WRITTEN QUESTION P-2202/03 by Fodé Sylla (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. The June 2003 elections in Togo.
Date: 2003-06-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Togo, election monitoring, electoral fraud, fact-finding mission, organisation of elections, presidential election

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/233

analytical methods and to inform NRLs of advances in this field. The Commission together with the CRL is
currently preparing an amendment to Decision 91/180/EEC to be proposed in the near future for approval
by the Member States. This will be based on the latest list of reference methods recommended by the CRL.
This list will be sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat for information.

In addition, food business operators may use, in routine testing, alternative analytical methods when these
methods provide equivalent guarantees and have been validated against the reference methods set above.
These alternative methods are not subject to official listing in Community legislation.

(1) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992.
(2) OJ L 93, 13.4.1991.

(2004/C 33 E/239)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2202/03

by Fodé Sylla (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(27 June 2003)

Subject: The June 2003 elections in Togo

1.

Is Togo one of the priority countries this year for the sending of election observation missions?

2. When was the Commission asked to send observers to the Togo elections, what was the answer from
its interlocutors, and why did it refuse to send an observation mission?

Can it give me specific information about the existence of a confidential ‘Protocol for a meeting of

3.
Togolese political forces’ which, it is alleged, was drawn up by Commission officials?

4. What is the European Commission’s position on the June 2003 elections in Togo?

5.
Is it aware of the report of the Commission’s representative in Togo on the intimidation to which
Mr Yannick BIGAH (ACAT) was subjected and the violence that marred the conduct of the ballot of 1 June
2003?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(14 July 2003)

Togo did not figure on the priority list for EU election observation missions in 2003. Nevertheless,
1.
Togo was one of the countries that could have been added to the list in the event that pre-electoral
conditions were sufficiently favourable to allow the dispatch of such an observation mission.

2.
A formal request from the Togolese authorities for the EU to send a Union election observation team
in early April 2003 the Commission had already informed the
was sent on 6 May 2003. However,
Government that it would be impossible to dispatch an election observation team since the Government
did not agree to the dates and terms of reference of a Commission exploratory mission. This mission
would have assessed the pre-electoral situation, the human rights situation and the possibility to send an
election observation team.

The Commission was not involved in drawing up any confidential ‘protocol for a meeting between

3.
the political forces in Togo’.

4.

The Commission considers that the election process was not credible.

The Commission receives regular political reports from its representative in Lomé, including on the

5.
case of Mr Bigah as well as on events that occurred on polling day.