WRITTEN QUESTION E-1913/02 by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission. The euro — compatibility of Vatican City State (VCS) legislation with Community law.
Date: 2002-07-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Holy See, Italy, euro, euro area, financial institution, intra-EU payment, issuing of currency

C 92 E/116

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

17.4.2003

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2002)

The Honourable Member seems to be referring to the case regarding the joint selling of the media rights of
the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) Champions League where the Commission has issued
a statement of objections against UEFA. The Commission’s procedure has caused UEFA to propose a
number of remedies designed to respond to the Commission’s competition concerns. These remedies are
currently under examination.

In analysing the restrictive effect of the arrangement, the Commission examines whether the conditions for
an exemption are possible. The Commission wishes to ensure that the very important media rights of
football tournaments are not sold in a way that harms competition on media markets and which, as a
consequence, harms viewers. However, Community competition law is neutral as to on which market the
owner of the rights chooses to sell the TV rights. As a matter of competition law, the Commission does
not give any preferential treatment of the market for pay-TV over the market for free-TV or vice-versa.
However, the Television without Frontiers Directive provides that Member State may draw up a national
list of events of major importance to society, which must be broadcast on TV channels accessible to the
large majority of the population (cid:1) in effect on free-TV. In Member States where such lists exist, they often
include UEFA and the International Federation of Football Association (FIFA) football.

Before giving its final approval of the settlement regarding the UEFA Champions League, the Commission
wishes to give third parties the opportunity to comment on the result and it will publish a notice in the
Official Journal describing the new arrangements and inviting third parties to submit comments on the
new arrangements.

(2003/C 92 E/164)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1913/02

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(2 July 2002)

Subject: The euro (cid:1) compatibility of Vatican City State (VCS) legislation with Community law

The Monetary Agreement between the Italian Republic, on behalf of the European Community, and the
Vatican City State and, on its behalf, the Holy See (1), which authorises the VCS to issue euros:

(a)

stipulates that the Vatican City State is represented by the Holy See within the meaning of Article 3 of
the Lateran Treaty,

(b) makes reference to the ‘principles established in the existing Agreements between the Vatican City
State and the Italian Republic and in particular in the Treaty between the Holy See and Italy of
11 February 1929 and amendments thereto’ (Recital 1),

(c) provides that ‘financial

institutions located in the Vatican City State may have access to payment
systems within the euro area under appropriate terms and conditions determined by the Banca d’Italia
with the agreement of the European Central Bank’ (Article 10).

Furthermore, Article 11 of the Lateran Treaty stipulates that all central bodies of the Catholic Church
(which include the central bank, the Istituto Opere di Religione (IOR))
from any
interference on the part of the Italian State’.

‘shall be exempt

Given the above, would the Commission state:

(cid:1) what financial institutions are located in the Vatican City State, which of them have been granted

access to payment systems within the euro area, and under what conditions;

(cid:1) whether it considers Article 11 of the Lateran Treaty to be compatible with Community law;

(cid:1) whether the Italian state is able, not least from a legal point of view, to monitor the activities of the

IOR?

(1) OJ C 299, 25.10.2001, p. 1.

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/117

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 2002)

None of the banks in the Vatican State have direct access to Target. There is one bank (Instituto di Opere
de Religione) which is an indirect participant (1) and which has two channels of access, via a major German
and a major Italian bank which are themselves linked to the system.

Since the banking authorities impose controls only where there is direct access, the issue of whether
Article 11 of the Lateran Treaty is compatible with Community law does not arise.

(1) An indirect participant is an institution which does not have its own account in a Real-Time Gross Settlement
(RTGS) system but which is nonetheless acknowledged by a national RTGS system and covered by its rules, and
which may be directly accessible within Target. All the transactions of an indirect participant are carried out on the
account of a participant which has agreed to represent the indirect participant.

(2003/C 92 E/165)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1914/02

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(2 July 2002)

Subject: The euro: Vatican City State (VCS) and money laundering

Aware that:

(cid:1) Under the Monetary Agreement between the Italian Republic, on behalf of the European Union, and

the Vatican City State and, on its behalf, the Holy See (1), the VCS is authorised to issue euros.

(cid:1) The only bank operating within the SCV is the central bank, the ‘Istituto per le Opere di Religione’

(IOR).

(cid:1) The Commission is a member of, and Europol has observer status within, the Financial Action Task

Force on Money Laundering (FATF) set up by the OECD.

(cid:1) During the 1980s a huge money-laundering operation involving among others the Pope’s delegate in

charge of the IOR, the American bishop Paul Marcinkus, was brought to light.

(cid:1) In October 2000 an attempt was made to defraud the Sicilian regional authorities of USD 400 million
in European funds, which allegedly would then have been laundered through various banks, including
the IOR (Arresting Transnational Crime (cid:1) an electronic journal of the US Department of State,
August 2001, Volume 6, Number 2).

(cid:1) On 10 June 1984, the Turks and Caicos Islands were taken out of the Diocese of Nassau (Bahamas)
and proclaimed a Missio Sui Iuris. The same happened to the Cayman Islands (which formed part of
the Diocese of Kingston (Jamaica)) on 14 July 2000. The American cardinal Theodore Edgar
McCarrick was appointed Superior for the Turks and Caicos on 21 September 2001, while the
American cardinal Adam Maida, member of the IOR Supervisory Board, is Superior for the Cayman
Islands. Both groups of islands are among the world’s best-known offshore financial centres.

Given the above, would the Commission state:

(cid:1) whether any anti-money laundering laws that enable the origin of funds deposited to be traced are in

force in the VCS;

(cid:1) whether any checks have been run by international organisations on the VCS’s banking, economic and

financial systems and, if so, what conclusions were reached;

(cid:1) what steps it intends to take to guard against money laundering by banks located in the VCS?

(1) OJ C 299, 25.10.2001, p. 1.