do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 104/2003 of 21 January 2003 on the issue of import licences for sugar and mixtures of sugar and cocoa qualifying as ACP/OCT and EC/OCT originating products
Date: 2003-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: ACP countries, cocoa, import licence, originating product, overseas countries and territories, sugar

22.1.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 16/9

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 104/2003

of 21 January 2003

on the issue of import licences for sugar and mixtures of sugar and cocoa qualifying as ACP/OCT
and EC/OCT originating products

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Decision 2001/822/EC of 27
November 2001 on the association of the overseas countries
and territories with the European Community (1),

Commission Regulation (EC) No 192/2002 of 31 January 2002
laying down detailed rules for issuing import licences for sugar
and sugar and cocoa mixtures with ACP/OCT or EC/OCT
cumulation of origin (2), and in particular Article 6(3) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

Article 6(4) of Annex III
to Decision 2001/822/EC
allows ACP/EC/OCT cumulation of origin in the case of
products falling with Chapter 17 and tariff headings
1806 10 30 and 1806 10 90 up to an annual quantity
of 28 000 tonnes of sugar.

Applications have been submitted to the national autho-
rities in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 192/2002
for the issue of import licences for a total quantity of
56 000 tonnes more than the quantity fixed by Decision
2001/822/EC.

Article 6(3) of Regulation (EC) No 192/2002 provides
that, where licence applications cover an annual quantity
in excess of 28 000 tonnes, the Commission is to adopt

a regulation fixing a single reducing coefficient to be
applied to each application submitted and suspend the
in
submission of
progress.

further applications

the year

for

(4)

The Commission must therefore fix the reducing coeffi-
cient for the issue of import licences and suspend the
submission of further licence applications for 2003,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Import licences covered by applications submitted by 9 January
2003 under Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 192/2002 shall be
issued for 50 % of the quantity applied for.

Article 2

The submission of
suspended.

further applications for 2003 is hereby

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publica-
tion in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 21 January 2003.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 314, 30.11.2001, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 55.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2003-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate

21.1.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/1

I

(Information)

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

20 January 2003

(2003/C 14/01)

1 euro =

USD

JPY

DKK

GBP

SEK

CHF

ISK

NOK

BGN

CYP

CZK

EEK

HUF

LTL

Currency

US dollar

Japanese yen

Danish krone

Pound sterling

Swedish krona

Swiss franc

Iceland króna

Norwegian krone

Bulgarian lev

Cyprus pound

Czech koruna

Estonian kroon

Hungarian forint

Lithuanian litas

Exchange
rate

1,0653

125,96

7,433

0,6635

9,1968

1,4608

84,4

7,318

1,9552

0,5782

31,297

LVL

MTL

PLN

ROL

SIT

SKK

TRL

AUD

CAD

HKD

NZD

Currency

Latvian lats

Maltese lira

Polish zloty

Romanian leu

Slovenian tolar

Slovak koruna

Turkish lira

Australian dollar

Canadian dollar

Hong Kong dollar

New Zealand dollar

15,6466

SGD

Singapore dollar

Exchange
rate

0,6219

0,4205

4,0632

35725

230,7715

41,732

1773000

1,8056

1,6367

8,3082

1,9364

1,8454

244,31

KRW

South Korean won

3,4531

ZAR

South African rand

1250,98

9,421

___________
(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0045/03 by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission. Welfare of wild-caught primates.
Date: 2003-01-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Directive, amendment of a law, animal breeding, animal experimentation, animal welfare, approximation of laws, monkey, protection of animals, scientific research

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/65

(2003/C 268 E/066)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0045/03

by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(21 January 2003)

Subject: Welfare of wild-caught primates

Is the Commission aware of the RSPCA footage and a new report, ‘Caged and Cruel’, which exposes the
suffering caused to primates through trapping from the wild and breeding for use in research?

What action does the Commission intend to take to ensure that primates captured for use in EU
laboratories are treated according to international guidelines?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2003)

The Commission is aware of the RSPCA report ‘Caged and Cruel’ relating to the use of non-human
primates in research. The use of non-human primates in experiments falls under Council Directive 86/609/
EEC of 24 November 1986 (1) on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of
the Member States regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes.
The Commission is planning a revision of the Directive. This revision will also incorporate initiatives
regarding the use of non-human primates; their acquisition and transport as well as their breeding are
among the issues which will be thoroughly examined.

(1) OJ L 358, 18.12.1986.

(2003/C 268 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0054/03

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(22 January 2003)

Subject: The Commission and the Committee of Enquiry into the causes and the disastrous effects of the

accident involving the ‘Prestige’

Has the Commission set up a committee of enquiry into the causes and the disastrous effects of the
accident involving the ‘Prestige’? What kind of committee of enquiry is it and what are the reasons for the
Commission’s decision?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2003)

The Honourable Member is kindly requested to refer to the answer given by the Commission to priority
question P-0127/03 from Mr Ribeiro E Castro (1).

