WRITTEN QUESTION E-2108/02 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Closure of subsidised company Typopoiitiria Thivas.
Date: 2002-07-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing arrangements, Greece, Structural Funds, agri-foodstuffs, company in difficulties, complaint to the Commission

C 52 E/130

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.3.2003

What steps does the Commission intend to take (cid:1) as indicated by Commissioner Verheugen in the
abovementioned interview (cid:1) to bring the laws still effective (the 1946 amnesty law, the 1992 restitution
law and the Benes Decrees) into line with EU law?

What is the Commission’s view of the idea of the Czech Republic setting up a reconciliation fund as
symbolic compensation for the expropriation of the Sudeten German population as an option for settling
this dispute (along the lines of the Austrian compensation fund for expropriated Jewish property set up in
2001)?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(12 August 2002)

As is correctly reported in the interview to which the Honourable Member refers, the Commission is still
conducting an analysis,
together with the Czech authorities, regarding some aspects related to the
Czechoslovak Presidential decrees of 1945 and some related legislation of the immediate post-war period.
Work is also continuing on restitution laws and practice of the 1990s.

Final results are not yet available, but the following points can already be made:

(cid:1) The 1946 law to which the Honourable Member refers is not an amnesty law providing blanket
exculpation for all crimes committed against occupying forces and the German- or Hungarian-
speaking minorities.
It was rather conceived as an ‘impunity law’ that sought to provide legal
protection for resistance fighters and persons in temporary positions of authority in the liberation and
intended the law to cover acts committed for
initial post-war periods. The legislator had not
dishonourable motives.
intent has been increasingly
overlooked in view of the Communist-era legal practices. Various Czech statements make it clear
that there are no legal obstacles in the Czech Republic to prosecute persons suspected of war crimes
or crimes against humanity which are not subject to prescription.

In the public consciousness,

this original

(cid:1) The Commission is examining the relevant Czech legal order and individual cases of

judiciary
decisions but has not completed its work on this. The Parliament has also commissioned outside legal
expertise on these matters.

(cid:1) As was stated in the Joint Press Statement of 11 April 2002 by Prime Minister Zeman and the
Commissioner in charge of enlargement, any part of a candidate country’s legal order that is still
capable of producing new legal effects cannot escape the scrutiny of Union/Community (EU/EC) law.
This includes the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality.

(cid:1) Any decision to establish a ‘reconciliation fund’ would be a matter of national sovereignty about
which the Commission cannot speculate. In any case, apart from investigating aspects of relevance to
EU/EC law, the Commission remains fully committed to assist politically in achieving satisfactory
solutions to the dispute over the Czechoslovak Presidential decrees and related matters.

(2003/C 52 E/149)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2108/02

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Closure of subsidised company Typopoiitiria Thivas

(17 July 2002)

In its answer to my previous questions (P-3402/01 (1), P-1011/02 (2)) concerning the probable closure of
the Typopoiitiria Thivas company, which was subsidised under Regulations (EEC) 355/77 (3) and 866/
90 (4), the Commission states that it has not received a reply from the Greek authorities, that ‘the
Commission is particularly concerned that the schemes part-financed by the Structural Funds should be

6.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52 E/131

operational and not dormant’ and that, once it has received an answer, the Commission ‘will decide
whether to apply Article 24 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 (5) of 20 July 1993 amending
Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 (6) laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/
88 (7) as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and
with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments dealing
with the recovery of sums unduly received.’

Has the Commission received an answer from the Greek authorities? If not, what does it propose to do?

(1) OJ C 147 E, 20.6.2002, p. 167.
(2) OJ C 205 E, 29.8.2002, p. 247.
(3) OJ L 51, 23.2.1977, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 91, 6.4.1990, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993, p. 20.
(6) OJ L 374, 31.12.1988, p. 1.
(7) OJ L 185, 15.7.1988, p. 9.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2002)

The Commission has unfortunately not yet received an official reply from the Greek authorities and cannot
therefore confirm whether or not proceedings have been initiated for the purpose of enabling Tipopiitiria
Thivas to continue operating. We are however in regular contact with the Greek Agriculture Ministry
concerning the matter and its top officials have undertaken to explore every possibility of resolving it.

In the meantime the complaint of 23 February 2002 made to the Commission by Mr Barakakos, the head
of the firm, and his petition No 1075/2001 continue to be dealt with under the procedures in force. In
any event it rests with the Greek courts to rule in the dispute referred to them.

(2003/C 52 E/150)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2119/02

by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 July 2002)

Subject: Identity checks at Malpensa airport

At Malpensa airport in the last few days the State police have reintroduced controls in addition to the
procedures for checking identity already introduced by the airlines, even for the Schengen area. The
controls make no distinction between Schengen and other passengers and consist in people being
physically stopped and each individual passport etc being checked, as well as the boarding card. Have the
European authorities been notified about this ‘suspension’ of the Schengen Agreements?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(12 August 2002)

The Commission has not been notified of any reintroduction of controls at internal frontiers by the Italian
authorities.

It is collecting the relevant information from them and will be certain to inform the Honourable Member
of its findings at the earliest opportunity.