WRITTEN QUESTION E-2060/02 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Imprisonment in Tibet.
Date: 2002-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: China, EU relations, human rights, imprisonment

C 92 E/130

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

17.4.2003

(2003/C 92 E/179)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2057/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 July 2002)

Subject: Enlargement

Can the Commission confirm that under the Treaties up to five candidate countries may join the European
Union even without the ratification of the Nice Treaty? If the Nice Treaty is again rejected by the Irish
electorate will the Commission recommend that the fifteen Member States agree to a slimmed-down
version of the Treaty which concentrates on the so-called ‘Amsterdam leftovers’ so that there will be no
additional legal obstacle to the enlargement process?

Can the Commission also confirm that countries will be invited to join the Union strictly on the basis of
adherence to the accession criteria, and that if negotiations have been completed with some countries but
not others then those countries that have completed negotiations will not be prevented from joining the
European Union before the European elections in the summer of 2004 simply because the others have
failed to do so?

Does the Commission also accept that the fact that serious negotiations between the existing Member
States over reform of the Common Agricultural Policy are unlikely to begin until after the German
elections in September means that some slippage regarding the original
target date for concluding
negotiations at the end of this year is now almost inevitable, even if that still leaves time for Candidate
countries who meet the accession criteria to join before the summer of 2004?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(14 August 2002)

The Commission refers to the Presidency conclusions of the European Council of Barcelona (15 and
16 March 2002), where it is stated, that ‘… the ratification of the Nice Treaty which is due to be
completed by all Member States by the end of 2002 in order to allow enlargement to proceed as planned.’

It would not be appropriate for the Commission to speculate about the course of action to follow in the
hypothetical case that the Nice Treaty is not be ratified.

The Commission has always emphasised the application of the principle of differentiation based on each
candidates country’s own merit for conducting and completing the negotiations. There is no reason to
depart from this position.

The Commission holds the view that it is possible to complete the negotiations with the candidates that
are sufficiently prepared by the Copenhagen European Council in December 2002.

(2003/C 92 E/180)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2060/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 July 2002)

Subject: Imprisonment in Tibet

Does the Commission have any information about
the Tibetan nun Ngawang Sangdrol who was
imprisoned as a young teenage girl ten years ago after unfurling a Tibetan flag at a peaceful demonstration
and calling for Tibet to be freed from Chinese control? In particular, does it have any information about
her treatment in prison and the treatment of others imprisoned under similar circumstances? Is there any
access given to the Red Cross or any other international agency?

Does the Commission regard the development of the European Union’s relationship with China as vital to
the future wellbeing of the international community, and, if so, has it impressed on China the damage
which such policies are doing to China’s image and interests abroad and the importance of moving
towards a more relaxed stance vis-à-vis Tibet, the issue of religious freedom and the Falun Gong?

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/131

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(2 August 2002)

The EU and the Commission have repeatedly emphasised to China the need for China to respect cultural
throughout China. The
and linguistic rights,
Commission has also asked China to start a direct dialogue between the Beijing authorities and the Dalai
Lama as it believes strongly that resolution of the Tibetan situation can best be achieved through this.

freedom and the protection of minorities

religious

The Commission has raised the case of Ngawang Sangdrol with the Chinese authorities in the framework
of the bilateral EU-China human rights dialogue. Unfortunately although the Chinese authorities have
provided information concerning her sentencing and imprisonment,
they have not yet provided a
satisfactory reply concerning her present treatment.

The Commission will continue to raise the case of Ngawang Sangdrol at every suitable opportunity,
including at the highest level.

(2003/C 92 E/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2069/02

by Bob van den Bos (ELDR)
and Lousewies van der Laan (ELDR) to the Council

(12 July 2002)

Subject: Treaty of Accession

Paragraph 22 of the Conclusions of the Seville European Council refers to a ‘Treaty of Accession’, while
paragraph 10 of the Conclusions of the Laeken European Council refers to ‘accession treaties’.

1.

Can the Council confirm that just one Treaty of Accession is being drawn up?

If so, when was the decision taken that just one Treaty of Accession would be drawn up, and on the

2.
basis of what considerations is just one Treaty of Accession being drawn up?

Does the Council agree that precedent cannot be invoked in this instance because what is at issue

3.
here is the simultaneous accession of up to ten countries?

How does the principle of the individual assessment of the various applicant countries square with

4.
the inclusion of all the applicant countries in just one Treaty of Accession?

Does the Council share our view that the democratic scrutiny of the accession process is being
5.
adversely affected, since the national parliaments may say simply ‘yea’ or ‘nay’ to the entire Treaty and not
to individual applicant countries? Does the Council feel that this constitutes a good example of democratic
procedure to be setting the applicant countries?

Does the Council still intend to give the national parliaments a say in the individual assessment of

6.
the applicant countries? If so, how will it do so?

Reply

(19 December 2002)

As the Honourable Members are certainly aware, the Luxembourg European Council launched the current
enlargement process as a comprehensive and inclusive process. This approach has been regularly
confirmed at the level of the European Council ever since.

The structure of the legal instruments giving effect to accession has remained the same in every previous
enlargement of the European Union, where more than one country acceded: a short Treaty of Accession
provides that the new Member States are to become members of the European Union and on the
conditions set out in an annexed Act of Accession. This approach was most recently confirmed by the
European Council in Seville. It should be noted that the Treaty of Accession is an international agreement,
which is ratified by the existing and new Member States as sovereign States, in accordance with their
constitutional procedures.