do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1612/2002 of 11 September 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2002-09-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, grape, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit, stone fruit

12.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 244/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1612/2002

of 11 September 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 12 September 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 11 September 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 244/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

12.9.2002

to the Commission Regulation of 11 September 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

0806 10 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

0809 30 10, 0809 30 90

0809 40 05

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
096
999
052
999
052
999
388
524
528
999
052
064
400
999
388
400
512
720
800
804
999
052
388
720
999
052
999
052
060
064
066
068
094
624
999

59,6
42,0
50,8
92,6
92,6
92,6
92,6
56,7
62,5
56,6
58,6
61,3
84,5
154,5
100,1
86,7
99,3
84,2
71,5
163,1
88,7
98,9
97,3
74,4
50,1
73,9
111,9
111,9
62,7
63,5
57,6
76,6
46,0
44,1
189,0
77,1

(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’.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2002-09-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate

11.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 215/1

I

(Information)

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

10 September 2002

(2002/C 215/01)

1 euro =

USD

JPY

DKK

GBP

SEK

CHF

ISK

NOK

BGN

CYP

CZK

EEK

HUF

LTL

Currency

US dollar

Japanese yen

Danish krone

Pound sterling

Swedish krona

Swiss franc

Iceland króna

Norwegian krone

Bulgarian lev

Cyprus pound

Czech koruna

Estonian kroon

Hungarian forint

Lithuanian litas

Exchange
rate

0,976

116,44

7,4263

0,6281

9,2085

1,4603

84,8

7,391

1,9467

LVL

MTL

PLN

ROL

SIT

SKK

TRL

AUD

CAD

Currency

Latvian lats

Maltese lira

Polish zloty

Romanian leu

Slovenian tolar

Slovak koruna

Turkish lira

Australian dollar

Canadian dollar

0,57303

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

29,903

NZD

New Zealand dollar

15,6466

SGD

Singapore dollar

Exchange
rate

0,5876

0,4124

4,0503

32315

227,955

43,16

1634000

1,775

1,5315

7,613

2,0715

1,7114

243,25

3,453

KRW

ZAR

South Korean won

South African rand

1164,37

10,272

___________
(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2521/02 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Council. Police wiretapping of Jyllands-Posten.
Date: 2002-09-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Denmark, data protection, newspaper, police, protection of communications, source of information

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/179

Can the Commission confirm that these reports are true?

Could it also provide all available information on the infringements committed to date in the current tuna
fishing year?

Is it aware of the existence of the Albatross and of its illegal activities?

Can it confirm what the vessel’s Flag State is and where its owners are from, and say where it lands it
catches?

What measures has it adopted or will it adopt with regard to the presumed illegal fishing activities carried
on by this vessel?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 October 2002)

The Commission has been told about the fishing vessel Albatros II. Withdrawn from the Irish fleet register,
it is flying under the flag of Belize in order to carry out drift net fishing for albacore tuna outside
Community waters. The Commission has passed on its information to the International Commission for
the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT).

In line with ICCAT’s ad hoc recommendation the vessel has not been authorised to land its catches at
Community ports. At present the Commission does not know how it is disposing of its tuna catches.

The Commission and the relevant Member States are collaborating to monitor compliance with Regulation
(EC) No 1239/98 (1) introducing a prohibition on the use of drift nets by Community vessels to catch
highly migratory species. At this stage in the albacore fishing season in the North East Atlantic no
infringements have been detected.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1239/98 of 8 June 1998 amending Regulation (EC) No 894/97 laying down certain

technical measures for conservation of fishery resources, OJ L 171, 17.6.1998.

(2003/C 92 E/236)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2521/02

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Council

(11 September 2002)

Subject: Police wiretapping of Jyllands-Posten

Is it compatible with EU rules for the police to wiretap Jyllands-Posten and attempt to force a journalist to
reveal his sources?

Reply

(19 December 2002)

Whether a Member State is complying with its obligations under Community law is a matter for the
Commission.

In the case in question, responsibility for the application of measures to enforce the law or detect offences
lies with Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2532/02 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Commission reports on Iranian opposition organisations.
Date: 2002-09-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Iran, access to EU information, confidentiality, dissemination of EU information, political opposition, report

C 268 E/14

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

Council Report on Nuclear Safety in the Context of Enlargement, held the view that this evaluation
exercise did ‘not lead to any transfer of competencies from the Member States to the Community’. In this
report, Member State experts confirmed the need for firm closure commitments in view of existing
deviations from safety requirements and practices widely applied within the Union.