(1) See page 72.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3007 — E.ON/TXU Europe Group) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2003-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, energy distribution, energy production, energy supply, gas, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation

C 14/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.1.2003

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3007 — E.ON/TXU Europe Group)

(2003/C 14/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 18 December 2002, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in English and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

— as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

— in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document No 302M3007. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations,
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 427 18, fax (352) 29 29 427 09.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0038/03 by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council. Presence in the Italian Embassy in Moscow of an individual sought by Interpol.
Date: 2003-01-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Interpol, Italy, fight against crime, judicial cooperation

C 222 E/140

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

18.9.2003

Projects to strengthen asylum management valued at EUR 5 million for the period 2000-2003 are being
implemented and about EUR 20 million has been allocated for border infrastructure at the western borders.

Given the open border to Russia and the lack of normal relations with Belarus, the perspectives of
increasing funding are limited.
In any event this would only contribute to solving the problem of
migratory flows at Belarus western border.

Burden sharing will be taken into consideration in the co-operation agreement with Ukraine.

(2003/C 222 E/162)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0038/03

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council

(21 January 2003)

Subject: Presence in the Italian Embassy in Moscow of an individual sought by Interpol

On 7 January 2002 the Italian newspaper ‘La Repubblica’ published an article according to which the
financier Mark Garber,
‘Director of Fleming Family and Partners’ and ‘holding a senior position in the
Russian bank UCB’ was present at a fashion show and reception held in the Italian Embassy in Moscow.
According to ‘La Repubblica’ the Turin Public Prosecutor’s Office and the entire Interpol network had been
trying to find Mark Garber in November 2001 (entered in the computer system as early as 28 May 2001)
under an international arrest warrant on charges of criminal conspiracy for the purposes of arms
trafficking. The warrant was subsequently revoked.

In the context of its competence for judicial and penal cooperation between the EU countries and vis-à-vis
third countries, can the Council ascertain from the Italian Government and Europol whether the report in
‘La Repubblica’ is true and, if possible (cid:1) if it is true (cid:1) explain what prompted Italy not to enforce an
international arrest warrant?

Reply

(5 and 6 May 2003)

The Council never comment on Press articles and is not in a position to intervene in individual criminal
cases. The Council can thus not meet the request by the Honourable Member of the European Parliament.

(2003/C 222 E/163)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0041/03

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: European ‘In Town Without My Car’ Day

(21 January 2003)

On Sunday, 22 September 2002 many European towns and cities organised European ‘In Town Without
My Car’ Day.

Which towns and cities in Belgium ultimately received the ‘In Town Without My Car’ quality label?

From which Belgian towns and cities did the Commission receive an assessment report?

How does the Commission itself assess the results of ‘In Town Without My Car’ Day in towns and cities in
Belgium?

How does the Commission assess the results of ‘In Town Without My Car’ Day in Antwerp?

How much did the 2002 campaign cost?

What is the focal point of the 2003 campaign? What budget has the Commission set aside for the
organisation of the campaign in 2003?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0034/03 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. The Penelope plan.
Date: 2003-01-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC opinion, European Commission, Treaty on European Union, democratic deficit, operation of the Institutions, transparency in decision-making

C 280 E/30

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

21.11.2003

(2003/C 280 E/029)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0034/03

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(21 January 2003)

Subject: The Penelope plan

A new constitution for the EU has been drafted within the Commission with the code-name ‘Penelope’.
Evidently the Commission has not collectively approved it. From the point of view of the Commission as a
whole, what is the status of this draft and how well does it represent the position of the Commission in its
entirety?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3860/02, E-3902/02 and E-0034/03
given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 2003)

At the request of Mr Prodi, President, in agreement with Mr Barnier and Mr Vitorino, a working party of
Commission officials prepared a feasibility study entitled ‘Contribution to a preliminary draft of a European
Constitution’. Mr Prodi informed the other members of the Commission of the existence of this working
document but it was not discussed by the full Commission and it does not commit the Commission.

It is for each Member of the Commission who has responsibility for a specific area, and for the President
where action by the Union is concerned, to ask Commission departments to draft preparatory documents,
study papers, feasibility studies, etc. A Commission decision is not needed to launch such work, which is
part of the normal activities of Commission departments, i.e. the preparation of decisions and the position
to be adopted subsequently by the Commission. Mr Prodi in agreement with Mr Barnier and Mr Vitorino
felt that a feasibility study on the European Constitution would help the Commission to adopt its position
with regard to the Convention.

The names of the officials who prepared the feasibility study are listed on the first page of the study, which
did not give rise to any costs other than Commission overheads.

(2003/C 280 E/030)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3865/02

by Jules Maaten (ELDR)
and Lousewies van der Laan (ELDR) to the Council

(10 January 2003)

Subject: Indonesia’s ad hoc tribunals on East Timor

Does the Council recognise that the trials on East Timor show, as the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights states, that Indonesia has not taken responsibility for crimes against humanity in East
Timor?

