WRITTEN QUESTION P-2252/03 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission. Uncommitted and unspent EC funds in South Africa.
Date: 2003-07-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, European Commission, South Africa, administration of the Institutions, financial regulation, implementation of the budget

C 88 E/394

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2003)

The Commission and Member States have repeatedly called for the immediate release of Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi and the arrested National League for Democracy (NLD) officials and supporters, the reopening of
NLD offices throughout the country as well as the reopening of all universities in Burma/Myanmar.

On 16 June 2003 the EU also decided to implement without delay the strengthened sanctions, specifically
targeted on the military leaders and their supporters, originally envisaged to enter into force on or before
29 October 2003 as agreed in the Common Position on Burma/Myanmar (2003/297/CFSP) of 28 April
2003 (1).

In addition, the EU has intensified discussions on the situation in Burma with its dialogue partners in Asia
in order to encourage them to use their influence on the Burmese Government to release Aung San Suu
Kyi and support progress on the issues of good governance, and economic reform. On 17 June 2003, the
Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) has launched an unprecedented call to Burma for
‘a peaceful transition to democracy’.

The Commission will continue to liase with all EU dialogue partners in order to ensure that the increased
international pressure on the Burmese Government is maintained until the Burmese government releases
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and all her supporters and undertakes some firm steps towards national
reconciliation and a return to democracy.

(1) OJ L 106, 29.4.2003.

(2004/C 88 E/0400)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2252/03

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Uncommitted and unspent EC funds in South Africa

(1 July 2003)

Would the Commission confirm that in the case of South Africa, because decommitted funds cannot be
reprogrammed, they are lost? There is a need to urgently consider applying a more flexible approach likely
to allow the extension of essential projects. This approach would lessen the strong likelihood of serious
social and/or political consequences. Would the Commission give its view on this matter?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(29 July 2003)

The Commission confirms that, in the case of external aid allocated from the general budget, funds de-
committed in one budget year cannot in principle be re-used or made available again in subsequent budget
years. These annual budget operations are subject to binding legal rules in the Financial Regulation (1)
adopted by Council and Parliament. (Programming is essentially a longer-term planning exercise to set out
key priorities (cid:1) it does not constitute a formal financial commitment). This is not only the case for South
Africa but applies also for all other countries that receive external aid from the Commission’s general
budget. Regarding this issue the Commission has conducted intensive discussions with the South African
Authorities over the last months.

The Commission has always applied a large degree of flexibility for the extension of cooperation projects
with South Africa. Since the start of the European Programme for Reconstruction and Development
(EPRD) with South Africa, the Commission has approved over 150 riders for the extension of Financing
Agreements. Unfortunately, not all of these extensions have produced the expected results. Nevertheless,

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/395

the Commission remains open to continuing discussions with the South African Authorities for the
extension of projects that have experienced difficulties in implementation. Some 14 projects have been
identified for extensions and adjustments during 2003. The fact is that the Commission is trying to cope
with the problem that too many earlier commitments and projects were launched without meeting the
same standards in relation to quality and implementability as the Commission is insisting on today, (cid:1) even
if the objectives of these were, and are, good and valid.

Following criticism from the Parliament and Council, the Commission has undertaken to find a better
balance between budgetary commitments made and funds actually spent. Moreover, as part of the effort to
improve budget implementation, Parliament and Council agreed in the Financial Regulation that a final
date for implementation should be fixed in compliance with the principle of sound financial management.
Thus each individual request for project extension must be carefully assessed and extension may be granted
only if duly justified by the relevance of the project and in terms of sound financial management.

(1) Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the

general budget of the European Communities, OJ L 248, 16.9.2002. See Article 77 (3).

(2004/C 88 E/0401)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2256/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(8 July 2003)

Subject: Violations of religious freedom with regard to Pentecostal Church evangelists in Belarus

Knowing that:

(cid:1) in the context of the new wave of restrictions on religious meetings in the private homes of
Pentecostal evangelists in town and villages in western Belarus, Aleksandr Tolochko was fined in
accordance with Article 193 of the Civil Code, which condemns unregistered religious activities;

(cid:1) individuals fined in Baranovichi, in the Brest region, include two women, one an invalid, the other a
pensioner. Bishop Nikolai Kurkaev has denounced the new law on religion, which came into force last
November;

(cid:1) the government signed an agreement with the Orthodox Church on 12 June which, according to a

number of other religious communities, will further reduce their rights;

(cid:1) according to Bishop Khomich, police raids in the middle of the night are illegal, since religious

services in the village of Zheludok have not yet begun;

(cid:1) an official, Sergei Kasperchuk, has erroneously claimed that in every European country church
members must be registered in order to hold meetings (Belarus is the only European country to
impose this requirement, contrary to international laws on human rights).

In view of the excellent economic and commercial cooperation relations between the European Union and
Belarus, can the Commission say:

(cid:1) whether it is aware of the facts outlined above;

(cid:1) what measures,

in the context of cooperation, might constitute a serious and effective way of

persuading Belarus to respect religious freedom?