WRITTEN QUESTION E-2541/03 by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission. The Gescartera case and agreements between the Spanish State and the Holy See.
Date: 2003-07-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Holy See, Spain, business ethics, church-State relations, economic offence, financing, interpretation of the law, tax exemption

C 78 E/124

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2003)

The Commission would point out that the matters to which the Honourable Member refers concern the
status granted by the Spanish State to religions, and in particular the Catholic religion. These matters do
not, therefore, fall within the scope of European Union law.

Accordingly, any incompatibilities with religious freedom that might come to light in this connection must
be dealt with at national level.

(2004/C 78 E/0126)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2541/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(30 July 2003)

Subject: The ‘Gescartera’ case and agreements between the Spanish State and the Holy See

Gescartera, the brokerage firm which invested in the stock market and became involved in Spain’s worst
stock-market fraud (leaving EUR 87 million unaccounted for) included among its clients a number of
organisations linked to the Catholic Church.

Six of Gescartera’s 15 largest clients in terms of volume of profits are religious bodies: Salesian Inspectors
of Mary Help of Christians, Order of Saint Augustine, Philippian Missionaries of Education, Emilio Álvarez
Gallego Foundation, Augustinian Missionaries and the Archbishopric of Valladolid. One of the clients
which entrusted most money to Gescartera, and accordingly one of the main beneficiaries of artificial
capital gains, was a body enjoying the exemptions provided for under Law 49/2002 on the tax
arrangements for non-profit-making bodies and tax incentives for patronage, which granted such bodies an
exemption in respect of income from property (Article 6).

Moreover, without wishing to lend credence to rumours that
the archbishopric simulated fictitious
ownership of the securities it invested, the amount invested does appear disproportionate in relation to an
archbishopric such as that of Valladolid.

The archbishopric’s accounts are opaque and contradictory, and it refused to cooperate when the
investigating magistrate asked it to furnish its accounts between 1996 and 1999, by which time it had
accumulated investments with Gescartera amounting to EUR 6 641 184 (which it withdrew when it learnt
that Gescartera was being investigated by the CNMV, the National Commission for the Securities Market),
and for the 2001 financial year, when it
invested EUR 150 253. The Spanish Bishops’ Conference
supported this refusal to cooperate on the grounds that ecclesiastical documents are inviolable on the basis
of the Agreement concerning Legal Affairs, which recognises and protects the Spanish Church’s right to
exclusive safekeeping of its archives and recognises that they are ‘inviolable’.

Under the Agreement concerning Economic Affairs between Spain and the Holy See, the system for
financing the Catholic Church takes the form of an allocation system based on each taxpayer’s income-tax
statement explicitly in favour of the Catholic Church, and an allocation from the Spanish general budget
(amounting to an average of 130 million pesetas).
In addition, the Catholic Church enjoys a VAT
exemption in contravention of Directive 91/680/EC (1). The fact that the budgets of the Catholic Church
and the various bodies linked to it are not public and the allocation from the state is not made conditional
on transparency in the Church’s financial management makes it extremely difficult to establish whether or
not the money which the Catholic Church invested on the stock market stemmed from the advantages it
enjoys by virtue of the agreements with the Spanish State.

Is the Commission aware of these facts, and if so, what initiatives has it taken or will it take in response to
these serious circumstances?

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/125

Does it consider the agreements between the Holy See and the Spanish State to be incompatible with the
EC Treaty and the EU Treaty, and does it believe that the Kingdom of Spain has taken all appropriate steps
to remove the incompatibilities?

Does it believe that complaints against infringements of the Constitution should be brought only through
the country’s national law, or can they be taken into consideration by the Community institutions as
serious violations of the rule of law and democracy?

(1) OJ L 376, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2003)

The matters raised by the Honourable Member have not been referred to the Commission.

With regard to VAT, I would refer the Honourable Member to the reply to his Written Question P-3773/
02 (1).

(1) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 142.

(2004/C 78 E/0127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2546/03

by Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 July 2003)

Subject: Evaluation of tobacco products

Article 11 of Directive 2001/37/EC (1) requires that the Commission submits by 31 December 2004 a
report to the European Parliament on the application of the said directive.

More specifically Article 11 of Directive 2001/37/EC states, amongst other things, that scientific and
technical experts should assist in preparing the report and that the report should include an evaluation of
tobacco products which may have a potential to reduce harm.

1. What measures has the Commission taken to involve scientific and technical experts in producing
the report, particularly in view of the evaluation of tobacco products which may have a potential to reduce
harm?

2. Will the Commission report, as required by Article 11 of Directive 2001/37/EC, include an evaluation
of tobacco products which may have a potential to reduce harm?

(1) OJ L 194, 18.7.2001, p. 26.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2003)

The Honourable Member asks in particular what measures the Commission has taken to involve scientific
and technical experts in producing the report required by article 11 of Directive 2001/37/EC (1) on the
manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products, particularly ‘in view of the evaluation of tobacco
products which may have a potential to reduce harm’. In addition, the Honourable Member asks if the said
report will include an evaluation of tobacco products, which may have a potential to reduce harm.

The recent opinions and reports from the scientific community make it very clear that the issue (possible
‘harm reduction’ tobacco products) referred to in the written question must be very carefully analysed. The
matter is complex and difficult, and the Commission intends to get a comprehensive and balanced analysis
and scientific advice. To be able to achieve this, the Commission intends to involve appropriately the
scientific community and the Regulatory Committee in this process while preparing the report. The
Commission has already had preparatory consultations with scientific experts in the field. The first expert