WRITTEN QUESTION E-3892/02 by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council. Union support for the government of Sudan.
Date: 2003-01-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Islamic law, Sudan, aid policy, common foreign and security policy, death penalty, human rights, settlement of disputes

C 222 E/122

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

18.9.2003

The Commission:

1. Can it explain why, of the approximately EUR 60 million disbursed in 2001, only EUR 1 million has

in fact been used to finance structural aid in the applicant countries?

2. What intermediaries and other consultants have taken a share of the money? Can the Commission

provide a list of these?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 2003)

Commission payments in 2001 in the context of Sapard Programmes amounted to EUR 30 491 677.
For details, we refer you to Section 7 and relevant annexes of Sapard Annual Report 2001. The bulk of
this amount corresponded to advances paid to the beneficiary countries. These advances constitute a cash
facility to be used only to pay the Community contribution to final beneficiaries.

In accordance with the financial rules laid down in the multi-annual agreement agreed with each country,
further payments are made in respect of expenditure incurred by the Candidate country. Such
reimbursement can only be done when the Beneficary country has incurred eligible expenditure and
present the relevant claims to the Commission for reimbursement. This, in turn, is dependent on the
claims for re-imbursement of expenditure being presented by the final beneficiary in the candidate country
to the Sapard Agency. This may occur, depending on the type of project, many months after the project
has been approved, as is the case in Member States.

As reported by the Court of Auditors in its Annual report 2001, payments by the Commission relating to
reimbursement of expenditure incurred by final beneficiaries in that year were made in two countries,
Bulgaria and Estonia, and amounted to roughly one euro. The reason is that only these two had been
operating the Sapard instrument for a period long enough for the Commission to be able legitimately to
make reimbursement payments. It may be noted that by the end of 2002 reimbursement payments by the
Commission have increased almost ten fold.

The amount paid by the Commission to the implementing agencies in each country but not yet disbursed
to final beneficiaries remains in each country in the Sapard euro account (account opened under the
responsibility of the beneficiary country in a financial or treasury institution, bearing interest).

Consequently, none of
consultants’.

the EUR 30,5 million advance could be used for

‘intermédiaires et autres

(2003/C 222 E/142)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3892/02

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council

(13 January 2003)

Subject: Union support for the government of Sudan

During its visit to Sudan on 9/10 December 2002 a delegation from the European Troika signed an
agreement with the Sudanese Government authorising the use of initial funding to support the Khartoum
government in the technical preparation of the cooperation programmes which will resume when a
definitive peace agreement is signed.

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/123

All this is happening a few weeks after the end of the second session of peace talks between the Khartoum
government and the forces of the Sudanese people’s liberation army, which were inconclusive because of
the decision by the el-Bashir government
forces, namely the
appointment of the first Vice-President of the Republic from the south of the country, a fair distribution of
the revenue from the exploitation of petroleum and the secularisation of the city of Khartoum.

to oppose the demands of

the rebel

During the visit press sources indicated that the Sudanese Government claims that at the beginning of
2002 it received an official note in which the European Union undertook to resume development
cooperation with support worth EUR 155 million, to be granted on the basis of the Cotonou Agreements
of June 2000.

In view of the role played by the Khartoum Government in the partial collapse of the second session of
peace talks, on what basis did the Council consider that it should suspend the ban on any economic,
financial and political support to the el-Bashir regime?

What amount of funding has been made available for the technical preparation of the cooperation
programmes on the basis of the agreement initialled with the Sudanese authorities?

Can the Council confirm the existence or otherwise of a Union document on the basis of which the Union
undertook to grant EUR 155 million to the Khartoum government?

(2003/C 222 E/143)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0077/03

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council

(23 January 2003)

Subject: Death penalty in Sudan

On 3 January 2003 the EU Presidency condemned the death sentences and barbarous practices imposed
law and the
on five Sudanese nationals, which it described as totally inconsistent with international
obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Sudan has ratified, in
relation to torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment. In the same statement the Union urged the
Government of Sudan to commute these five sentences by presidential pardon and avoid sentences
involving hanging and amputation.

On 6 January 2003, Mr Ali Mohamed Osman Yassin, Sudanese Minister of Justice, replied to this request
by stating that the Islamic sentences had been passed by a court and could not be altered by any other
authority as they were based on provisions of the Koran.

Given that three of the five death sentences have now been carried out:

Can the Council indicate:

(cid:1) what relations does the Union intend to have with a state which considers that its acts are justified by
provisions of the Koran, showing utter contempt for international conventions in spite of having
ratified them?

(cid:1) does the Union intend to make the implementation of the agreement signed on 10 December 2002
with the Sudanese Government (cid:1) providing for the use of a fund intended for the technical
preparation of cooperation programmes, with payments being made following the signing of a
definitive peace agreement (cid:1) conditional on the suspension of the death-by-hanging sentences and
punishments involving amputation?

(cid:1) what role does the Union intend to play in the peace process, given that the Sudanese Government is
placing obstacles in the way of the opening of the third phase of negotiations which were about to
begin in Machakos?