WRITTEN QUESTION P-1275/03 by Koldo Gorostiaga Atxalandabaso (NI) to the Council. Lack of medical care for Basque political prisoners.
Date: 2003-03-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Basque Country, barring of penalties by limitation, competence of the Member States, criminal law, health care, political prisoner

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/71

(2004/C 51 E/079)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1270/03

by Marianne Eriksson (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(3 April 2003)

Subject: Human rights violations in Burma

The Burmese army is using rape as a weapon of war along the Thai-Burma border, especially directed
towards the Shan minority in Burma. The situation has worsened since the release of the report ‘Licence to
rape’ by the Shan Human Rights Foundation and the Shan Women’s Action Network in May 2002. The
report documents 173 cases of sexual violence,
involving 625 women and girls, committed by the
Burmese army between 1996 and 2001. I would like to request that the Council sends a fact-finding
mission to investigate all human rights violations carried out by the Burmese army.
Is the Council
intending to do so?

Reply

(2 October 2003)

The Council shares the Honourable MEPs’ serious concerns over human rights violations in Burma,
1.
and in particular over allegations that the Burmese army is systematically using rape as a weapon in the
internal conflict along the border with Thailand.

The EU has on several occasions in meetings with the Burmese authorities raised its human rights
2.
concerns, and will continue to do so. The Council has also publicly declared in its conclusions adopted in
mid-April 2003 that the EU is gravely concerned over the ongoing serious violations of human rights in
Burma, and over the reports of rapes and other forms of sexual violence persistently carried out by
members of the Burmese armed forces.

3.
The Council considers that an EU fact-finding mission to Burma would have little chance of being
admitted into the country by the Burmese authorities. The Council will therefore continue to support the
initiative of UN Human Rights Rapporteur, Amb. Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, in this regard. A full and speedy
investigation by Amb. Pinheiro and his team into the allegations of rape is deemed to be the most
appropriate way to address this issue.

4.
Consequently, at its meeting on 16 June in Luxembourg the Council adopted conclusions referring to
its decision, following the events of May, to implement without delay the strengthened sanctions originally
envisaged to enter into force by October 2003. The Council also decided to monitor closely the further
evolution of the situation in Burma/Myanmar, and reaffirmed its readiness to react proportionately to
future developments. The Council
level
previously scheduled to take place before the end of October 2003.

further decided to postpone the Troika visit on a political

(2004/C 51 E/080)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1275/03

by Koldo Gorostiaga Atxalandabaso (NI) to the Council

Subject: Lack of medical care for Basque political prisoners

(31 March 2003)

Lack of medical care for Basque political prisoners shows how laws are not equally implemented in the
Spanish Kingdom.

Bautista Barandalla’s case is one of the clearest examples of that. This 38-year old Navarrian has been in
prison for over 12 years. In 2000 he was diagnosed with ulcerous proctitis but he was not admitted into
hospital until March 2002. From that time, 13 times he has had parts of his colon and rectum removed.

C 51 E/72

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

He was always moved from hospital to prison too early. Given Barandalla’s situation a request was made
to the Criminal Court of Zaragoza for Barandalla’s release under Article 92 of the Penal Code due to his
sufferings and incurable illness. This request was repeated several times and all of them were refused in
spite of additional reports from different doctors and hospitals that consider it absolutely necessary for
Barandalla to be released.

Can the Council say what steps it will take in a humanitarian bid to remedy this situation?

Reply

(7 October 2003)

It is not for the Council to comment on a criminal case which is a matter for national judiciary authorities.

(2004/C 51 E/081)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1276/03

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Council

(4 April 2003)

Subject: Regulation on sexual and reproductive health and rights

Regarding the Regulation on sexual and reproductive health and rights, Members of the European
Parliament were asked to vote in plenary (13 February 2003) for an increase in the budget up to
EUR 73,95 million (Amendment 46) by mobilising the flexibility instrument in order to fund this increased
budget line.

Members of Parliament’s Development Committee and the EPP-ED Group were informed that this increase
followed, and was in conformity with, a Council request.

In the meantime, my office was informed by representatives at Commission and Council level that this
requested increase was in fact a unilateral move on behalf of the European Parliament. Furthermore, I am
informed it was at the request of the rapporteur. If this is so, it would mean that a conciliation procedure
is needed at Council level in order to reallocate funds in the context of EU external actions (Chapter 4).

Could the Council please clarify if it did request the above increase or not?

According to Budget Commissioner Schreyer’s office, Budget 2003 is already engaged and fully allocated.
Does the Council intend therefore a conciliation procedure in order to reallocate funds in the context of
the EU external action? Could the flexibility instruments be mobilised for each year of this programme
2003-2006? Regarding the agreement of the programme itself, could the Council please clarify under
which procedure it will act: qualified majority or unanimous vote?

Reply

(2 October 2003)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that, as a general rule,
inserting non-binding
provisions, such as wishes which might impinge on the Budget Committee’s prerogatives (cid:1) especially as
concerns use of the flexibility instrument (paragraph 24 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May
1999) (1) (cid:1) is to be avoided.

Nonetheless, on the question of the points made in the Honourable Member’s question, the Council noted,
when the Regulation concerned was adopted, the Commission’s confirmation that the increased financial
framework for this Regulation may be integrated into heading 4 of the financial perspective and,
in
particular, into the increased funding earmarked for development policy in the context of drawing up the