WRITTEN QUESTION E-0648/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Absence of compensation and rehabilitation measures for people illegally deported from Slovakia in 1946 and 1947.
Date: 2003-03-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Slovakia, accession to the European Union, ethnic cleansing, expropriation, forced migration, indemnification, slavery

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/61

to
Agreement had been signed with China and several meetings held (also with Japan and Korea)
coordinate action against poaching and smuggling. USD 3 million had been invested over the past three
years to protect tigers; the programme was to be extended to cover other big cats.

TACIS projects are identified in a dialogue with the Russian authorities and are to be in line with the
adopted strategy for Russia. Currently it is focussed on four main areas: support for institutional, legal and
administrative reform; support to the private sector and assistance for economic development; support in
addressing the social consequencies of transition; nuclear safety. The Commission has not received any
proposal for consideration from the Russian authorities with regard to the situation of the Amur tiger. If
received, the Commission will assess to what extent it corresponds to the strategy for assistance and which
priority such a project proposal could get relative to other pressing needs.

The Commission is currently not aware of problems related to activities of the World Wild life Fund
(WWF) in the Amur region and the indigenous Udege people.

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997.

(2004/C 33 E/057)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0648/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 March 2003)

Subject: Absence of compensation and rehabilitation measures for people illegally deported from Slovakia

in 1946 and 1947

1.
Is the Commission aware that Law No 88/1945 of 1 October 1945, which was in force for twenty
years in the former Czechoslovakia, authorised the State to compel men between 16 and 60 and women
between 18 and 55 to leave their homes and engage in forced labour for a maximum of one year in order
to combat catastrophes or crises and carry out urgent public works, with the proviso that pregnant
women, mothers and the sick were exempt, only individuals, and not whole families, could be
requisitioned, and the people concerned retained their homes and property in their absence?

2.
Is the Commission aware that in 1946 and 1947, 43 546 people were sent into forced labour, that,
in violation of the law, in many cases the period of forced labour was in excess of one year, that people
were sent far away from their homes (cid:1) without decent accommodation or salaries (cid:1) to work in
agriculture and other industries where there was no crisis situation, that the army and police transferred
whole families (cid:1) including children and elderly people (cid:1) in cattle trucks from what is now Slovakia to the
present-day Czech Republic and confiscated their houses in order to give them to new occupants, a
measure which, for the Hungarian-speakers from the southern border area of Slovakia and for members of
the large Roma community living mainly in the east of Slovakia, came close to what is now known as
ethnic cleansing?

3.
Does the Commission understand the sense of indignation felt by the victims of these measures,
originally from Slovakia, and their descendants, who now live in Slovakia, the Czech Republic and other (cid:1)
mainly European (cid:1) countries, at the fact that the Slovak Government has in the meantime decided to
compensate and rehabilitate the victims of illegal acts committed during the Fascist regime, between 1939
and 1945, and the Communist period, from 1948 to 1949, but is not taking any similar measures for the
benefit of the victims of forced labour and ethnic cleansing during the allegedly democratic period in
between, i.e. from 1945 to 1948, and that the Slovak Prime Minister does not reply to complaints on this
subject?

4. What can the Commission do to ensure that when Slovakia becomes a member of the European
Union a satisfactory solution is found to this problem, which has been dragging on for so long and which
is reminiscent of situations that we now reject in the European Union?

C 33 E/62

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 2003)

The Commission is well aware of the post-war Czechoslovak legislation relating to members of the
Hungarian and German minorities living in the Czechoslovak Republic. The Commission has conducted a
thorough analysis of the relevant decrees issued by the Czechoslovak president and related laws of the
years 1945 and 1946, as well as related aspects regarding the restitution legislation of the Czech(oslovak)
Republic of the 1990s.

in question cannot be applied anymore. Certain discriminatory elements

The Summary Findings of the Commission’s analysis, which were presented to the public on 18 October
2002, do not show any obstacles to accession in the light of the acquis communautaire, as the decrees and
laws
in the relevant
Czech(oslovak) restitution legislation with regard to confiscated property have not been found to be in
contradiction with the acquis since all deadlines for filing new claims have expired. The Commission is
grateful to the Honourable Member for pointing out that the law on forced labour he refers to has long
ceased to apply.

The Commission cannot engage in a debate as to whether or not any given law on forced labour was
applied in accordance with the same law’s proper stipulations, at any given moment in history prior to the
first European Community’s coming into existence whether in an EU Member State or third country. The
Commission recalls that article 5 of the Charter of Fundamental Human Rights of the European Union
strictly prohibits any form of slavery or forced or compulsory labour, that is, irrespective of circumstances.

The Commission recalls that both the European Parliament and the European Council have repeatedly
endorsed the Commission’s view that the Slovak Republic fulfils the Copenhagen Criteria and will be able
to fully implement and enforce the acquis communautaire by the date of accession. The Community has
no competencies regarding matters of restitution or compensation for historical injustices. Member States
may choose to set certain conditions or limitations to such measures as they see fit, provided the latter do
not conflict with other applicable Community law such as the principle of non-discrimination.

The Commission appreciates all efforts by current and future Member States to address the burden and
injustices of the past, and encourages them to persist in these efforts. The Communities have been founded
on the common determination to overcome former tensions between the peoples of Europe. By addressing
these questions of a moral and psychological nature, they contribute to the strengthening of our Union of
mutual respect and understanding.

(2004/C 33 E/058)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0654/03

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(5 March 2003)

Subject: Mozambique sugar farmers

Is the Commission aware of the devastating effect the 8 000-tonne import quota imposed on sugar exports
from Mozambique is having on Mozambican inhabitants?

Mozambique has the means to produce as much as 30 000 tonnes of sugar for export to European
countries. However, they are unable to do so owing to the strict import quota. Sugar factories in
Mozambique are prepared to fund small-scale farmers to buy equipment to enable them to produce sugar
from their rich farmland, therefore alleviating the dependence of Mozambicans on EU aid. However, the
quotas imposed are restricting this possibility.

Is the Commission prepared to review and increase the quota, beyond the proposed 15 % increase,
imposed on Mozambique sugar imports? Will the Commission make every effort to open up the market to
Mozambique, therefore empowering its people to rebuild their economy and in turn reduce the need for
international aid?