do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1950/02 by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Council. Respect for the rights of the lawyers defending the Breton separatists.
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Brittany, France, autonomous movement, right to justice, rights of the defence

6.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52 E/117

(2003/C 52 E/131)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1950/02

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Council

(3 July 2002)

Subject: Respect for the rights of the lawyers defending the Breton separatists

In France a number of Breton separatists are being tried on charges connected with an attack on a
McDonald’s restaurant in Quévert, allegedly carried out by the Armée Révolutionnaire Bretonne. The
defence lawyers have been obliged to bring an action against the French State, which has failed to fulfil its
obligations for more than six months, and they claim that the rights of the defence have not been
respected, since they have been unable to obtain copies of about 73 volumes of legal files from the
investigating magistrates, whose excuse is that they are short-staffed and lack the equipment to make
photocopies.

This situation in fact constitutes a serious discrimination against the defendants, who are all militant
Breton separatists, in view of the Decree of the French Republic of 31 July 2001, which recognises the
right of every defence lawyer to be given a free copy of the record of criminal proceedings.

Does the Council not consider that it is a matter of very serious concern that in a trial of such (cid:1) not least
political (cid:1) importance, the defence is not in a position to obtain a copy of the record of proceedings, all
the more so because they largely consist of transcriptions of intercepted telephone calls.

Reply

(5 November 2002)

The Council is not competent to comment on a matter that is sub judice in a Member State.

(2003/C 52 E/132)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1982/02

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 July 2002)

Subject: Food safety as a barrier to trade with Romania

Since March 2002, various Dutch consignments of good-quality fruit and vegetables have been stopped at
the Romanian border on the ground that the exporters have not had the proper papers. Evidently, various
EU directives on quality standards, plant health measures and food safety requirements are not being
correctly interpreted by the Romanian authorities, thus hampering the export of fruit and vegetables. This
technical barrier to trade still exists, the loss now amounting to EUR 2 million.

Is the Commission acquainted with the problems encountered by exporters from the Netherlands

1.
when exporting fruit and vegetables to Romania?

2. What action has the Commission taken to prompt the Romanian authorities to remove this technical
trade barrier?

Answer given by Mr. Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 2002)

The Commission is aware of the problems encountered by Member State exporters as a result of a new
Romanian Order regarding the security and quality conditions for fresh fruit and vegetables for human
consumption. It is the the Commission’s view that the requirements of the order are excessive.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1953/02 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. European citizenship awareness.
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European citizenship, promotion of the European idea, teaching curriculum

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/251

(2002/C 301 E/266)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1953/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: European citizenship awareness

Does the Commission agree that the development of a voluntary European citizenship awareness module
as part of the curriculum of EU Member State schools would not only enhance the education of all
Member State children, but also reinforce the idea of ‘no future wars in Europe’?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(2 August 2002)

The Commission certainly agrees that children should be taught the value of peace, and conflict resolution
in schools, and that an awareness of European citizenship, and of the history and motivation of the
Union’s founders, can contribute to this.

However, Article 149 of the EC Treaty confirms the responsibilities of Member States for the content and
organisation of their educational systems. This question therefore is a matter on which Member States, or
competent authorities within them, must decide.

(2002/C 301 E/267)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1958/02

by Nuala Ahern (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Definition of sustainable nuclear power

(3 July 2002)

In respect of the statement included in the Commission press release IP/02/872 on 17 June 2002 which
said: ‘The just adopted Euratom Research Framework Programme sets new guidelines for European nuclear
research for the 2002-2006 period. With a total budget of EUR 1 230 billion, the programme addresses all
key issues to promote sustainable nuclear power in Europe,’ will the Commission set out its definition of
sustainable nuclear power; and in light of the fact that the responsibility for long term management of
radioactive waste created under the present generation is passed on to future generations, will the
intergenerational equity within
Commission explain how this is compatible with the principle of
sustainable development?

