WRITTEN QUESTION E-3348/02 by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Council. Crime in South Africa — another Portuguese citizen murdered.
Date: 2002-11-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU programme, South Africa, cooperation policy, crime, development aid, fight against crime

3.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155 E/141

number of mobility exercises have taken place amongst the A1 (Directors General or equivalent) and A2
(Directors or equivalent) cohort, the most recent of which was in November 2002. Indeed, over the past
three years some 60 appointments at A1 level (including transfers) have been made. These movements
took place in the context of a total A1 population at the Commission of 62 posts. Similarly some 117 A2
appointments (including transfers) have been made, from a population comprising 223 posts. Within the
context of such widespread changes, the nationality of successive post holders has rarely remained the
same. The various decisions on appointments (including those taken in the context of mobility exercises)
clearly demonstrate the Commission’s effective implementation of its stated policy and also its respect of
the terms of Article 27 of the Staff Regulations. Whilst the Commission does strive to fulfil its policy of
maintaining merit in appointments whilst sustaining reasonable geographic balance in appointments (as
required by the Staff Regulations and by the multinational and multilingual character of the Institution),
the Commission does not have or operate a ‘country quota system’ of any kind.

The Honourable Member cites two individual cases. With regard to the first, he is factually incorrect when
he asserts that the Court of First Instance ruled against the appointment of a Deputy Director General
‘partly on the grounds that senior posts in DG Agriculture had been shared out among five large countries
since 1973’. The Court of First Instance did not make any judgement whatsoever on the validity or
otherwise of the plaintiff’s claims on this point. The Honourable Member should also note that the post in
question was published some eight months before the Commission’s new rules on ‘the appraisal, selection
and appointment of senior Commission officials’ came into effect. The Court’s ruling does not call into
question any of the new measures put into effect by the Commission since December 2000. However, the
Commission is not at all complacent in this or other areas. Recruitment methods are under a process of
continued review and are constantly being refined.
the appointment of a Permanent
Rapporteur to the Consultative Committee on (Senior) Appointments (the ‘CCA’) has significantly
improved the provision of feedback to candidates, which not only increases transparency but also helps
such candidates to better prepare for future career opportunities which may arise.

In particular,

With regard to the second case quoted in the question, the Commission is unaware on what basis the
Honourable Member makes his claim, given that the recruitment procedure referred to is barely underway.

In answer to the Honourable Member’s final question, apart from the case which he refers to, only one
other appointment decision has been annulled by the Courts during the last three years. It should be noted
that in that other case, the recruitment procedure was actually undertaken during the term of office of the
previous Commission. Meanwhile, the annulment of two appointment decisions over the last three years
should be seen in the context of more than 360 appointment decisions relating to senior officials taken
during the same period.

(2003/C 155 E/157)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3348/02

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Council

(26 November 2002)

Subject: Crime in South Africa (cid:1) another Portuguese citizen murdered

In its reply of 21 November 2001 to Written Question P-1662/01 (1) on the same subject tabled on 1 June
2001 the Council said that it considered that ‘the escalation of violent crime in South Africa is a general
problem that is affecting all races, nationalities and social strata present in the country and not only the
resident Portuguese community’ going on to say that ‘South Africa is however an independent country
with a democratically elected government’ (cid:1) which has of course never been called into question (cid:1) ‘and
the Council remains convinced that the South African authorities are doing their outmost to control this
unfortunate situation in the country and to respect the human rights situation’. The Council also refers to
the European Programme for Reconstruction and Development (EPRD), described as ‘among the largest
development programmes that the EU is financing to an individual country’ and the Council considers that
‘through these positive actions, the EU aims at improving the quality of life in South Africa and thereby
also reducing the level of violence’. However, the Council says that only one of the specific programmes
was ‘aimed at strengthening the capacities and institutional development for the services of the South
African police’.

C 155 E/142

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.7.2003

Around the same time, on 5 July 2001, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the situation in
South Africa (2) which expresses much less optimism about the problem and probable developments. It
points out that ‘South Africa would have serious difficulties in overcoming these problems without the
support and solidarity of the international community, in which the role of the European Union is crucial
in so far as the Union and its Member States account for 70 % of international aid to the country’.

Unfortunately, violent crime in South Africa shows no signs of abating and a large number of EU citizens,
especially Portuguese, are still being murdered. A person murdered a few days ago was the twenty-fifth
Portuguese victim since the beginning of the year.

This is obviously an unacceptable situation and calls for more determined measures on the part of the
competent South African authorities, as well as more intensive international support.

Does the Council still have the same confidence and the optimistic feeling that the problem of violent
crime against European residents in South Africa will be solved by ‘improving the quality of life in South
Africa’, which is of course a desirable aim for this and for other countries? Or does it rather intend to
include crime prevention, especially prevention of violent crime and murder, as a central issue in the
whole policy of cooperation and development between the EU and South Africa? What are the main
indicators and conclusions emerging from the programme which, in the context of the EPRD, focused on
the capacity and institutional development of the South African police?

(1) OJ C 81 E, 4.4.2002, p. 48.
(2) OJ C 65 E, 14.3.2002, p. 371.

Reply

(3 March 2003)

The Council is still of the opinion that the problem of violent crime in South Africa will be reduced by
improving the quality of life in South Africa. The Council is furthermore of the opinion that the problem
of violent crimes should be addressed in general terms and not only in relation to European residents. In
particular since South African citizens themselves, in particular the poor ones, are probably the worst
affected by this kind of crime. To incorporate crime prevention in the policy of cooperation and
development between the EU and South Africa is not a new idea as the Honourable Parliamentarian
himself points out in his question. To make crime prevention a central issue in this cooperation would
however, completely change the overall development focus of the EU, away from poverty alleviation as
stated in the common and comprehensive strategy in the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement.

The Council therefore considers that the question of crime prevention is comprehensively addressed in the
context of the EPRD.

Finally as regards the program the Council recalls that it is administrated by the Commission and
consequently the Honourable Parliamentarian should refer to the competent institution.

(2003/C 155 E/158)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3358/02

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Council

(27 November 2002)

Subject: Research on supernumerary embryos

At its 2451st meeting held in Brussels on 30 September 2002, the Competition (Internal Market, Industry
and Research) Council adopted an arrangement under which:

the Council and Commission agreed that detailed implementing arrangements for research activities
involving the use of human embryos and human embryonic stem cells that may be financed under the