WRITTEN QUESTION E-1932/02 by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Eastern section of the A73 south motorway.
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, biotope, environmental impact, environmental protection, motorway, protection of animal life, wildlife

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/157

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1929/02 and E-1978/02
given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(30 July 2002)

The Commission shares the concern over the situation of Mr Pasko, whose conviction lacks some of the
fundamental elements of independent and fair justice such as publicity. The Commission hopes that a
speedy solution will be found by the appropriate Russian instances to remedy Mr Pasko’s unfortunate
personal situation.

Looking beyond the worrying personal situation of Mr Pasko, this affair is also regrettable since it fits into
a trend of weakening media freedom in Russia. The ruling of the military collegium of the Supreme Court
on 25 June 2002 denying Mr Pasko’s appeal, coincided with a number of other court decisions that have
raised concerns among Human Rights activists and the media community in Russia, as well as
internationally.
it must be noted that the Joint Statement of EU-Russia Summit on
29 May confirms our common goal of strengthening a society based on respect for democratic principles
and human rights. The defence of freedom of expression is fundamental in this context.

In this respect,

The EU has raised the specific case of Mr Pasko with the Russian authorities. The Commission is open to
consider further diplomatic action in the light of developments.

More generally, the Union will continue to raise freedom of expression and editorial freedom in its
political dialogue with Russia, in particular the need to preserve the important achievements made in the
field of freedom of expression since 1991. This is an essential component in our efforts to establish a
strategic partnership based on shared core values between the EU and the Russian Federation.

(2003/C 28 E/180)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1932/02

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Eastern section of the A73 south motorway

(3 July 2002)

In its reply to my question concerning the construction of the A73 south motorway in the Netherlands
(E-2244/01 of 26 July 2001 (1)), the Commission states that it is currently investigating the complaint that
the proposed construction of the A73 motorway on the East bank of the river Maas between Venlo and
Maasbracht is incompatible with the Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC (2) of 21 May 1992
on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora).

The Commission also states in its reply that it will ask the Dutch Government to give a formal reply to a
series of questions regarding the likely effects of the A73 south project on the state of conservation of the
species and habitats listed in the Community nature protection directives (directives on the conservation of
wild birds and habitats) and provide details of compensation measures envisaged.

What is the present situation with regard to the request for a formal reply from the Dutch Government?

What is the Dutch Government’s formal reply?

In the light of that reply, are further measures called for in relation to the Netherlands, and if so, what?

(1) OJ C 81 E, 4.4.2002, p. 137.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

C 28 E/158

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2002)

The Commission is investigating several complaints regarding the compatibility of the proposed A73
motorway on the East bank of the river Meuse between Roermond and Venlo and the Habitats Directive,
Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna
and flora (1), and the Birds Directive, Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of
wild birds (2).

The Commission is in contact with the Dutch Government on this case. In particular, the Commission is
preparing a letter putting questions to the Dutch government as regards the likely effects of the A73
project on the state of conservation of the species and habitats listed in the two Community Nature
Protection Directives referred to above and the details of the application of the safeguards foreseen by
these Directives.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2003/C 28 E/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1936/02

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(26 June 2002)

Subject: Georgia

In its reply to Question H-0372/02 (1), the Commission sets out a long list of severe difficulties with which
Georgia is faced. Would it not agree that, if the current applicant countries had not been offered firm
prospects of accession and negotiations had not been opened with them, problems that were equally, if
not more, severe would have occurred in those countries too? Accordingly, would it not agree that, as
things stand, its warnings are likely to be seen as mere rhetoric or an easy way out, and that the only
possible political response to the situation in Georgia, and one which takes due account of the interests of
both Georgia itself and of the Union, is to include Georgia in the list of applicant countries immediately
and to draw up, on the basis of close cooperation between the Georgian and EU authorities, a schedule of
reforms that will enable Georgia to join the EU at the earliest opportunity?

(1) Written reply of 11.6.2002.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(22 July 2002)

For the reasons indicated in the reply to oral question H-0372/02 during question time at Parliament’s
June 2002 session, the Commission believes that under present circumstances it is not appropriate to
address, even theoretically, the question of eventual Union membership or candidate status for Georgia.

(2003/C 28 E/182)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1941/02

by Christos Folias (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 June 2002)

Subject: Athens underground railway

According to figures from the Greek Government, basic work on the Athens underground railway will cost
approximately 540 billion drachmas (cid:1) 430 billion to adjust the initial cost of 180 billion set out in the
1988 agreement to take account of inflation and successive exchange rate fluctuations, and the 110 billion
cost of work to improve the railway’s safety and appearance. Together with the costs for administration,