(2002/C 301 E/268)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1960/02

by Nuala Ahern (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: Clean nuclear energy

In respect of the statement included in the Commission press release IP/02/872 on 17 June 2002 by
Commissioner Busquin which stated, ‘The debate on nuclear energy should be kept open so as to include
clean nuclear energy’, could the Commission explain what nuclear energy it regards as ‘clean’ in light of
the fact nuclear power production inevitably creates solid and liquid radioactive wastes, and routine liquid
and gaseous radioactive discharges?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1943/02 by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. EU subsidies for Rhineland-Palatinate between 1999 and 2002.
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, EU programme, Germany, Rhineland-Palatinate, co-financing, credit

C 161 E/6

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

(2003/C 161 E/006)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0725/02

by Ralf Walter (PSE) to the Commission

(14 March 2002)

Subject: EU subsidies for Rheinland-Pfalz in 2001

What EU funds did Rheinland-Pfalz receive in 2001, and under what measures, from:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF),

the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (cid:1) Guidance section,

the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (cid:1) Guarantee section,

the European Social Fund (ESF),

the EC research programmes,

the EC programmes for environment,

7. other EC programmes?

(2003/C 161 E/007)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1943/02

by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: EU subsidies for Rhineland-Palatinate between 1999 and 2002

What European Union subsidies were paid to recipients in Rhineland-Palatinate between 1999 and 2002,
broken down by EU programme? Who were the recipients and what funding was made available under
cofinancing arrangements with the Land of Rhineland-Palatinate or the Federal Republic of Germany?

Supplementary joint answer
to Written Questions E-0725/02 and E-1943/02
given by Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(22 November 2002)

Because of the length and detail of the answer, the Commission is transmitting it direct to the Honourable
Members and Parliament’s Secretariat.

(2003/C 161 E/008)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0930/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(5 April 2002)

Subject: Logging concession in the rainforest in the Democratic Republic of Congo

In its answer to Written Question E-3498/01 (1), the Commission stated that a Zimbabwean company,
whose Board of Directors included military personnel, had succeeded in securing the most extensive
logging concession in the world.

Can the Commission supply me with the name of that company? Where is its registered office, and who
serves on its Board of Directors? Who are the shareholders of that company?

From an environmental point of view, how does the Commission assess the granting of that logging
concession? Will it take measures to make the contracting parties understand that the logging of such a
vast area is incompatible with a sustainable worldwide environmental policy?
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.2853 — Volkswagen/DIN BIL) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: concessionaire, dissemination of information, economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry

C 158/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

3.7.2002

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2853 — Volkswagen/DIN BIL)

(2002/C 158/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 21 June 2002 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare
it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation
(EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in English and will be made public after it
is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

— as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

— in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document No 302M2853. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations,
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 427 18, fax (352) 29 29 427 09.

Notice under Section 12(2) of the Telecommunications Act 1984

Proposed modifications to the licence of British Telecommunications plc (BT)

(2002/C 158/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Published in the Belfast, Edinburgh and London Gazette on Friday 21 June 2002.

The link to the notice on Oftel's website is:

http://www.oftel.gov.uk/ind_info/licensing/mods/2002/galvin210602.htm
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1199/2002 of 3 July 2002 on the issuing of system B export licences for fruit and vegetables
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, export licence, fruit, vegetable

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 174/25

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1199/2002

of 3 July 2002

on the issuing of system B export licences for fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1961/2001
of 8 October 2001 on detailed rules for implementing Council
Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 as regards export refunds on fruit
and vegetables (1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1176/
2002 (2), and in particular Article 6(7) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 678/2002 (3) fixed the
indicative quantities laid down for the issue of export
licences other than those requested in the context of
food aid.

In the light of information now available to the Commis-
sion, the indicative quantities have been exceeded in the
case of lemons.

Those overruns are without prejudice to compliance
with the limits resulting from the agreements concluded
in accordance with Article 300 of the Treaty. The rate of

refund for all products covered by licences applied for
under system B from 15 May to 3 June 2002 should be
the indicative rate,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The percentages for the issuing of system B export licences, as
referred to in Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1961/2001, and
applied for between 15 May and 3 June 2002, by which the
quantities applied for and the rates of refund applicable must
be multiplied, are as fixed in the Annex hereto.