(1) http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/01/st09/09181-a1en1.pdf.

(2003/C 268 E/015)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2532/02

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(11 September 2002)

Subject: Commission reports on Iranian opposition organisations

Can the Commission confirm that it drew up a report on 18 March this year entitled ‘Commission report
on the Iranian opposition group Mujahedin-e-Khalq’?

Did the Commission decide to invoke any of the exceptions mentioned in Article 4 of Regulation (EC)
No 1049/2001 (1)?

If not, can it say why it did not distribute the report electronically?

Can the Commission supply a copy of the report or, if not, explain why it cannot?

(1) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2002)

The Commission has not drawn up a written report on the subject of the ‘Mujahedin-e-Khalq’ (MKO). The
issue of invoking any of the exceptions mentioned in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 has not
arisen.

The Commission was asked by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and
Defence Policy, to make an intervention on the subject MKO at its meeting of 19 March 2002. At this
meeting a representative of the Commission gave a brief oral presentation which provided a general
background for the debate on the MKO.

It is worth recalling that under the Common Position adopted by the Council on 27 December 2001 (1),
the Council in its review of May 2002 decided to include the MKO on the list of organisations whose
funds shall be frozen.

(1) OJ L 344, 28.12.2001.

(2003/C 268 E/016)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2786/02

by Ulla Sandbæk (EDD) to the Commission

(3 October 2002)

Subject: Sugar

1. Would the Commission provide a detailed assessment of the impact on trade flows from LDCs to the
EU in the areas where tariffs were reduced under the Everything But Arms Initiative. The assessment
should include trade flows one year before and at least one year after implementation of the Everything
But Arms Initiative started. Finally, would the Commission state whether the impact on LDC trade flows is
considered satisfactory?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2523/02 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission. Agriculture.
Date: 2002-09-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EAGGF, EU Member State, EU statistics, aid recipient

C 92 E/180

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

17.4.2003

(2003/C 92 E/237)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2523/02

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

(11 September 2002)

Subject: Agriculture

Who are the 10 biggest recipients of EU agricultural subsidies in each of the 15 Member States and what
percentage of total agricultural support (in % and actual amounts in euro) was paid to those recipients in
2000 and 2001?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 October 2002)

The Commission would refer
Mr Poignant (1).

(1) See page 123.

the Honourable Member

to its answer

to written E-1949/02 by

(2003/C 92 E/238)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2529/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(11 September 2002)

Subject: A further tragedy marked by the death of thirteen immigrants in the Straits of Gibraltar

On 1 August the bodies of thirteen African immigrants, men and women from the Kingdom of Morocco,
were washed up at Tarifa, on the coast of the Straits of Gibraltar, in Spanish and European Union territory,
in a repetition of the kind of tragedy which has already claimed the lives of thousands of people over the
last few years. What steps is the Council taking vis-à-vis Spain and the Kingdom of Morocco to try to
create the conditions needed to ensure that such appalling events do not happen again?

Reply

(19 December 2002)

1.
The Council shares the view of the Honourable Member regarding the need to adopt measures to
prevent any future recurrence of tragic events such as the one he mentions. It should be pointed out that
immigration and more effective and appropriate means to prevent it has been
the problem of illegal
included by recent Presidencies among the priority issues confronting the Union.

2.
The fight against illegal immigration was given great prominence in the conclusions of the Seville
European Council held on 21 and 22 June 2002. These conclusions outlined the courses of action to be
taken to ensure that effective measures were taken at Union level to prevent and limit the problem.

Attention should also be drawn to the fact that substantial impetus was given to this question by the
Spanish Presidency, even before the Seville European Council, in particular through the adoption of two
programmatic instruments which not only identified a number of measures to be carried out but also
defined the framework within which future action should occur and expand. These instruments are the
Action Plan to combat illegal
immigration and trafficking in human beings in the European Union
(adopted by the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 28 February 2002) and the Action Plan for the
management of the external borders of the Member States of the European Union (adopted by the Justice
and Home Affairs Council on 13 June 2002).