WRITTEN QUESTION E-3889/02 by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission. Request for the extradition of Mr Khemais Toumi from France to Tunisia.
Date: 2003-01-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, EU relations, France, Tunisia, competence of the Member States, extradition, human rights, political refugee

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/81

(2003/C 242 E/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3885/02

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 January 2003)

Subject: Take-up of Community funding in the EU Member States at the end of 2002

Can the Commission state the level of commitments and expenditure effected at the end of 2002 under
the Community support framework for each EU Member State?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2003)

The information requested is set out in the table which is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and
to Parliament’s Secretariat. It should be noted that the sum of payments to each Member State in the case
of the Community initiative ‘Interreg’ cannot be compared with the amount earmarked per country
(allocations column) since, for Community accounting purposes, payments are made to the country that
coordinates the programmes. This is why the table does not give the breakdown by Member State, in
contrast to the situation with regard to other Community initiatives.

(2003/C 242 E/085)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3889/02

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(13 January 2003)

Subject: Request for the extradition of Mr Khemais Toumi from France to Tunisia

Following a request by Tunisian judicial authorities, France has arrested Mr Khemais Toumi, a Tunisian
entrepreneur who has been resident in France for several years, and is preparing to extradite him to Tunis.
According to well-informed sources, Mr Toumi has been imprisoned and is threatened with extradition on
the basis of two rulings, the first of which is no longer in force, the second concerning a case of
defamation. Formerly an activist of the far left during his studies in Montpellier, Mr Khemais Toumi has in
recent years provided unfailing support for the victims of political repression at the hands of President Ben
Ali’s regime, and has consistently condemned the regime’s corrupt nature, particularly with regard to cases
involving persons close to the President in Switzerland and the European Union.

information does the Commission have regarding the Khemais Toumi affair? What does the
What
Commission intend to do to avoid a person who is the object of politically motivated charges, as is
manifestly the case with Mr Toumi, being extradited to a country, Tunisia, where he would be subject to
degrading treatment and where he would face trial without the least guarantee that international standards
would be respected? Furthermore, what does the Commission think of the dramatic increase in violations
of fundamental rights that has struck Tunisia in recent weeks?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 2003)

The Commission has the same information concerning Mr Khemais Toumi as the Honourable Member
does.

Cases of reported human rights violations in Tunisia are being followed by the Commission,
in
conjunction with the Member States. The political dialogue with the Tunisian authorities on this issue is
also conducted locally by the Union embassies and the Delegation of the Commission.

C 242 E/82

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

Regarding the possible violation of fundamental rights in a Member State the situation is the following:
Although it is the duty of the Commission to ensure observance of Fundamental Rights in the field of
Community law, it has no power to examine the compatibility with the European Convention of Human
Rights of national legislation and practice lying outside the scope of Community law. This is derived from
the case law of the Court of Justice (inter alia, in the cases Demirel, Wachauf and E.R.T.) and reflected in
Article 51(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

The Commission has no competence to intervene in decision of Members States regarding the handling of
extradition requests from third countries, such as the case of Mr Khemais Toumi from France to Tunisia.
The competent authorities of the Members States deal with these cases.

Furthermore, if Mr Toumi would have applied or would apply for asylum in France, it has to be stressed
that there are no Community provisions, based on Article 63 of the EC Treaty, in place yet. In particular,
the two proposals for a Directive on minimum standards for asylum procedures and for a Directive on the
qualification as a refugee or as a person otherwise in need of international protection are still under
negotiation in the Council. At present there is, therefore, no Community law in place that would enable
the Commission to make inquiries about individual asylum and immigration cases and, therefore, there is
no power to intervene on that basis with the French authorities.

(2003/C 242 E/086)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3927/02

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 January 2003)

Subject: Patenting of software

What can the Commission do to ensure that its proposals for the patenting of software do not deprive
internet users of the benefit of superior applications and operating systems developed through ‘free’ and
‘open source’ software?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 2003)

Computer software as such is excluded from patentability under the European Patent Convention and the
laws of the Member States, and the Commission has no intention of changing this situation.

Thus, the Commission’s proposal for a Directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions
made in February 2002 (1) is not intended to extend the scope of what may be patented. Rather, what it
sets out to do is to establish uniform rules for patent offices and courts to follow in assessing the
patentability of inventions involving apparatus or methods which involve the use of computer software.
This is necessary because, while the Member States are bound by the European Patent Convention, it is not
currently part of Community law, and in practice it is not always the case that the respective national laws
are uniformly interpreted, especially on specialised points of detail.

A directive that does not change the overall balance of what is or is not patentable will not deprive
internet users of anything they might otherwise have been able to enjoy. However, both users and
developers of computer software, whether it be supplied as ‘free’, ‘open source’ or under any other business
model, should experience the benefits which will arise from the increased legal certainty and uniformity of
practice that the directive should bring.

Certain of the amendments which have been discussed in the course of consideration of the proposal in
the Council would produce still greater legal certainty by defining more precisely what subject-matter
should be excluded from patentability on the grounds of making no technical contribution. The
Commission has indicated that
it would consider these amendments in the course of the ongoing
negotiations.