WRITTEN QUESTION P-2473/02 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission. Support for bushmen in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve, Botswana.
Date: 2002-08-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Botswana, EU relations, aid policy, development aid, environmental cooperation, forced migration, indigenous population, ownership, protection of minorities

C 268 E/10

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 2002)

The Government of India has made a commitment to organise free and fair elections in the state of Jammu
and Kashmir. The Indian Election Commission has established a framework whose objective is to avoid
flaws that have occurred in the past.

In this context it is important to recall the overall situation in which these elections take place: Kashmir
remains at the heart of the India-Pakistan dispute as recent events have clearly shown, and violent incidents
are reported regularly.

The presence of international observers would be valuable and desirable. This issue has been discussed
with the Indian authorities at various occasions and levels. The Government of India has, however,
explained that the Indian law does not permit international observation, but that it would allow the
presence of foreign diplomats in their personal capacity only.

Such an arrangement would not be consistent with the guidelines for EU Observation Missions outlined in
the 2000 Commission Communication on Election Assistance and Observation. The Commission and the
Member States are currently evaluating the advisability of having a presence on this basis.

(2003/C 268 E/011)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2473/02

by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(30 August 2002)

Subject: Support for bushmen in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve, Botswana

Can the Commission confirm, giving details, whether the Botswana Government is using or intends to use
EU development assistance to support the resettlement of Kalahari bushmen, which, as MEPs found, is
happening against their will? Does the Commission accept that this is in contradiction with its own 1998
Working Paper on Indigenous Peoples? Will the Commission review this issue and, in particular, give
positive consideration to providing assistance to support alternative development so that the Kalahari
bushmen may remain on their ancestral lands, if all parties are able to agree?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(25 October 2002)

The Commission wishes to confirm that it would not agree to any reported Government intention to use
Community development assistance to support the resettlement of Kalahari
‘Bushmen’ (also known as
Basarwa or San peoples) against their will. In fact the Commission has not received any request to this
purpose form the Government of Botswana and is not aware of any such intention of the latter.

The Commission has in its frequent contacts with the Government of Botswana expressed its concern over
the rights of these people and insisted that there must be no coercion or excessive inducement (e.g. for
resettlement) and that the own choice of the indigenous people must be respected.

This position is in conformity with its own Working Paper of May 1998 (1) and the Council’s Resolution of
November 1998 recognising i.a.
the
territories they traditionally inhabit and that they have the right to choose their own development path,
which includes the right to object to proposals in particular in their traditional area.

indigenous peoples’ communal and undeniable ownership of

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/11

Initiatives like the Community supported ‘Wildlife Conservation and Management Programme’ (WCMP),
which the Honourable Member refers to, come within this scope and the Commission will continue the
dialogue with Government institutions at all levels on the issued relocation.

Two aspects of the above mentioned WCMP intervention appear of particular interest. Firstly, the main
aim of this development operation is not the provision of a specific support to any particular ethnic group
nor to the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR). Therefore, the programme is not directly related to the
question of the Basarwa. It aims at supporting and improving the conservation and sustainable use of the
country’s protected reserves and adjacent areas through activities in Ngamiland, Ghanzi District as well as
parts of Central and Kweneng District.

Secondly, it is important to clarify that EUR 1 million (out of a total of EUR 14 million) will be provided in
the form of a ‘Community Development Grant Fund’. Access to resources will be demand driven and all
Basarwa or other communities in the target areas, protected or adjacent, can submit proposals for support
for economically viable and environmentally sustainable development alternatives
these local
communities. Potential project ideas include, but are not limited to, activities related to the generation of
income and the development of infrastructure. Capacity building measures within local communities are
also foreseen. Indeed, communities will be trained and strengthened so as to enable them to develop their
own institutions, manage and monitor resources and negotiate in their own interest with the private
sector, government institutions and others. This last aspect is considered of crucial importance for the
effective empowerment of local communities.

for

Following discussions with the Government of Botswana earlier this year, it appears that Basarwa, even if
residing outside the CKGR, may be permitted to develop activities that include the sustainable use of
resources within the reserve. The Commission will follow up on this option within the context of the new
programme once it is fully operational towards the end of 2002.

(1) SEC(98) 773 final.

(2003/C 268 E/012)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2518/02

by Dorette Corbey (PSE)
and Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

(10 September 2002)

Subject: Genetically modified food aid to developing countries

We have heard that developing countries are having genetically modified organisms forced upon them in
the form of food aid. Zambia is considering refusing consignments of genetically modified food, Zimbabwe
accepts modified food only if it has been milled, and Mozambique does not permit the transport of any
genetically modified material.

Is the Commission aware of any cases in which developing countries have had genetically modified

1.
food aid forced upon them and thus were not able to opt for GMO-free food aid?

2.

Does this contravene the Cartagena Protocol on biosafety?

Is the Commission aware of any cases in which developing countries have encountered problems

3.
with exports after farmers had used part of a consignment of genetically modified food aid as seed?

4.

Does the Commission agree that recipient countries should be able to opt for GMO-free food aid?