WRITTEN QUESTION E-2335/03 by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Practice of the Greek authorities in informing the public about projects co-funded by the EU.
Date: 2003-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, Olympic games, Structural Funds, advertising, bus, co-financing, display, large-scale construction, vehicle fleet

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/239

press agencies, the key points of this law are: life imprisonment for anyone found guilty of high treason,
sedition, secession or subversion; strengthening of security force powers to stop and search suspicious
persons; banning of any organisations already outlawed in mainland China.

What further information does the Commission have on this provision? What will it do to avert the
adoption of a law against which hundreds of thousands of Hong Kong citizens have demonstrated in
recent days? Does it not agree that by acting in this manner the Chinese authorities are renouncing the
tenuous idea of ‘one country, two systems’, thereby seriously jeopardising the possibility of Hong Kong
remaining a case apart from the rest of China in terms of respect for basic human rights?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(12 August 2003)

The Commission is closely following Hong Kong’s adoption of national security laws under Article 23 of
the Special Administrative Region’s Basic Law. It has gathered extremely detailed information from various
sources since the process first began.

Although it does not contest the constitutional obligation to legislate that Article 23 places on the Hong
Kong Government, the Commission would like future legislation to protect the fundamental rights of
Hong Kong citizens as enshrined in the Basic Law and to respect the Special Administrative Region’s
international obligations particularly as regards the two United Nation Covenants on human rights.

The European Union has made known its concerns about certain measures initially proposed by the Hong
Kong Government such as the prescription of local association and the very vague definition of crimes of
subversion, sedition and state secrets through four successive statements. The Hong Kong authorities have
been made aware of these positions during the many approaches by the Troika of heads of mission.

In its latest statement of 16 July the European Union welcomes the three new amendments introduced by
the Hong Kong Government and deferment of the tabling of the draft law before the Legislative Council to
allow calmer discussion of the matter by Hong Kong society. The European Union also reiterates its desire
to see Hong Kong eventually introduce universal suffrage which is the ultimate aim of the Basic Law.

The Commission will continue to closely monitor events concerning Article 23 both as regards further
public consultation and the adoption and future implementation of the law and their compatibility with
the principle of ‘One country, Two Systems’.

(2004/C 51 E/261)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2335/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 July 2003)

Subject: Practice of the Greek authorities in informing the public about projects co-funded by the EU

In his reply to my Written Question E-1712/03 (1) Commissioner Barnier states that
the Union is
contributing, by means of the European Investment Bank (EIB), to ‘the renovation of the Olympic Stadium
in Maroussi and the press centre located nearby’ and a series of other projects (extension of the subway
line, the construction of tram lines, the construction of the suburban railway, the completion of the ‘Attiki
odos’ ring road etc.) connected to the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens. He also states that the Union is co-
funding the renewal of the Athens bus and trolley fleet (EUR 79 million) and that ‘concerning the co-
funding of the renewal of the Athens bus and trolley fleet, the normal requirements relating to information
and publicity apply.’

C 51 E/240

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

is the obligation to
Will the Commission confirm that foremost among these ‘normal requirements’
indicate clearly that the new bus and trolley fleet is co-funded by the EU? Why has the Commission not
yet asked the Greek authorities to put up the relevant signs? Have any signs been put up in the Olympic
Stadium and press centre?

(1) OJ C 33 E, 6.2.2004, p. 156.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(22 August 2003)

In addition to its reply to Written Question E-1712/03 by the Honourable Member, the Commission
confirms that the obligation to indicate the European co-funding is among the ‘normal requirements’
relating to information and publicity concerning co-funded projects.

However, as concerns the renewal of the Athens bus and trolley fleet, the Commission already stated in its
previous answer that this project was approved ‘in May of this year and its implementation has only just
got underway’. So far, no busses or trolleys co-funded under the current Community Structural Funds
(CSF) have been delivered for circulation. On the busses running on liquid natural gas that were co-funded
under the previous CSF, the European co-funding is correctly mentioned.

Concerning the Olympic Stadium and press centre, the Commission stated in its previous answer that the
Community contributes to this project by way of an European Investment Bank (EIB)-loan and that it is
not co-funded by the Structural Funds. Therefore, the information and publicity requirements of the
Structural Funds do not apply.

(2004/C 51 E/262)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2343/03

by Jean-Maurice Dehousse (PSE) to the Commission

(16 July 2003)

Subject:

‘Eurostat cases’: financial interests and image of the European institutions

For a number of weeks there has been a lot of talk of a ‘case’ involving Eurostat. In a breach of standard
legal practice, a number of senior officials, including the director-general, have been publicly accused, in
particular in the press, of ‘embezzlement involving sums of up to EUR 900 000’
(Agence Europe of
19 June 2003).

The two officials in question have thus already been tried and convicted by some sections of the press, and
by those who believe what those sections of the press report and pass that ‘information’ on, whether
maliciously or otherwise, without having been officially charged and, as far as I am aware, without being
able to make any formal statement of their own.

Accordingly, with a view to making the debate as objective as possible, i.e. with a view to establishing the
facts and, if there is evidence of wrongdoing, to bringing to trial and, if possible, convicting those guilty of
the offences concerned, wherever and whoever they are, I should like to put the following questions to the
Commission:

1. when and how did the Commission learn about the allegations;

2. what is the exact nature of those allegations;

3.

4.

are the allegations serious enough to warrant legal proceedings or disciplinary proceedings before the
competent Community or Union bodies;

if the allegations do indeed concern fraud or similar acts, did the evidence which prompted the
allegations come to light in the course of internal audits requested as from 1999 by the director-
general of Eurostat;