WRITTEN QUESTION E-0920/03 by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE)and Gerardo Galeote Quecedo (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Release by the Netherlands authorities of Mullah Krekar.
Date: 2003-03-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, Norway, Schengen Agreement, Schengen Information System, political asylum, public safety, restriction of liberty, terrorism

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/57

A research project, Tenawa, on this particular problem was executed under the Nuclear Fission Safety
(Euratom) programme. The overall objective of this project, which ended in 1999, was to study various
removal methods and commercially available equipment and study their ability to remove natural nuclides
from drinking water. The project studied a number of techniques such as aeration, granular activated
carbon, ion exchange, and membrane technology. Some of these techniques achieved an efficiency above
99 % for the removal of radon. Further details on this project may be found at the projects web site:
(http://iwga-sig.boku.ac.at/project/tenawa/tenawa1_e.htm)

Under the Fifth Framework Programme, a currently running research project, Radwat, funded by the sub-
is focused on
programme Environment and Sustainable Development under
developing an innovative radon measuring and monitoring system for use in groundwater. This two-year
project will end in February 2004.

the CRAFT scheme,

(2004/C 65 E/058)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0920/03

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE)
and Gerardo Galeote Quecedo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Release by the Netherlands authorities of Mullah Krekar

(24 March 2003)

Is the Commission aware that the Netherlands authorities have released Mullah Krekar,
international Islamic organisation Ansar al-Islam?

leader of the

Is the Commission aware that Mullah Krekar, who was arrested at Amsterdam airport after being expelled
from Iran is currently in Norway where he has refugee status?

Is the Commission aware that the terrorist organisation headed by Mullah Krekar is said to have produced
and tested chemical and biological weapons, including ricin, a lethal toxin for which there is currently no
vaccine?

What action will the Commission take to counteract Mullah Krekar’s activities and prevent him from ever
entering the European Union, thereby ensuring that in future he is unable to move around within the EU
as he did in the years leading up to his arrest?

What action will the Commission take to ensure that Norway keeps a watchful eye on the activities of
Mullah Krekar’s and his organisation, which seems to be recruiting many of the Al-Qa’ida members who
escaped from Afghanistan?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(28 May 2003)

The Commission is aware of Mr Krekar’s case.

Following an amendment by the United Nations’ Sanctions Committee on 24 February 2003, Commission
Regulation (EC) No 350/2003 of 25 February 2003 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 (1),
has included Ansar al-Islam in the list of ‘Legal persons, groups and entities’ to whom the freezing of funds
and economic resources shall apply.

Article 96 of Schengen Convention (2) provides for the possibility to prevent third country nationals from
entering the territory of the Member States by issuing an alert on them in the Schengen Information
System (SIS). This type of alerts to be introduced by a Member State must in principle be enforced by all
13 Member States which have fully implemented the Schengen acquis, or by States that have been
associated with it, as Norway and Iceland have. The decision to issue an alert based on Article 96 of the
Schengen Convention may be based on the fact that the third country national poses a threat to public
policy or public security.

C 65 E/58

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

In order to cope with potential contradictions that may arise from decisions made successively by different
Member States, Article 25 of Schengen Convention provides for consultation procedures between Member
States. These procedures are used when a Member State considers issuing, or has already issued a residence
permit to a third country national on whom an Article 96 alert exists in the SIS. These consultation
procedures are also used when it emerges that a Member State envisages to issue an Article 96 alert for the
purposes of refusing entry on a third country national holding a valid residence permit issued by another
Member State.

The outcome of the consultation foreseen by Article 25 of the Schengen Convention may be:

(cid:1) either the withdrawal of alert from SIS with the possibility for individual Member State to keep that

person on their national list of alert;

(cid:1) or the withdrawal of the residence permit with the confirmation of the alert in the SIS.

If Member States issued an alert on Mr Krekar based on Article 96 of the Schengen Convention, similar
consultations could take place and open the two options mentioned above.

Finally, as regards possible action by the Commission to ensure that Norway keeps a watchful eye on the
activities of Mr Krekar and his organisation, the Commission informs the Honourable Members that this
matter falls entirely within the competencies of the Norwegian authorities. The Commission may neither
issue alerts nor have knowledge of the alerts that have been issued; the SIS is run by the Member States
and national alerts are under the responsibility of Member States’ authorities. Nevertheless,
in the
hypothesis that no alert based on Article 96 has been issued on Mr Krekar, an alert for the purpose of
‘discreet surveillance and specific checks’ based on Article 99 of the Schengen Convention could be issued
by other Member States.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 350/2003 of 25 February 2003 amending for the 13th time Council Regulation
(EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities
associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC)
No 467/2001, OJ L 51, 26.2.2003.

(2) Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985, signed on 19 June 1990, OJ L 239,

22.9.2000.

(2004/C 65 E/059)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0946/03

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: EU contribution to building the Málaga Picasso Museum

(26 March 2003)

The Málaga authorities are hoping to emulate the Guggenheim Museum’s contribution to Bilbao’s
modernisation and economic revitalisation, with the future Picasso Museum acting as a flagship for
development and modernisation.

The fact that Málaga is hoping to repeat Bilbao’s Guggenheim success means that all administrative levels
should be making the maximum possible contribution to ensure that the new museum becomes a genuine
flagship for Málaga as a modern city with more to offer than just sunshine and beaches.

What contribution is the Commission making to the building of the Málaga Picasso Museum, and how
does it assess this project in terms of its contribution to the cultural wealth of the EU as a whole?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(25 April 2003)

The Commission would like to draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that it did not
contribute to the building of the Malaga Picasso Museum.