WRITTEN QUESTION E-2619/02 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. The right of all political movements to organise and participate in parliamentary elections and the resultant rights.
Date: 2002-09-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, civil rights, democracy, election, parliamentary election, political participation, political tendency

10.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161 E/29

The Commission is not aware of a widespread discussion on the future of the national sides of the euro
coins. The citizens of Europe became familiar with the euro coins very quickly and the different national
sides did not appear to be a source of confusion, but rather a source of interest. The new European
currency is a great success and at the current stage there is no need to discuss possible future changes, as
this could indeed contribute to confusion among the public.

At the present stage, it is hard to predict the pace at which national sides will be added, as this will not
result from the accession process as such (2004), but rather from the subsequent entry of these countries
into the euro area.

(2003/C 161 E/030)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2619/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 September 2002)

Subject: The right of all political movements to organise and participate in parliamentary elections and the

resultant rights

1.
Does the Commission agree that it is part of the essence of parliamentary democracy within the EU
that every political movement, no matter how controversial others may consider its aims to be, has the
right to solicit support for its views, to participate in parliamentary elections at the various levels of
administration, to express its opinions on that basis in parliamentary debate and if possible to contribute
to the taking of majority decisions and the formation of majority coalitions?

Does the Commission furthermore agree that, on the basis of this principle, it is quite possible, when
2.
courts sentence criminal or violent individuals, to temporarily strip them of their right to stand for
election, and for courts to prohibit organisations if they are proved to have carried out acts of violence,
but that it is never possible to deny the right of organisation or the right to participate in elections at local,
regional, national and European level to adherents of a political point of view which a majority regard as
undesirable?

3.
Does the Commission agree that a situation must be avoided which could encourage the belief
among adherents of any political movement that they have no hope whatsoever of achieving their aims by
peaceful parliamentary means, and that on the contrary it is desirable that those who, deplorably, have
hitherto pursued their objectives by using violence should be better integrated into parliamentary
democracy, particularly in order to ensure that no one applauds terrorism?

4.
Judicial and parliamentary organs of the Spanish State have recently taken a decision which is not
confined to combating an organisation that uses violence but which prevents adherents of a particular
political viewpoint, irrespective of the name or legal personality assigned to it, from continuing to organise
as a party and to participate in elections. Does the Commission consider this decision compatible with the
democratic principles referred to in questions 1 and 2 above?

(2003/C 161 E/031)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2620/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 September 2002)

Subject: The precedent set by recent decisions by Spain for the functioning of parliamentary democracy in

the European Union

1. What precedent has Spain’s decision about the right to exist of Herri Batasuna (and hence Euskadiko
Herritarrok) set for the functioning of parliamentary democracy at all levels in the present and future
Member States of the EU? Will it now be easier for parliamentary majorities and governments to exclude
from participation minorities whom they detest?

2.
Does the Commission expect that political movements which have many supporters will be made to
disappear by declaring them illegal, or will the main effect of this effort to eradicate them ultimately be to
render parliamentary democracy incomplete and impair its credibility?