WRITTEN QUESTION P-2371/03 by Michael Cashman (PSE) to the Commission. EU-Egypt Association Agreement.
Date: 2003-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Egypt, European neighbourhood policy, association agreement (EU), human rights, interim agreement (EU)

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/407

In view of:

(cid:1) the anger and indignation caused by the sexual abuse of these women by European citizens as a form

of entertainment;

(cid:1) the total lack of respect for their physical and psychological integrity; and

(cid:1) the price they and their children have to pay, in terms of marginalization and expulsion by their

families, for events for which they bear no responsibility.

Does the Commission intend to intervene to shed light on this affair and ensure that these Kenyan women
receive moral and financial compensation and that
receive exemplary punishment?
Furthermore, what measures does the Commission intend to take to prevent such incidents of sexual
violence and abuse of women in future which constitute flagrant violations of their human rights?

the culprits

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(14 August 2003)

The Commission has received information on the alleged gang rape of women committed by British
troops in Kenya. The Commission considers this issue one to be pursued by the Government of the
Member State concerned, and for them to take appropriate measures. In this context the Commission
would like to draw attention to the report of Amnesty International entitled ‘Decades of Impunity: Serious
allegations of Rape of Kenyan Women by UK Army Personnel’ which notes that in April 2003 the British
Royal Military Police Special Investigation Branch (RMP-SIB) opened an investigation into a number of
rape allegations.

(2004/C 88 E/0413)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2371/03

by Michael Cashman (PSE) to the Commission

(16 July 2003)

Subject: EU-Egypt Association Agreement

Can the Commission provide assurances that when the EU-Egypt Association Agreement comes into force,
it will remain vigilant as to the extent Egypt fulfils the terms set out in Article 2, concerning respect for
human rights? How will the Commission measure Egypt’s compliance with this article and what steps will
the Commission take to ensure that Egypt adheres fully to its obligations?

Is there any possibility that Egypt may be able to take advantage ‘at an early stage’ of some benefits that
would result from the Agreement, and if so, can the Commission clarify what benefits may be offered, and
when? Furthermore, will the Commission agree that should such benefits be made available, Egypt will also
be required to take steps in respect of other aspects of the Agreement, particularly Article 2?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(4 August 2003)

The respect of human rights is a matter of great importance for the Commission, which has been
following closely the situation in Egypt independently of the entry into force of the association agreement.
The Honourable Member will be aware of the Union’s many efforts on issues of Human Rights and
Democratisation in Egypt. Most recently discussions on human rights questions took place during the
Union-Egypt ministerial meeting of 16/17 June 2003.

C 88 E/408

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

When the Association Agreement enters into force, article 3 foresees the start of a formal political
dialogue, inter alia on human rights and democratisation, in the framework of Association Councils and
Committees. This dialogue will provide a solid basis for developing more profound dialogue and
cooperation with Egypt in the areas of human rights and democratisation.

In addition, the Commission intends to further build on an enhanced dialogue and cooperation through
the implementation of a recent Commission initiative. On 22 May 2003, the Commission issued a
Communication aimed at ‘reinvigorating Union actions on Human Rights and democratisation with the
Mediterranean partners’, within the framework of both dialogue and co-operation under the Euro-Med
Association Agreements. The communication is now under the consideration of the Council and the
Parliament.

in view of

As regards the ‘possibility that Egypt may be able to take advantage “at an early stage” of some benefits
that would result from the Agreement’, this would first depend on the date of entry into force of the
association agreement,
the necessary ratification by each Member State. A provisional
application of the association agreement would cover trade and trade related provisions and would require
both parties to the association agreement to come to an understanding to proceed in such manner.
Examples of provisional application of association agreements already exist (e.g. with Lebanon). In such
case, the benefits would be the ones set out in the association agreement signed on 25 June 2001. It
would concern in particular the dismantling of tariffs for industrial products imported into Egypt, and the
arrangements for agricultural, fisheries and processed agricultural products. Industrial products originating
in Egypt already enjoy free access to the Community according to the Co-operation Agreement signed in
1977.

In order to implement the objectives of the agreement and in particular, in the framework of the New
Neighbourhood policy, the Commission will ensure that progress is made in all the components of the
agreement, including article 3.

(2004/C 88 E/0414)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2372/03

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 July 2003)

Subject: Transfer of EU citizens being held prisoner to prisons in their home countries

According to information supplied by the Finnish Foreign Service, in Venezuela alone 500 citizens of EU
countries are serving long prison sentences, often under particularly inhuman conditions. In some cases,
for example,
the prison makes no provision whatsoever for even basic services, and the prisoners
themselves are instead obliged to pay EUR 300 a month for necessary purchases such as their daily food.
Transport journeys are long and gruelling.

Although Venezuela has acceded to the international convention on serving sentences in the country of
origin (and ratified it in April), it does not seem possible in practice, at the level of private individuals, to
reach agreement on the transfer of a prisoner to his home country. Even EU Member States acting on their
own appear to be powerless. One reason that the transfers have failed to happen may be the large-scale
corruption within the Venezuelan bureaucracy.

Is the Commission willing to organise one-off negotiations with a view to having all the EU citizens being
held prisoner in Venezuela transferred to serve the rest of their sentences to prisons in their home
countries? To that end, could a high-level delegation be sent to Venezuela within the next few months in
order to have the matter dealt with on the highest possible tier of the Venezuelan authorities?

Does the Commission have any knowledge of the situation in other non-member countries? Should the EU
develop a system enabling it to intervene more quickly, at any rate when they are being held under the
harshest conditions,
in order to have EU citizens transferred to serve their sentences in their home
countries?