Is the Council aware of Indonesia’s minimal cooperation with investigations into the deaths of Dutch
citizen Sander Thoenes in September 1999 and British citizens Brian Peters and Malcom Rennie in 1975?

Will the Council invite the United Nations to establish an international tribunal on East Timor?

Will the Council become party to this international tribunal on East Timor?
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.3087 — Penske/DaimlerChrysler/VM Motori JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2003-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aerospace industry, commercial vehicle, economic concentration, exchange of information, hire purchase, merger control, motor vehicle industry

C 14/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.1.2003

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3087 — Penske/DaimlerChrysler/VM Motori JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(2003/C 14/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 13 January 2003 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to
1.
Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/97 (2),
by which the undertakings Penske Group, through its wholly owned subsidiary Penske Corporation (Penske
— USA), and DaimlerChrysler AG (DaimlerChrysler — Germany) acquire within the meaning of Article
3(1)(b) of that Regulation, joint control of the Italian undertaking VM Motori SpA (VM Motori) a subsidiary
of the US-based Detroit Diesel Corporation (Detroit Diesel), currently solely controlled by DaimlerChrysler
by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

— Penske: car dealership, car and truck rental and leasing, fleet management, automobile racing, products

for automotive usages,

— DaimlerChrysler: automotive and aerospace industries, financial services, power systems,

— VM Motori: automotive industries.

3.
On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified concentration could fall within
the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant
to the Commission notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Regu-
lation (EEC) No 4064/89 (3),
it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the
procedure set out in the notice.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit

4.
proposed operation.

their possible observations on the

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication.
Observations can be sent by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference
COMP/M.3087 — Penske/DaimlerChrysler/VM Motori JV, to:

European Commission,
Directorate-General for Competition,
Directorate B — Merger Task Force,
J-70,
B-1049 Brussels.

(1) OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 257, 21.9.1990, p. 13.
(2) OJ L 180, 9.7.1997, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 40, 13.2.1998, p. 17.
(3) OJ C 217, 29.7.2000, p. 32.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.3085 — Schroders Ventures Limited/Premiere) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2003-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control, pay television, service, venture capital

21.1.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/7

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3085 — Schroders Ventures Limited/Premiere)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(2003/C 14/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 13 January 2003 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to
1.
Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/97 (2),
by which the Channel
Islands undertaking Permira Europe II Managers LP (Permira), controlled by
Schroders Ventures Ltd (Channel Islands) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of that Regulation,
sole control of the whole of the German undertaking Premiere Fernsehen GmbH & Co. KG (Premiere) by
way of acquisition of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

— Schroders Ventures Ltd: management, advisory and consultanc services to buy-outs and venture capital

fund,

— Premiere: operation of a digital Pay TV platform.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified concentration could fall within
3.
the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant
to the Commission notice on simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (3), it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the
procedure set out in the notice.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit

4.
proposed operation.

their possible observations on the

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication.
Observations can be sent by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference
COMP/M.3085 — Schroders Ventures Limited/Premiere, to:

European Commission,
Directorate-General for Competition,
Directorate B — Merger Task Force,
J-70,
B-1049 Brussels.

(1) OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 257, 21.9.1990, p. 13.
(2) OJ L 180, 9.7.1997, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 40, 13.2.1998, p. 17.
(3) OJ C 217, 29.7.2000, p. 32.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 102/2003 of 21 January 2003 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2003-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit

22.1.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 16/5

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 102/2003

of 21 January 2003

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and
vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

(2)

In compliance with the above criteria,
the standard
import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of
21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the
import arrangements
last
amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002 (2), and in parti-
cular Article 4(1) thereof,

fruit and vegetables (1), as

for

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Whereas:

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the
outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade nego-
tiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the
standard values for imports from third countries,
in
respect of the products and periods stipulated in the
Annex thereto.

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regula-
tion (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex
hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 22 January 2003.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 21 January 2003.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 299, 1.11.2002, p. 17.

L 16/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.1.2003

to the Commission Regulation of 21 January 2003 establishing the standard import values for determining the
entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0707 00 05

0709 10 00

0709 90 70

0805 10 10, 0805 10 30, 0805 10 50

0805 20 10

0805 20 30, 0805 20 50, 0805 20 70,
0805 20 90

0805 50 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
204
212
999

052
628
999

220
999

052
204
999

052
204
212
220
600
999

204
999

052
204
220
464
600
624
999

052
600
999

052
060
066
400
404
720
999

388
400
720
999

103,1
51,5
102,0
85,5

123,5
151,4
137,4

137,7
137,7

128,7
105,4
117,1

48,1
51,4
44,1
40,5
73,2
51,5

80,4
80,4

63,5
59,2
83,4
144,0
47,1
79,6
79,5

65,3
69,6
67,4

131,9
42,4
35,6
90,6
108,6
118,8
88,0

135,1
101,9
55,9
97,6

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2020/2001 (OJ L 273, 16.10.2001, p. 6). Code ‘999’ stands for

‘of other origin’.