WRITTEN QUESTION E-3054/02 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Commission position on Nepal.
Date: 2002-10-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, EU relations, Nepal, aid evaluation, development aid, human rights, political situation

15.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11 E/21

(2004/C 11 E/022)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3054/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 October 2002)

Subject: Commission position on Nepal

Since 1977 the EU has given more than EUR 130 million in assistance to Nepal. On 24 July 2001,
Commission President Romano Prodi wished that country’s then recently elected Prime Minister, Mr Sher
Bahadur Deuba, every success in his new office. Prodi had, by his own account, every confidence that
Nepal would, under its new prime minister’s leadership and with the help of democratic dialogue, be well
placed to make progress in its efforts to secure peace, stability and prosperity. Prodi also, on that occasion,
confirmed the European Commission’s willingness to establish ever closer links with Nepal.

On 20 August 2002, the Commission issued a press release stating that it had allocated EUR 615 000 in
assistance to Nepal, to be used to help reduce tensions in that country. A week later the Nepalese Prime
Minister spoke with Commissioner Patten. As for Sher Bahadur Deuba’s visit to Brussels, Nepalese human
rights activist, Gopal Siwakoti Chintanis has stated that no one in Nepal had heard of it. All that the
Nepalese people had known was that their Prime Minister had been in Johannesburg at the Sustainable
Development Summit. On 4 October 2002, the Prime Minister and his government were dismissed by the
king for failing to organise the elections for the scheduled date of 13 December. King Gyanendra insisted
that he was not mounting a coup, but nevertheless postponed the elections indefinitely.

Can Commissioner Patten state what matters he discussed with the former Prime Minister of Nepal, in
what atmosphere their conversation was held, and what impression it made on the Commissioner? What
practical results came out of that conversation?

Can the Commission provide an assessment of the assistance it has provided to Nepal since 1977, and
what practical results it has achieved? Are the results commensurate, in the Commission’s view, with the
financial outlays involved?

Is the Commission keeping abreast of the most recent developments in Nepal, and in what ways will it
consequently adjust its position in relation to that country?

Lastly, the press release stated that future EU assistance would be directed more particularly to the
underlying reasons for the conflict in Nepal. What action has the Commission already taken to that end?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 2002)

In view of the growing instability in Nepal since the killing of the Royal Family (June 2001), the Union has
attached increased attention to the political and security situation in the country. The Commission and
Member States have stepped up their monitoring of governmental instability, Maoists insurgency activities
and army’s attempt to keep the situation under control. They have also shown their concern for growing
human rights violations and worsening of the economic and social situation.

the elections, expressing at

Prime Minister (PM) Deuba’s visit in August 2002 was made against this background. On that occasion,
the member of the Commission responsible for External Relations reiterated the Commission’s offer to
support
the state of
emergency. He confirmed the Commission’s support to long-term development initiatives to eradicate
poverty and to eliminate the root causes of the conflict with Maoists. The atmosphere of the meeting was
friendly (first visit of a PM of Nepal to the Commission) and the Commission’s willingness to support all
efforts to consolidate democracy was made very clear.

the same time concern for possible extension of

C 11 E/22

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

15.1.2004

Most recent developments such as a non-elected care-taker government, absence of Parliament, absence of
elected local representatives and no clear signs of resumption of talks with the Maoists, risks to push the
country back to a pre-1990 situation, destroying the results achieved since the instauration of a
Constitutional Monarchy.

The Commission will continue its commitment to Nepal and a Commission Delegation Office has been
opened in March 2002. Political reporting and close concerted action with Member States represented in
Kathmandu continue to take place, in particular in relation to security issues that might jeopardise ongoing
and new development activities.

The main focus of past Community development assistance to Nepal was on rural development and
poverty alleviation. Community’s efforts were concentrated on: (i) irrigation and watershed management,
(ii) animal health, (iii) reproductive health, (iv) primary education, (v) refugees, and (vi) institutional and
capacity building.

Community aid to Nepal has, on the whole, been successful and has responded to the needs and priorities
of Nepal, set out in the various Five-Years-Plans. Experience has taught that successful projects need to be
based on an active participation of the local beneficiaries, as well as on a strong management organisation.

In recent years, major Community projects focused on rural development and irrigation have encountered
serious problems with Maoists’ interference and attacks. As a result of these developments and in order to
support progress towards peace and stability in Nepal, the new Community cooperation strategy with
Nepal has integrated the issue of conflict mitigation as an important component of its development
strategy.

The Commission is currently completing a new Country Strategy Paper for Nepal that will
include
‘preventive’ initiatives, through support to the rule of law, good governance, protection of human rights as
well as long term rural development in areas (Mid-Western Region) with strong insurgency presence. In
July 2002 the Commission approved an important initiative worth EUR 15 million in favour of rural
electrification of (photovoltaic) local communities in areas deprived both of any access to the national grid
or to hydroelectric systems.

(2004/C 11 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3076/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(28 October 2002)

Subject: Racism in football

In view of the continuing appalling level of racism being exhibited at international football matches, does
the Commission take the view that it would be perfectly legitimate for television companies to halt the
broadcasting of such matches and consequently refuse to pay the agreed fees, particularly in countries like
the United Kingdom where broadcasting material likely to incite racial hatred is illegal?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 2002)

The Commission firmly condemns racism and xenophobia, which are a direct violation of the principles of
liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. These are the
principles upon which the Union is founded and which are common to Member States as stated in
Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union, and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Accordingly, the Commission has recently presented a proposal for a Framework Decision (1), in the field
of penal law, on combating racism and xenophobia. This instrument is designed to approximate the laws
and regulations of Member States, providing a common definition of punishable offences in this area, as