislation that would make it illegal
to criticize the Prime Minister in public.

Article 41 of the Maltese constitution provides that:

Except with his own consent or by way of parental discipline, no person shall be hindered in the
enjoyment of his freedom of expression,
including freedom to hold opinion without interference,
freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to communicate ideas and
information without interference (whether the communication be to the public generally or to any
person or class of persons) and freedom from interference with his correspondence.

The Commission is not aware of any law that would limit the freedom of expression enshrined in the
Constitution if this expression concerns the Prime Minister. On the contrary, reading the Maltese media
confirms that it is a common and frequent practice in Malta to criticize the Prime Minister and the
government.

The Commission stated in its 2001 Regular Report on Malta (1) that
‘Malta continues to fulfil the
Copenhagen political criteria … and the authorities’ record on democratic and human rights remains
generally good.’ The Commission will continue to monitor the respect of fundamental human rights and in
particular the freedom of expression in Malta.

(1) COM(2001) 700 final.

(2003/C 52 E/095)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1643/02

by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Commission

(3 June 2002)

Subject: South Tyrol and EU enlargement

Must the Italian province of South Tyrol expect cuts in funding following the planned EU enlargement?

If so, in what areas?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(29 July 2002)

For the 2000-06 programming period part of the Autonomous Province of Bolzano is eligible under
Objective 2. The Structural Fund contribution to the programme is EUR 32 400 000. The Trentino-Alto
Adige Region also has rural development eligibility (part-financing by the European Agricultural Guidance
and Guarantee Fund, Guarantee Section) and for that purpose EUR 118 670 000 has been assigned to
Bolzano Province for the same period.

These sums remain unchanged up to the end of 2006 even though enlargement is expected to begin
before than. For the period after 2006, the Commission has launched a wide debate on the future of
Union cohesion policy with publication of the second Cohesion Report in January 2001. Parliament has
been deeply involved in the discussions on this subject and has given a number of formal opinions on
various aspects of the subject. The Commission’s cohesion policy proposals, including those for regions
not lagging behind in development, will be made in the third Cohesion Report to be published at the end
of 2003.