WRITTEN QUESTION P-1345/03 by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission. EU penalties for collusion by European banks with the Baghdad regime.
Date: 2003-04-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: France, Germany, Iraq, Italy, bank, business ethics, economic sanctions, international sanctions

C 88 E/26

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 2003)

The Commission is aware of some of the press reports referred to by the Honourable Member concerning
alleged persecution of homosexuals in addition to informal accounts of human rights violations in the
Palestinian Territories.

The Commission is concerned by allegations and reports of human rights violations and has, in conjunction
with international donors, called on the Palestinian Authority to undertake democratic reforms, to ensure
the rule of law, and to respect basic human rights.

The Union is actively participating in the Quartet and the International Task Force on Palestinian Reform,
which was established in July 2002 to monitor and support the implementation of Palestinian civil
reforms, and to guide the international donor community in its support for the Palestinian’s reform
agenda. The Task Force is composed of the United States, the Union, the Russian Federation, the United
Nations, Norway, Japan, Canada, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. It is monitoring
progress across key areas such as civil society, public administration and rule of law and recommends
further actions to be undertaken by the Palestinian Authority.

The Commission will continue to monitor progress on reform within the framework of Union’s bilateral
relations with the Palestinian Authority as well as in conjunction with other international donors.

The question of Human Rights in Israel is regularly raised by the Community in its official contacts with
Israeli authorities and also when Union-Israel Association Council or Association Committee meets.

Specific cases are followed with attention by the Commission, notably via its Delegations on the ground.

(2004/C 88 E/0028)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1345/03

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(3 April 2003)

Subject: EU penalties for collusion by European banks with the Baghdad regime

Recent newspaper reports have carried details of the Baghdad regime’s financial network, which consists of
a great many European banks. These banks are mainly French or German, but also include the
omnipresent Italian bank BNL.

In the ‘Full final and complete declaration’ submitted by Iraq to the UN experts, these banks are in fact
referred to as the Iraqi Central Bank’s ‘correspondent banks’, which bore the cost of the letters of credit
issued by the Iraqi Central Bank for the purchase of suspicious materials. They include the German banks
Dresdner Bank, Deutsche Bank, Commerz Bank, Vereins-und West Bank, UBAE, Berliner Handels-und
Frankfurter Bank, DG Bank, Westdeutsche Landesbank and Bayerische Landesbank, and the French banks
Banque de France, Société Générale, Crédit Lyonnais, BNP, Crédit Commercial de France and UBAF.

Does the Commission not consider it very serious that some of the most prominent institutions in the
European banking system, along with other western establishments, should gladly have supported at a
financial level the Baghdad regime’s large-scale operations to purchase chemical weapons and weapons of
mass destruction, even during the embargo?

What urgent steps will it take to penalise these banks for colluding with the criminal activities of the
Baghdad regime?

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/27

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 2003)

The Commission is not aware of the financial network linking the Iraqi regime to the major European
banks referred to by the Honourable Member, including the alleged purchase of prohibited material by
Iraq.

The UN has imposed restrictions on transfers to Iraq through the UN Security Council Resolution 661
legislation and not by
(1990), but these restrictions have been implemented by means of national
Community legislation.

Accordingly, the Commission does not have any power to proceed against Member States if they fail to
apply these restrictions or to take appropriate measures against any organisation (e.g. banks, companies)
which break national laws.

(2004/C 88 E/0029)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1382/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(15 April 2003)

Subject: Consequences of the Copenhagen criteria for suppressing oppositions, restricting free expression of

opinion, banning organisations and increasing the prison population

1.
Does the Commission recall that the Presidency’s conclusions for the June 1993 Copenhagen meeting
of the European Council include (paragraph 7(iii)) the so-called ‘Copenhagen criteria’, which in particular
lay down political criteria to the effect that new Member States of the European Union must have stable
institutions that uphold democracy, the rule of law, human rights and the protection of minorities?

Is it expected that Member States will also continue, after they have acceded, permanently to comply

2.
with those criteria? How does the Commission monitor for such compliance?

3.
Is it compatible with the Copenhagen criteria for a form of stability to be maintained in one or more
Member States, or in parts thereof, by prosecuting the expression of political opinions, making it
impossible for lawful opposition newspapers to be published, banning political and other organisations,
treating new organisations formed to pursue the same objectives as previously banned organisations as
ipso facto illegal, confiscating funds legitimately raised by organisations, making demonstrations against
such measures impossible, or by sharply increasing the number of persons imprisoned on such grounds?

4.
Does the Commission consider it possible that an EU Member State might cease to comply with the
Copenhagen criteria? What, in that event, would be the consequences for its continuing membership of the
EU?

5. What action will the Commission take to prevent one or more EU Member States, old or new, from
lapsing back into forms of government, censorship and criminal law that displayed features of the situation
regrettably still obtaining at the present time in accession-applicant state Turkey, with its high numbers of
persons wrongfully imprisoned, and a ban on movements, publications and the use,
in public, of
historically established regional languages?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 2003)

1.
The Copenhagen criteria, as defined in the Presidency’s conclusions of the June 1993 Copenhagen
European Council, are the basis for the Commission’s assessment of each Candidate Country’s progress
towards accession, first in the context of the 1997 Opinions, and subsequently in the framework of the
Commission’s Regular Reports on each country.