The above subparagraph does not apply to licences applied for
in connection with food-aid operations as provided for in
the Agreement on Agriculture concluded
Article 10(4) of
during the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 4 July 2002.

Article 2

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 July 2002.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 268, 9.10.2001, p. 8.
(2) OJ L 170, 29.6.2002, p. 69.
(3) OJ L 104, 20.4.2002, p. 3.

L 174/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

4.7.2002

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 3 July 2002 on the issuing of system B export licences for fruit and vegetables

Percentages for the issuing of licences and rates of refund applicable to system B licences applied for between 15
May and 3 June 2002

Product

Percentage for the
issuing of
licences

Rate of refund
(EUR/t net)

Tomatoes

Oranges

Lemons

Apples

100 %

100 %

100 %

100 %

14,0

26,0

14,0

13,0
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1191/2002 of 3 July 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit, stone fruit

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 174/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1191/2002

of 3 July 2002

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and
vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(2)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

In compliance with the above criteria,
the standard
import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of
21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the
last
import arrangements
amended by Regulation (EC) No 1498/98 (2), and in particular
Article 4(1) thereof,

fruit and vegetables (1), as

for

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Whereas:

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the
outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade nego-
tiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the
standard values for imports from third countries,
in
respect of the products and periods stipulated in the
Annex thereto.

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regula-
tion (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex
hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 4 July 2002.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 July 2002.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 198, 15.7.1998, p. 4.

L 174/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

4.7.2002

to the Commission Regulation of 3 July 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry
price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0707 00 05

0709 90 70

0805 50 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

0809 10 00

0809 20 95

0809 40 05

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
070
999
052
220
999
052
999
388
528
999
388
400
404
508
512
524
528
720
804
999
388
512
528
800
804
999
052
064
999
052
060
068
400
999
624
999

34,2
52,8
43,5
100,2
143,3
121,8
78,8
78,8
64,5
56,3
60,4
84,8
95,8
75,2
83,5
89,3
72,9
70,6
144,6
99,2
90,7
92,6
82,0
88,7
65,2
50,1
75,7
180,3
164,1
172,2
348,8
181,2
140,2
253,2
230,9
234,4
234,4

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2020/2001 (OJ L 273, 16.10.2001, p. 6). Code ‘999’ stands for ‘of

other origin’.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1928/02 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Payment of contractors and suppliers.
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: deadline for payment, supplier

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/119

The Commission shares the view of the Honourable Member on the importance of a safe handling and
disposal of mercury-containing waste. Indeed, amalgam waste from dental care is classified as hazardous
waste and hence Member States have to ensure that it is disposed of in accordance with the provisions of
the Framework Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (1) and in particular of Council
Directive 91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991 on hazardous waste (2). Waste management of dental
amalgam is addressed by Parcom Recommendation 93/2, which states ‘equipment should be installed to
separate water and amalgam to enable collection of amalgam as from 1 January 1997’. Preliminary results
of an ongoing study of
this
recommendation has been largely implemented in the Member States. Nevertheless, there is no Community
legislation that specifically requires sealing the mercury-waste from dental clinics prior to destruction.

the Commission on risks to health and the environment show that

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.
(2) OJ L 377, 31.12.1991.

(2003/C 92 E/167)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1928/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: Payment of contractors and suppliers

Further to Ms Schreyer’s answers to my written questions E-0505/00 (1), E-1669/00 and E-1670/00 (2), will
the Commission please update the figures given for performance and change in average invoice payment
times for contractors and suppliers for the years for which data is now available (2000 and 2001)?

(1) OJ C 46 E, 13.2.2001, p. 10.
(2) OJ C 89 E, 20.3.2001, p. 70.

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(17 July 2002)

Performance and change in average payment times since 1995 (overall statistics).

