WRITTEN QUESTION E-1277/03 by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Council. Uniates in Romania.
Date: 2003-04-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Romania, accession criteria, church, cultural object, enlargement of the Union, human rights, pre-accession strategy, religious discrimination, religious group

21.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 280 E/123

a two-pronged approach, consisting in a return to strict channelling involving liability for others than the
registered owner and an increase of the owners’ financial obligations concerning the financing of the
proposed supplementary oil pollution compensation fund. These proposals will now form part of the
future debates of the Working Group. Its next meeting is scheduled to take place in October 2003.

(2003/C 280 E/141)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1265/03

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(3 April 2003)

Subject: Outcome of the Transport Council’s decision of December 2002 on the conclusion of agreements

by the States with their respective industries

A decision was taken at the Transport Council of December 2002 on the conclusion of agreements by the
States with their respective industries to ensure quality shipping and ban the transport of heavy fuel oil in
single-hull tankers.

What has been the outcome of this decision? What agreements have been entered into in the various
States with their industries?

Reply

(22 July 2003)

As the Honourable Member of the European Parliament rightly noted, the Council conclusions on ships’
safety and pollution prevention, adopted on 6 December 2002 in response to the Prestige accident, urged
Member States to enter into agreements with their respective industries to ensure quality shipping and
eliminate older single hulled vessels transporting the heavy grades of oil and invited the Commission to
develop a model agreement to this end.

The Commission, however, deemed it more appropriate to include the ban of transport of heavy grades of
oil in single hull tankers into its proposal for an amendment of Regulation 417/2002 on the accelerated
phasing in of double hull or equivalent design requirements for single hull oil tankers, presented to the
European Parliament and the Council on 20 December 2002, with a view to ensuring a uniform
implementation throughout the Community.

The Council has followed the Commission’s reasoning on the matter and agreed, at its meeting on
27 March 2003, a general approach on this proposal, including a ban on transport of heavy grades of oil
in single hull tankers.

As indicated by the Commission in its Communication ‘Report to the European Council on action to deal
with the effects of the Prestige disaster’, of 5 March 2003, it seems that industry shares the view that
Community legislation is the most appropriate means to ensure equal treatment between competing
companies.

(2003/C 280 E/142)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1277/03

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Council

(4 April 2003)

Subject: Uniates in Romania

On 7 February 2002, after having gained legal title in the courts, the Greek Catholic minority (also called
Eastern Rite Catholic, or Uniates) was able to to recover their Church of Ocna Mures, Transylvania,
Romania.

A few weeks later, on 16 March 2002, they informed me that they were driven out of their church by a
mob led by three Orthodox priests, aided and abetted by the local police.

C 280 E/124

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

21.11.2003

I’m further informed that a similar case happened a few years ago. In the town of Ardud, the police
warned the Greek Catholic priest that he would be arrested then called the members of the congregation
one by one and told them the same. Also in 1995, in the city of Craiova, the Orthodox Bishop had the
Greek Catholic church demolished, with the involvement of the army and the police.

Is the Council aware of such discrimination against the Uniate minority in Romania?

In the context of accession negotiations, will the Council raise the issue of religious persecution?

Is the Council ready to demand an end to such religious discrimination against the Catholic minority or
any other religious minority in Romania?

Reply

(22 July 2003)

The Council attaches the utmost importance to the respect, by the candidate countries, of human rights,
including religious freedom. With regard to Romania, the Council notes that the Commission’s 2002
Regular Report on Romania’s progress towards accession, which was issued in October 2002, has
concluded that, in general, Romania continues to fulfil the Copenhagen political criteria.

As regards the specific issue raised by the Honourable Parliamentarian, the Regular Report states that
freedom of religion in Romania is guaranteed by the Constitution and is observed in practice. There is
however a particular issue concerning the property of churches. In this regard, the Report notes that ‘In
July 2002, Parliament adopted legislation that clarified the process of restituting property confiscated from
churches. The legislation extends the scope of the previous law in several important respects. However,
only church property is covered and there is presently no legal framework for the restitution of actual
churches. This is a particularly important issue for the Greek-Catholic Church which had a large number
of properties confiscated by the Communist regime but still has no legal redress. The Government has
committed itself to producing specific legislation on this issue but delays in preparing such a law means
that there has been no substantial progress.’

In the framework of the pre-accession strategy, the Union will continue to monitor the situation in
Romania in the light of the Copenhagen criteria for accession and, should the need arise, will discuss the
matter with the Romanian side, in particular within the bodies established by the Europe Agreement such
as the Association Council and Association Committee.

(2003/C 280 E/143)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1291/03

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 April 2003)

Subject:

‘Cellule de Communication’

1.
On the basis of the report submitted in August 2001 by the official Paul van Buitenen, in a letter of
12 April 2002 Commissioner Neil Kinnock informed the chairman of the Committee on Budgetary
Control, Diemut Theato, that on 8 April 2002 an administrative inquiry had been initiated into the case of
the ‘Cellule de Communication’, which, at the behest of the former Commissioner Edith Cresson, and
under the leadership of the current Director-General François Lamoureux,
is alleged to have awarded
contracts to French firms under dubious circumstances. Mr Kinnock stated that the inquiry would be
completed and that the claims made by Mr van Buitenen would be ‘verified’ by ‘late June 2002 at the very
latest’. Is it the case that this inquiry has still not been completed?

2. Why has the inquiry continued at least nine months beyond the final deadline given by Mr Kinnock?

How can it be that more than 18 months after the submission of the Van Buitenen report the

3.
Commission has still not satisfactorily verified the claims made in it?