WRITTEN QUESTION E-0905/03 by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission. Romania — access to the Securitate archives.
Date: 2003-03-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Romania, access to information, accession criteria, archives, secret service

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/89

at the highest level thereby limiting competition. Similarly Joint Ministerial Decision DG6a/GP/73754/24-
7-7-02(Official Gazette 984/31/7-02)
implementing the above law is not based on any technical
specifications, observing that no comparison is possible as, more specifically, that entire categories of
products cannot be compared with each other, on the principle that, by definition, all manufacturers
produce items which cannot be compared with those produced by any other manufacturer. It also fails to
stipulate procedures for the according of public supply contracts or require estimation of annual
requirements to be drawn up specifying either exact content or quality, leaving matters to the discretion of
the body concerned.

Is Greek Law 2955/2002, together with the Ministerial Decision implementing it, in accordance with EU
legislation in this field and more specifically Directive 93/36/EEC (1).
If not, what measures will the
Commission take to ensure that Greece fully complies with the directive and when?

(1) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2003)

The Commission has
in fact obtained Greek law No 2955/2001, and the Ministerial Decision
implementing that law (1). After an initial examination, it appears that these provisions might not comply
with the requirements of Directive 93/36/EEC (2).

The Commission has just received a complaint about the same matter, which seems to give a more
comprehensive description of the way in which the Greek legislation applies to hospital supplies.

The Commission will examine the bulky documents it has received on this matter and, in dealing with this
complaint, will contact the Greek authorities to obtain their point of view both on the allegations made by
the complainant and on the Commission’s analysis of this case.

(1) DY6a/GP/73754/24-7-02/FEK 984/31-7-02.
(2) Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts,

OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.

(2004/C 33 E/085)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0905/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(24 March 2003)

Subject: Romania (cid:1) access to the Securitate archives

In a report televised on 11 March 2003 the Euronews channel announced the Romanian Government’s
recent decision to stop the public from gaining access to the files of the former secret police, the
Securitate. It seems that the new Romanian information service has made access difficult. The government
also proposes dismantling the National Council for the Study of the Securitate Archives (CNSAS (cid:1)
Consiliului National de Styudiere a Arhivelor Securitatii) set up three years ago.

According to the same source around 3 000 people demonstrated in front of the Romanian Parliament to
protest against these measures.

C 33 E/90

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

Can the Commission say:

(cid:1) whether it can confirm these reports?

(cid:1) if so, what it thinks of the measures taken by the Romanian Government?

(cid:1) whether these events might have an impact on the process leading up to Romania’s future accession

to the European Union and, if so, in what way?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(22 April 2003)

Law No 187/99 ‘on individual access to one’s own files and on the disclosure of the Securitate as a
political police’ provided for the establishment of a National Council for the Study of the Securitate
Archives (CNSAS), which is governed by a board of 11 members appointed by the Romanian Parliament.
The board can take decisions by simple majority, but with no less than eight members present. Members
of the board can only be revoked by the Supreme Court. The CNSAS, among its various tasks, has to
ensure the right of individual access to personal files, vet candidates to public offices and publish lists of
persons who were agents or informers of the former secret police. In order to perform these tasks, the
archives of the former secret police have to be made available to the CNSAS but, until they are fully
transferred to the CNSAS premises, they remain under the control of the present information service (SRI).

It appears that since CNSAS was established in 2000, SRI has not handed over all the files requested or has
transmitted allegedly incomplete files. The attitude of SRI has provoked a division within CNSAS, and its
eventual deadlock, with five board members supporting the position of SRI and abstaining from
participating to its activities.

In January 2003 the legal affairs committees of the two houses of Parliament appointed a joint sub-
committee in order to find a solution to the deadlock. The report of the sub-committee, which was
submitted in March, proposes that Parliament revoke all the current members of the board and appoint a
caretaker board composed of the five board members who are at present abstaining.

The Commission has no comment to make on a specific domestic Romanian issue, especially when the
situation is still evolving. However the principles of transparency and access to documents, the observance
of legislation by public bodies and democratic control over police services are all relevant under the
Copenhagen political criteria, which stipulate that membership of
the Union requires ‘stability of
institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights …’. The Commission will make a
global review of Romania’s progress towards accession in the light of the Copenhagen criteria in its
Regular Report which it will adopt and publish in Autumn 2003.

(2004/C 33 E/086)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0917/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(24 March 2003)

Subject: HIV/AIDS in South Africa

In its development aid to South Africa, what view is the Commission taking on the actions of the South
African Government on their provision of anti-retroviral
the drug
Nevirapine to pregnant women across South African provinces?

therapies and the provision of