WRITTEN QUESTION P-1172/03 by Rolf Linkohr (PSE) to the Commission. EU citizens advice in the Member States.
Date: 2003-03-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, EU law, EU national, access to information, information centre, interpretation of the law, legal adviser, service

C 51 E/64

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

Reply

(29 September 2003)

The Council shares the Honourable Member’s concern about the security of holidaymakers in Bulgaria.
The unfortunate incidents of recent years have given additional impetus to the pressure already being
exerted by the European Union in the course of its contacts with Bulgaria.

Although the Council cannot itself conduct inquiries into individual cases, it does indirectly play a role by
monitoring the degree of candidate countries’ alignment on the JHA ‘acquis’, including as regards absence
of the rule of law. The Council has been informed that the Bulgarian authorities have to date adopted a
number of anti-corruption measures the implementation of which is being monitored by both the Council
and the Commission and will continue to be so monitored until the date of accession (1). Progress in this
respect was also acknowledged in the Commission’s 2002 regular report on Bulgaria’s progress towards
accession.

In the framework of the Europe Agreement with Bulgaria, the negotiations on enlargement, and the
Accession Partnership with Bulgaria, the Commission and the Member States have repeatedly urged
Bulgaria to take the necessary measures to prevent incidents such as those referred to by the Honourable
Member. The recently presented proposal for a Council decision on the principles, priorities, intermediate
objectives and conditions contained in the Accession Partnership with Bulgaria (2) for example, urges
authorities to ‘enhance combating corruption in law enforcement bodies by (…) developing a corrupt
practices prevention programme as well as a code of ethics for officials in the Ministry of the Interior, in
particular traffic and border police (…).’

The Union will continue to monitor developments in this field, notably in the framework of the bodies
created by the Europe Agreement (Association Council, Association Committee and Sub-Committees).

Finally, it is of interest in this respect to recall that within the 2002 PHARE programme, one of the four
anti-corruption projects approved deals specifically with corruption within police forces.

(1) The Inspectorate has set up a Division within the Ministry of the Interior to deal specifically with corruption.
A separate section of the NSCOC investigates possible corruption-based connections between members of public
and local administrations and organised crime groups. The National Police Service has developed a Counter
Economic Crime Programme 2000-2006, which envisages measures against corruption-related crime. The Border
police has launched several measures to combat corruption: there is an anonymous hot line telephone number, a
mailbox for passengers wishing to make a complaint about the border police and there is a specialised unit
responsible for the prevention and detection of corrupt practices.

(2) COM(2003) 142 final of 26 March 2003.

(2004/C 51 E/072)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1172/03

by Rolf Linkohr (PSE) to the Commission

(25 March 2003)

Subject: EU citizens advice in the Member States

The Commission has set up the Eurojus network (with citizens advice bureaux in each of the Member
States) where the public can obtain advice on their rights under European law. This initiative has been very
well received. The European Union’s information leaflets refer explicitly to these citizens advice centres.
Despite this very positive outcome, the offices in some Member States are not staffed or (cid:1) as in Germany
(cid:1) have repeatedly been closed for a period of several months because of administrative problems in the
Commission. This has already annoyed many members of the public.

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/65

1.

2.

Can the Commission confirm this state of affairs?

If so, how does it explain these internal administrative problems?

3. What steps does it intend to take to ensure that this service, which has, after all, been publicised, is in
future available on a permanent basis?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(23 May 2003)

On the basis of
the Commission communication of 27 June 2001 on the new information and
communication strategy (1), the Commission has already signed nine contracts relating to ‘Eurojus’ legal
correspondents in the Member States. These contracts are due to terminate in 2007. The notices
concerning the tender procedures for the other five ‘Eurojus’ contracts were published on 24 and
27 December 2002 in the Official Journal. Of these five procedures, those relating to the contracts for the
London and Paris Representations have now been completed and the contracts concerned are to be signed
shortly.

The contract relating to the ‘Eurojus’ correspondent in Germany is to be signed very soon, as the legal
doubts regarding the application to these contracts of the new Financial Regulation (2) and the Regulation
laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the Financial Regulation (3) (cid:1) the result of a public
tender procedure dating from before the entry into force of the two regulations (cid:1) have now been dispelled
by the Commission departments concerned.

(1) Commission communication to the Council, Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions on a new cooperation framework for activities relating to the Union’s information and communication
policy.

(2) Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the

general budget of the European Communities, OJ L 248, 16.9.2002.

(3) Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of 23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the
implementation of the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, OJ L 357,
31.12.2002.

(2004/C 51 E/073)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1177/03

by Raimon Obiols i Germà (PSE) to the Council

Subject: Telephone tapping at Council headquarters

(1 April 2003)

On 19 March 2003, the head of the Council’s press service, Mr Dominique Marreau, stated at a press
conference that on 28 February 2003 his institution’s security services had discovered that a number of
delegations (cid:1) those of Spain, Germany, France, Italy, the UK and Austria (cid:1) had been subject to illegal
telephone tapping at Council headquarters in Brussels. The Council’s security services had apparently found
that a number of lines at the Justus Lipsius building had been bugged.

These extremely disturbing revelations suggest that similar illegal telephone tapping may have been
happening, or may be happening now, at other Community institutions.

Has the Council identified the origin of this illegal tapping? If not, what action has it taken to do so?

Is the Council aware of any similar cases at any other Community institution?

What measures will be taken to prevent similar occurrences in the near future?