WRITTEN QUESTION E-0703/03 by Baroness Sarah Ludford (ELDR) to the Commission. Animal welfare.
Date: 2003-03-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal nutrition, animal welfare, fattening, poultry, protection of animals

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/229

(2003/C 222 E/258)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0703/03

by Baroness Sarah Ludford (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 March 2003)

Subject: Animal welfare

In July 2001 Commissioner Byrne stated that the Commission did not envisage any proposals to oblige
foie gras (answer to
changes in feeding practices of ducks and geese kept
Parliamentary question number E-1654/01 (1)).

for the production of

Does the Commission still have no intention of proposing legislation to ban this cruel and unnecessary
practice?

(1) OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001, p. 168.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(9 April 2003)

The Honourable Member refers in her question to the answer given by the Commission to Written
Question E-1654/01 (1) by Mr Mulder in relation to the production of foie gras. The Commission is
currently dealing with many animal welfare issues, such as the protection of animals during transport and
the protection of chickens kept for the production of meat. In line with the reply given to Written
Question E-1654/01, the Commission does not at present envisage any proposal to oblige changes in
feeding practices for the production of foie gras.

(1) OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001.

(2003/C 222 E/259)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0706/03

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(10 March 2003)

Subject: Vietnam suppresses freedom of expression and the right to demonstrate

Despite the repeated demonstrations of support from the Commission and the Member States for the ‘legal
reform strategy’ for Vietnam (cf. the reply to Written Question E-0003/03 (1)), the Vietnamese authorities
continue to break their international obligations by adopting fresh laws further restricting the exercise of
fundamental freedoms and rights. According to the Vietnam Committee for Human Rights, based in Paris,
major new restrictions have just been placed on the freedom of expression, following the adoption of
Decision 28 on Foreign Publications (Ministry of Culture and Information, 21 November 2002). This
decree lays down that publications from all non-Vietnamese organisations, including diplomatic bodies,
international NGOs, foreign businesses and even press agencies will be subject to state censorship. The
publication of press releases, Internet documents and any other documentation deemed ‘contrary to the
interests of the Socialist state’
to
demonstrate peacefully will be restricted in the near future. The official daily ‘Lao Dong’ (13 January
2003), reports that Minister Doan Manh Giao is currently preparing legislation banning public assemblies
in front of party and government buildings and offices, and punishing any individual who ‘uses complaints
or petitions’
to incite people to demonstrate. The law is particularly aimed at stopping peaceful
demonstrations by peasants and farmers protesting against public corruption and state confiscation of
land. Many peasants have been arrested following such demonstrations. On 21 October 2002, in Ninh
Binh (north Vietnam) all villagers were sentenced to prison terms of up to 13 years for having ‘provoked
social unrest’ and in December 2002, a further 21 peasants were arrested. In response to the peasant
demonstrations of May 2002, the Secretary-General of the Party, Mr Nong Duc Manh, stated that ‘the fact
that people gather with placards is abnormal’ and that in Vietnam, democracy had ‘gone too far in several
instances’.

(Article 22, SRV of the Press Law)

is now punishable. The right