WRITTEN QUESTION E-0813/03 by Maurizio Turco (NI), Marco Cappato (NI), Emma Bonino (NI),Marco Pannella (NI) and Gianfranco Dell'Alba (NI) to the Commission. War on drugs in Thailand.
Date: 2003-03-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Thailand, UN convention, death penalty, drug traffic, government violence, repression

C 33 E/86

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

As the Commission has already highlighted in its report of 24 May 2000 (1), the restrictions applied
2.
by Denmark, Finland and Sweden to the quantities of excise products that can be brought into the
territory of these countries from other Member States by travellers constitute a derogation to the principle
of free movement in the Internal Market, and were granted by the Council
in order to enable these
Member States to adapt their policy gradually to the full requirements of the Internal Market. In this
report, the Commission urged the Member States concerned to take the necessary steps in order to prepare
for a smooth transition to the application of the general rules in force after the expiry of the derogation at
the end of 2003.

The Commission also encourages Member States to take other measures aimed at reducing the adverse
health effects of alcohol consumption. In particular, the Community action programme in the field of
public health (2003-2008) (2) includes provision for the ‘preparation and implementation of strategies and
measures, including those relating to public awareness, on lifestyle related health determinants, such as
alcohol, including measures to take in all Community policies and age and gender specific strategies’. A
call for proposals and a work plan for 2003 (2) in connection with this programme have recently been
published.

(1) COM(2000) 316 final.
(2) OJ L 271, 9.10.2002.

(2004/C 33 E/082)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0813/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI), Marco Cappato (NI), Emma Bonino (NI),
Marco Pannella (NI) and Gianfranco Dell’Alba (NI) to the Commission

(17 March 2003)

Subject: War on drugs in Thailand

Taking into account the fact that according to information on ‘UN Wire’ of 4 March 2003:

(cid:1) the Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra affirmed that Thailand’s month-old drugs crackdown will
be stepped up, despite expressions of concern by the UN rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, Asma
Jahangir, and others over reports that summary executions have been committed in the context of the
campaign; he notably declared: ‘The crackdown will become more intense, I guarantee … Don’t worry.
(The) UN isn’t my father. If they want to come, come. If they want to inspect, go ahead’;

(cid:1) the Thai Prime Minister also affirmed that more than 1 140 have been killed in the crackdown, which
began on 1 February and is to last three months; police also said that as of Friday, 29 501 suspects
were arrested in the crackdown; they said officers acting in self-defence killed 31 people and that drug
gangs killed the others; a Ministry spokesman furthermore affirmed that ‘Nothing is above the law in
this campaign’;

Did the Commission express EU concern to the Thai authorities about
the government-sponsored
massacres in the war on drugs? Did it ask the government to stop these widespread killings that are
contrary to all internationally recognised human rights and fundamental freedoms?

What progressive measures will be enacted by the Commission if the Thai government continues the
massacre and ignores international requests to stop?

Is the Commission aware of the fact that, like Thailand, China, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Kuwait, Iran,
Philippines and Indonesia also apply the death penalty for drugs-related crimes, and does it agree that a
way forward would be to amend the international conventions on drugs to expressly prohibit the death
penalty, notably in view of the April 2003 UN meeting on drugs?

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/87

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(22 April 2003)

The Commission is following closely the Thai Government’s policy of ‘war on drugs’ launched in the
beginning of February 2003. The Commission is concerned with the present situation, in particular with
reports that a number of drug-related deaths have thus far allegedly been the result of extra-judicial
killings.

While the Commission recognises the seriousness and urgent nature of the problem of illicit drugs in
Thailand, it feels the problem should be tackled through a balanced approach addressing the demand and
the supply sides and conducted in accordance with international human rights standards and the rule of
law.

The Commission feels that the Thai Government should conduct transparent and thorough investigations
into each death, take urgent measures to prevent the number of deaths from rising further, and co-operate
closely with the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) on this issue.

In this respect, the Commission and the Member States are addressing the subject of the fight against drugs
with the Government of Thailand through the appropriate diplomatic channels.

As regards the death penalty, the Commission follows the specific Union policy guidelines on the subject
in its relations with third countries that maintain capital punishment. The Union has on several occasions
raised the issue of the death penalty with the Thai Government, as recently as in 2002.

The suggestion concerning possible amendments to the United Nations (UN) Conventions on Drugs to
expressly prohibit the death penalty for drugs-related crimes appears difficult to take forward given the
nature of International Law and the principle of sovereignty of the States, but also because the Community
as such is not a party to these Conventions. It would be up to the States that are parties of the
Conventions to propose the modifications they deem appropriate.

This subject was not on the agenda of the UN Commission of Narcotic Drugs meeting which took place
between 8-17 April 2003 in Vienna. Moreover, since the Commission only has an observer status in the
UN Commission of Narcotic Drugs, it was not in a position to intervene in this regard.

(2004/C 33 E/083)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0821/03

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(17 March 2003)

Subject: GATS and water privatisation

In the WTO, the Commission has been in the forefront of the liberalisation of water services in developing
countries. Does the Commission agree that privatisation of water services in the developing world serves
the interests of large multinational corporations rather than the interests of the world’s poorest people?

Before requesting the liberalisation of water services in third countries, has the Commission undertaken an
independent study of the effects of such liberalisations?

If not, will the Commission agree to carry out such an assessment in close cooperation with the relevant
NGOs before requesting further liberalisations from third countries?