WRITTEN QUESTION E-1742/02 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. The presidency of the European Council and the presidency of the European Commission.
Date: 2002-06-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, European Council, institutional reform

C 92 E/88

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

17.4.2003

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2002)

The Commission wishes to stress that, as Malta is not yet a Member State of the European Union, it is not
yet bound by Community legislation.

Nevertheless, once Malta becomes a full Member,
the Community legal
provisions related to the right to free movement, including rules governing measures taken in order to
restrict this right (e.g. refusal of entry).

it will have to implement

The right to free movement is a fundamental and personal right, which is conferred to each citizen of the
Union by the Treaty establishing the European Community (Article 18). Restrictions to these rights are
only allowed on grounds of public policy, public security or public health.

Measures (such as denial of entry or an expulsion order) taken by Member States on those grounds,
however, may only be used in compliance with Council Directive 64/221/EC of 25 February 1964 on the
co-ordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals which are
justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health (1), which provides for certain
safeguards and guarantees in order to limit the discretionary power of Member States in this respect. It
aims to ensure that the fundamental right to free movement is protected, in accordance with the European
Court of Justice case law, which has interpreted its provisions.

Measures taken on grounds of public order or public security have to be based exclusively on the personal
conduct of the individual concerned and to be motivated by a present and sufficiently serious threat
affecting one of the fundamental interests of society. They have to be applied in accordance with the
principle of proportionality.

Within the context of the accession negotiations currently underway between Malta and the Union, the
Commission monitors closely the degree to which Malta is adapting its national legislation to comply with
Community law. It will continue to do so to ensure that, by the time of accession, Malta fully complies
with all aspects of Community legislation related to the Free Movement of Persons enshrined in the Treaty
on the European Union, and in accordance with the provisions of Council Directive 64/221/EC.

As far as article 1 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights is concerned, the
Commission has no sufficient elements to assess whether a violation exists. The Commission wishes to
stress that the right to own property is recognised by Article 17 of the Charter of fundamental rights of the
Union.

(1) OJ P 56, 4.4.1964.

(2003/C 92 E/090)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1742/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(19 June 2002)

Subject: The presidency of the European Council and the presidency of the European Commission

The proposals made by certain prime ministers, for example those of the United Kingdom and Spain, with
a view to reforming the presidency of the European Council, whereby a permanent President would be
elected for a term of several years, are incompatible with the European Commission’s position set out in
the report ‘A Project for the European Union’ which even proposes merging, within the Commission, the
functions of the High Representative and the Commissioner for External Relations. In view of this, what
does the Commission think of the prime ministers’ reform proposals?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 2002)

The Commission has noted with interest the various proposals put forward for the reform of the European
Council. As these reforms require amendment of the Treaties, they must be examined in the context of the
proceedings of the European Convention. It is in this context that the Commission will take a position at

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/89

in particular, the need for the
the appropriate moment on the various proposals, bearing in mind,
Convention to establish a coherent
institutional structure. Since an in-depth debate on the future
institutional structure has not yet got under way, it is difficult for the Commission to give its views at this
stage on isolated aspects of particular proposals.

(2003/C 92 E/091)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1748/02

by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission

(11 June 2002)

Subject: Cruelty to dogs and cats

The Danish TV station, TV2, recently showed a documentary entitled ‘Flayed alive’, in which dogs and cats
were caught, trussed up with steel wire in enormous pain and then skinned alive. According to the
evidence, this method was used in China and Thailand.

This is an act of bestial cruelty to animals.

According to the programme, Italy and the USA have banned imports of hides and furs produced by
means of this bestial and totally unacceptable method.

Will the Commission submit a proposal to introduce such an import ban throughout the EU?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(22 July 2002)

The question of a trade policy initiative in the field of cat and dog furs (a ban on import of cat and dog
furs) should not be imposed in isolation from the more general issue of a domestic policy concerning the
production and marketing of cat and dog furs in the internal market. The common commercial policy
must be seen as a complement to the single market: trade restrictions in the absence of equivalent
measures on domestic production and marketing might be contestable as discriminatory and an obstacle to
the principle of national treatment.

Animal welfare concerns related to the production of fur in the Union is already covered by Community
legislation. The Community adopted Council Directives 98/58/EC (1) and 93/119/EEC (2), which apply to all
animals reared for commercial purposes, including the production of fur. Furthermore, in the framework
of
for farming purposes,
recommendations concerning fur animals were adopted in 1999. However, the applicability of these
measures to third countries outside the Union and the Council of Europe is clearly limited.

the Council of Europe Convention for the protection of animals kept

Therefore, the Commission does not intend to propose regulations on the trade in dog and cat furs,
leaving the decision to take measures to the individual Member States.

(1) Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes,

OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.

(2) Council Directive 93/119/EC of 22 December 1993 on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing,

OJ L 340, 31.12.1993.