WRITTEN QUESTION P-1397/03 by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Effects from depleted uranium.
Date: 2003-04-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Iraq, United Kingdom, environmental impact, health policy, international human rights law, international organisation, law of war, report, uranium, war damage

C 51 E/84

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

(2004/C 51 E/095)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1386/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Council

(15 April 2003)

Subject: Statistics for immigration and asylum

Can the Council please provide statistics or comparable figures of actual expenditure incurred by the
Immigration and Asylum Departments or Directorates or Interior Ministries of the Member States in
relation to their asylum, immigration and citizenship programmes in the last available financial year.

(Explanatory note:
processing of applications.)

‘programmes’ refers to all the costs pertaining to welfare, accommodation and/or

Reply

(29 September 2003)

The Council does not have the information requested by the Honourable Member.

(2004/C 51 E/096)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1397/03

by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(11 April 2003)

Subject: Effects from depleted uranium

Have the UK armed forces used depleted uranium munitions during the invasion of Iraq?

Given that DU weapons cause widespread and long-lasting contamination liable to cause injury, chronic
illness, slow death or severe birth defects to both civilians and UK soldiers for years to come, does the
Council consider that the use of DU munitions would be in breach of the Additional Protocol I to the
Convention on Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be
Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (the Protocol 1 is on ‘non-detectable
fragments’) and its relevant articles on deployment, use and effect upon civilians?

Article 11 of the European Parliament’s Resolution adopted on 13 February 2003 on depleted uranium
requested the Council to support independent and thorough investigations into the possible harmful effects
of the use of depleted uranium ammunition (and other types of uranium warheads) in military operations
such as in the Balkans, Afghanistan and other regions. Such investigations should concern the effects on
the soldiers in affected areas as well as the effects on civilians and their land, with the results of these
investigations to be presented to Parliament. What steps does the Council plan to take to initiate such an
independent and thorough investigation following the cessation of hostilities in Iraq?

Will the Council press for an immediate moratorium on the use of DU munitions by Member States?

Reply

(7 October 2003)

No reports on the use of depleted uranium ammunition by the UK armed forces during the conflict in Iraq
have been submitted to the Council. The Council has not addressed the issue raised by the Honourable
Member concerning Protocol I to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/85

The Council does not have at its disposal a list of ammunitions currently in use which contain depleted
uranium. The decisions on the use of various types of ammunitions are taken by the Member States on the
basis of their national sovereignty. All Member States are parties to the Geneva Conventions.

On 9 April 2001 the Council had an exchange of views on the issue of depleted uranium (DU) munitions
in the light of scientific evidence compiled by various international organisations. At the end of this
exchange of views, the President summarised the discussion thus:

The Council notes the work by various international organisations (UNEP, WHO, NATO, Ad hoc
Group of experts set up by the Commission) on the possible health and environmental impact of
exposure to depleted uranium in ammunition used in the Balkans.

In these detailed and objective examinations, there exists no scientific evidence to link the use of
depleted uranium with various illnesses suffered in the population or among those who served in
conflict areas.

However, due to the apparent health and environmental problems in the region the Council should
remain committed to following possible further investigations closely and re-examining the issue if
appropriate at a future stage.

The Commission is already addressing some of the environmental problems in the regions through
ongoing projects. The Council encourages the Commission to take into account findings from the
reports on depleted uranium, as well as the overall situation concerning environment and health
issues, as the Commission draws up new country strategy papers for all the countries in the Western
Balkans.

Since the deliberations of 9 April 2001, the Council has not addressed the issue of depleted uranium. The
Council invites the Honourable Parliamentarian to address his question to the Commission for information
on aspects it has dealt with since that date.

(2004/C 51 E/097)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1403/03

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Council

(11 April 2003)

Subject: Abolition of Duty on Weapons regulation

The Council’s reply to my oral question H-0043/03 (1) concerning the regulation adopted by the Council
on 21 January on the abolition of duties on weapons and military equipment did not address the principal
issues posed in my question.

Why was this regulation adopted ‘without debate’ by the Council on 21 January?

When was it debated in Council since the Commission came forward with the proposal in 1988?

What brought about the efforts to bring this matter to a final and successful outcome in the second half of
2002, as outlined in the Council’s answer to Question H-0043/03?

Can the Council confirm that the provisions set out in the original proposal stating that this would be a
temporary measure for three years were removed in the final regulation?

Are there estimates as to the amount of duty that will be foregone by each Member State arising out of
this regulation?

Are there estimates as to the likely impact on imports of weapons into the EU?

(1) Written answer of 12.3.2003.