WRITTEN QUESTION P-3568/02 by Luisa Morgantini (GUE/NGL) to the Council. Threats to religious and cultural diversity in Israel.
Date: 2002-12-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, European Union, Israel, association agreement, cultural pluralism, freedom of religious beliefs, human rights, religious group, religious institution

3.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155 E/169

(2003/C 155 E/188)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3564/02

by Marialiese Flemming (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Uniform animal welfare standards at EU level

(12 December 2002)

As some EU countries (Austria and Germany) have very high animal welfare standards while other
countries provide animals with no protection whatsoever, it seems necessary to introduce Community
in the spirit of Protocol No 24 ‘on the
legislation to institute minimum standards of animal welfare,
protection of animals’ annexed to the Amsterdam Treaty.

Is the Commission willing to draft a directive to this end?

If so, when will the Commission submit such a proposal for a directive?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(3 February 2003)

Since 1974 Community rules have been adopted in respect of the protection of animals on farms, during
transport and at the time of slaughtering. Furthermore, there is legislation in place for the protection of
wild animals and the protection of animals used for experimental or scientific purposes. These rules are
regularly reviewed.

In some cases, such as the protection of animals kept for farming purposes, the Member States are entitled,
in respect of the general requirements of Community law, to maintain or adopt stricter standards for their
country. Concerning other issues, such as the protection of animals during transport, Community
legislation constitutes a nearly full harmonisation of the welfare standards to be applied.

The Protocol mentioned by the Honourable Member requires full regard to be paid to animal welfare when
drafting and applying legislation in relation to the Community’s agricultural, transport, internal market and
research policies. The Community can only act within the powers that have been conferred to it by the EC
remains the sole
Treaty. Prevention of cruelty to animals and of
responsibility of the Member States except when breaches of the above-mentioned Community rules also
amount to cruelty or mistreatment.

their mistreatment,

in general,

(2003/C 155 E/189)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3568/02

by Luisa Morgantini (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(5 December 2002)

Subject: Threats to religious and cultural diversity in Israel

In May 2001, the Israeli armed forces forced their way into the property of the Armenian Apostolic
Monastery of Baron Der, near Beith Jala, damaging the monastery’s ecological, historical and archaeological
heritage, to an estimated cost of over EUR 300 000. They have been occupying the property ever since.

Reiterated attempts on the part of the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem to negotiate the position, and
appeals launched by leading moral and political authorities including Pope John-Paul II and the UN special
rapporteur for religious freedoms, Mr Amor, have gone unheeded.

When the Armenian Patriarchate appealed. the Israeli military and political authorities responded by
ordering the property to be seized. In April 2002, Israel launched its scheme to build a wall separating its
territory from the Left Bank. To this effect, the Israeli armed forces have laid a paved road right through
the property, and plan to run the dividing wall down this road, thus cutting the monastic property into
two mutually inaccessible halves.

C 155 E/170

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.7.2003

The Patriarchate’s last legal resort was an appeal to the Israeli High Court of Justice, which has gone
unanswered.

Javier Solana, approached by Europe’s Armenian community, has failed to react in any way at all.

It appears that this matter is a testing of the international community by the State of Israel. If Israel
succeeds, we can start worrying about the danger that the Orthodox and Roman Catholic institutions, and
indeed every other minority living in Israel, will see their culture smothered and their heritage confiscated.

Does the Council intend to take up the case of the Baron Der Armenian monastic property, and remind
Israel of its human rights undertakings, and ask the country to respect the cultural and religious diversity
of the various elements which constitute Israeli society?

Does the Council believe that the behaviour described above violates the Association Agreement (1)
between the European Union and Israel, specifically in respect of the recitals and Article 2 thereof? If so,
does the Council not intend to terminate this Agreement?

(1) OJ L 147, 21.6.2000.

Reply

(4 March 2003)

The Council has not specifically discussed this matter. However, in meetings with Israel held in the context
of the Association Agreement, it has always stressed that relations with Israel are based on joint respect for
democratic principles and fundamental human rights, which constitute an essential element of
the
Agreement, in accordance with Article 2 thereof. It has stated that the promotion of fundamental freedoms
(cid:1) one of which is religious freedom (cid:1) constitutes a major objective of the Union’s external policy. The EU
is sparing no effort, particularly through the Quartet in which the Secretary-General/High Representative
for the CFSP, Mr Javier Solana, participates, to establish trust between the Parties and bring them back to
the negotiating table.

(2003/C 155 E/190)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3575/02

by Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Shortcomings in the application of IACS in Greece

(6 December 2002)

The Court of Auditors’ Special Report No 4/2001 (1) includes a table (No 4) giving a summary of the
weaknesses identified by the Commission in the Member States with regard to the year 1998 (mission
reports from 1998 to June 2000). This table shows that there are key control weaknesses in Greece.
Specifically, the weaknesses identified in connection with area aid are: respect of deadlines, computerised
databases, the identification system for parcels, administrative controls, on-the-spot controls and penalties,
while in connection with animal premiums
respect of deadlines,
computerised databases, the identification and registration system for animals, aid applications, adminis-
trative controls and on-the-spot controls.
the
In addition, paragraph 64 of
the integrated administrative and control system (IACS)
Commission’s services have concluded that
introduced by Council Regulation No 3508/1992 (2) of 27 November 1992 establishing an integrated
administration and control system for certain Community aid schemes has not been implemented by
Greece.

the report states that

the weaknesses

identified are:

What is the current situation with regard to Greece’s implementation of IACS and what measures has the
Commission taken or does it intend to take to ensure that Greece’s implementation of IACS is satisfactory?

Is the Commission aware of the reasons for these shortcomings in implementation? In its view, what
impact have the shortcomings in applying this system had on the effectiveness of the checks carried out?