WRITTEN QUESTION E-2243/02 by James Nicholson (PPE-DE) to the Council. Security situation in the Moluccas.
Date: 2002-07-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Christian, Moluccas, Muslim, cooperation agreement, establishment of peace, violence

C 92 E/146

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

17.4.2003

Finally, the Union’s financial perspective beyond 2006, and other related issues including, if necessary, the
CAP, will be examined by the Council in due course on the basis of Commission proposals.

(2003/C 92 E/197)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2238/02

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(17 July 2002)

Subject: Killings in the DRC

A series of unlawful killings took place in mid-May 2002 in Kisangani, north-east Democratic Republic of
Congo (DRC). It is estimated that 1 200 people died in this massacre, which was condemned by the UN
Security Council. However, no measures have been taken to put pressure on this state to bring the
perpetrators to justice. The crimes, which included summary executions of civilians, rape and pillaging, are
reported to have been carried out by members of the Rwandese Patriotic Army and combatants loyal to
the Goma-based faction of the Congolese Rally for Democracy (RCD-Goma). According to human rights
organisations such as Amnesty International, the same groups carried out similar massacres in June 2000.

What is the Council’s position on these arbitrary killings and horrendous abuses of international human
rights law, and what measures, if any, have been taken by the Council to ensure that the perpetrators of
these massacres are brought to justice? Is the Council taking measures to prevent such massacres in the
future?

Reply

(16-19 December 2002)

Concerning the events that took place in Kisangani in mid-May 2002, the EU, in a declaration published
on 23 May, has denounced the resurgence of violence in the areas occupied by the RCD-Goma, notably in
Kisangani and the repression of the Congolese people by RCD-Goma members and Rwandan troops. The
EU also recalled the obligations stemming from the successive UN Security Council resolutions on the
demilitarisation of Kisangani.

The EU is, however, of the opinion that this kind of events can only be prevented on a permanent basis
through the realisation of peace in the region of the Great Lakes. The EU has over the years worked
towards that goal in many different ways, by giving financial assistance to the ongoing peace initiatives
and through its Special Representative Aldo Ajello. The progress made in the Inter-Congolese Dialogue
between the government of DRC, the different armed opposition groups, the unarmed opposition and
other groups as well as the recent peace agreement concluded between the DRC and Rwanda have kindled
a new hope that peace in the region might be within reach.

(2003/C 92 E/198)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2243/02

by James Nicholson (PPE-DE) to the Council

(23 July 2002)

Subject: Security situation in the Moluccas

The fragile peace brought about by the Malino Agreement is under threat from violent Islamic militants.

Will the Council indicate the nature of any representations made to President Megawati Sukarnoputri
regarding action taken to secure the arrest and trail of Jafer Umar Thalib and the effective enforcement of
the Malino Agreement.

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/147

Reply

(16-19 December 2002)

In its declaration of 11 March 2002, the European Union welcomed the Malino peace talks between
1.
representatives of the Christian and Muslim communities of the Moluccas, and the subsequent 11-point
declaration to end all violence in Moluccas. The EU also welcomed the mediation of the Government of
Indonesia in the peace process, urged both signatory parties to the 11-point declaration to fully implement
its content, and urged the Government of Indonesia to take the necessary measures against intruders
seeking to disrupt the ongoing peace process in the province. Finally, the EU encouraged the Indonesian
Government to initiate rehabilitation and development activities in the area, in order to obtain a broader
public support for the peace process.

The EU has not raised the arrest and trial of Jafer Umar Thalib with President Megawati, but has
2.
regularly discussed the security situation in the Indonesian provinces, including the Moluccas, with the
Indonesian authorities. Local EU Heads of Missions have reiterated the EU’s support for the Malino
Agreement in their talks with the Indonesian Foreign Minister, and continue to monitor closely the
evolution of the situation on the ground. The EU also continues to support the Agreement practically by
enhancing project co-operation in the Moluccas and in Central Sulawesi.

The EU, during the EU-Indonesia Foreign Ministers meeting on 24 September in Copenhagen, also

3.
discussed the situation in several regions of Indonesia, including Aceh, Papua and the Moluccas.

(2003/C 92 E/199)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2272/02

by Pere Esteve (ELDR) to the Council

(24 July 2002)

Subject: Failure by the Council to reply to priority questions within the set time limits

My priority written question P-0296/02 (1) on the role of the Spanish Presidency in the fifty-eighth session
of the Commission on Human Rights in Geneva (18 March to 26 April 2002) was sent to the Council on
30 January 2002 and was registered on 5 February 2002. I received a reply to that question on 25 June
2002, by which date the session of the Commission on Human Rights had ended two months previously,
and the Spanish Presidency only had five days left to run.

Under Rule 44(5) of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, replies must be given to priority
questions within three weeks of their being registered at the Council, which would take us to 26 February
2002 at the latest.

In the Council’s joint answer to written questions E-1299/00, E-1300/00 and P-1541/00 (2) dated 10 July
2000, the Council stated that it was not bound by the deadlines set in the European Parliament’s Rules of
Procedure. Nevertheless, it stressed that with a view to better collaboration with the European Parliament
in this area, it had acted swiftly to introduce a series of internal measures enabling it to reply to written
questions within two months.

In the case in point, the answer to the priority question which I had tabled came almost five months after
it had been registered, at a time when that answer was inapplicable, and therefore of no use, as the fifty-
eighth session of the Commission on Human Rights had ended and the Spanish Presidency was nearly
over.

Is the Council aware of the difficulties that failure to observe the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure
create? Will the Council take genuinely effective measures to eliminate these delays, which are more
frequent and much longer than is the case with replies from the Commission?

(1) OJ C 229 E, 26.9.2002, p. 70.
(2) OJ C 46 E, 13.2.2001, p. 167.