A. Performance as regards target times achieved since 1995

Percentage of payments executed

≤ 60 days

> 60 and ≤ 90 days

> 90 days

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

83,7

77,7

73,4

73,6

65,1

74,5

79,7

8,8

11,8

9,0

10,9

14,9

11,1

10,6

7,5

10,5

17,6

15,5

20,0

14,4

9,7

B. Annual average payment times since 1995 (calendar days)

Total numbers of days

1995

43,9

1996

51,5

1997

58,5

1998

55,1

1999

54,1

2000

50,3

2001

43,1
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1956/02 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. KEDO.
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea, South Korea, UNO, nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear safety, report, self-employed person, world organisation

C 192 E/36

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

4. Council Directive 94/67/EC od 16 December 1994, relates to the incineration of hazardous waste and
would not seem applicable to this project, since according to the description provided to the
Commission, incineration is not foreseen.

(1) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991.

(2003/C 192 E/032)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1955/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: EU-Japan relations

Does the Commission agree in principle with the idea of establishing free trade in services between the EU
and Japan?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2002)

Japan is an important trading partner of the EU: in terms of services it is the third partner after the United
States and Switzerland.

That is why, in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and under the Doha Development Agenda, the EU
and Japan have embarked upon services negotiations where the Community will seek better market access
for its service suppliers in Japan and Japan will reciprocally seek better market access for its service
suppliers in the EU. The EU believes that its market access objectives in Japan are best sought in the
multilateral context in the WTO. Accordingly, the EU has not proposed to negotiate a Free Trade
Agreement (FTA) with Japan on services, and nor is there any formal proposal by Japan that the two
partners negotiate such an FTA.

(2003/C 192 E/033)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1956/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: KEDO

As a partner in the KEDO project, has the Commission requested any independent assessment of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) estimate that it will take three to four years to verify
compliance with the requirements of the 1994 framework agreement?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 2002)

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is an independent inter-governmental organisation in the
United Nations system whose staff include many nuclear experts. It has the mission, under the Non-
Proliferation Treaty to carry out independent inspections and other controls on nuclear materials in its
Member States and has done so to the satisfaction of the international community. In view of the status
and credentials of the IAEA the Commission does not see a need to request the independent assessment
referred to in the question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1958/02 by Nuala Ahern (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Definition of sustainable nuclear power.
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU research policy, nuclear research, radioactive effluent, radioactive waste, storage of waste, sustainable development

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/251

(2002/C 301 E/266)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1953/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: European citizenship awareness

Does the Commission agree that the development of a voluntary European citizenship awareness module
as part of the curriculum of EU Member State schools would not only enhance the education of all
Member State children, but also reinforce the idea of ‘no future wars in Europe’?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(2 August 2002)

The Commission certainly agrees that children should be taught the value of peace, and conflict resolution
in schools, and that an awareness of European citizenship, and of the history and motivation of the
Union’s founders, can contribute to this.

However, Article 149 of the EC Treaty confirms the responsibilities of Member States for the content and
organisation of their educational systems. This question therefore is a matter on which Member States, or
competent authorities within them, must decide.

(2002/C 301 E/267)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1958/02

by Nuala Ahern (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Definition of sustainable nuclear power

(3 July 2002)

In respect of the statement included in the Commission press release IP/02/872 on 17 June 2002 which
said: ‘The just adopted Euratom Research Framework Programme sets new guidelines for European nuclear
research for the 2002-2006 period. With a total budget of EUR 1 230 billion, the programme addresses all
key issues to promote sustainable nuclear power in Europe,’ will the Commission set out its definition of
sustainable nuclear power; and in light of the fact that the responsibility for long term management of
radioactive waste created under the present generation is passed on to future generations, will the
intergenerational equity within
Commission explain how this is compatible with the principle of
sustainable development?

(2002/C 301 E/268)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1960/02

by Nuala Ahern (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: Clean nuclear energy

In respect of the statement included in the Commission press release IP/02/872 on 17 June 2002 by
Commissioner Busquin which stated, ‘The debate on nuclear energy should be kept open so as to include
clean nuclear energy’, could the Commission explain what nuclear energy it regards as ‘clean’ in light of
the fact nuclear power production inevitably creates solid and liquid radioactive wastes, and routine liquid
and gaseous radioactive discharges?