WRITTEN QUESTION E-2629/03 by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission. Eurostat affair: disappearance of documents from OLAF's offices.
Date: 2003-09-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, European official, Eurostat, document, fraud against the EU

C 70 E/122

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

(f)

the Council of Europe,

instructed its President to forward the resolution to the Council, the Commission, the authorities of
the Holy See,
the United Nations Human Rights Commission and the
Governments of Botswana, Burundi, Brazil, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana,
India, Ireland, Italy, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Nigeria, Papua-New Guinea, the Philippines, South Africa,
Sierra Leone, Uganda, Tanzania, Tonga, the United States of America, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

In the light of the above, could the Commission state:

(cid:1) what initiatives were taken subsequent to the forwarding of the resolution;

(cid:1) whether contacts were established with the Holy See and the Governments of Ireland and Italy and

what the outcome of these was;

(cid:1) whether the European Parliament’s demands concerning those countries with links to the European

Union were formalised, and what the response was to these?

(1) OJ C 21 E, 24.1.2002, p. 353.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 2003)

The Commission continues to promote international efforts to protect women against sexual violence.
In this regard, the Commission, on behalf of the Community, and the 15 Member States have signed the
Protocol
to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children,
supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime.

Concerning the specific facts referred to in the written question, the Commission has approached the
Permanent Mission of the Holy See to the Union’s Institutions and has transmitted its concerns while
requesting any information relevant to the issue.

The Union’s position on the issue is therefore clear and has been articulated in international fora. It does
not fall to the Commission to take the suggested steps against the Vatican, nor to intervene as regards the
relations between Member States and the Vatican.

(2004/C 70 E/124)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2629/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(2 September 2003)

Subject: Eurostat affair: disappearance of documents from OLAF’s offices

According to the German weekly ‘Stern’:

(cid:1) the minutes of the hearing of a Eurostat official in May 2000 have disappeared from OLAF’s file;

(cid:1) OLAF officials pointed out in an internal report last year that OLAF had failed to take a decision to

investigate Eurostat, and also indicated that other documents had ‘vanished’.

In the light of the above, could the Commission state:

(cid:1) when it was that OLAF opened the investigation into Eurostat and when it closed it, which is to say
when did it have the first ‘evidence’ relating to those persons whom it later referred to the courts?

(cid:1) whether the information provided by ‘Stern’ is correct and when and what action has been taken with

regard to the disappearance of documents from OLAF’s file?

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/123

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2003)

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) launched an initial investigation into one aspect of the activities of
the Directorate-General for Eurostat in October 2000 following the presentation of an audit report and an
analysis of the other documents. It subsequently launched a number of other investigations into aspects
that still concerned Eurostat.

Also according to the information provided by OLAF, it should be pointed out that as of 2001 OLAF has
ensured coordination between the different aspects at issue in the Eurostat affair and is devoting substantial
resources to the Eurostat investigations. This coordination and the subsequent investigations have resulted
in two files being handed over in July 2002 to the Luxembourg Public Prosecutor, who ordered the
commencement of
judicial proceedings in each case. Both procedures are still pending before the
Luxembourg courts. In addition, on 19 March 2003 OLAF notified the Paris Public Prosecutor’s Office of
facts that could be classified as criminal offences. Judicial proceedings have been opened and are still
ongoing.

Furthermore, the Commission has been informed by OLAF that it cannot confirm the disappearance of any
documents, particularly documents relevant to a hearing of a Eurostat official in May 2000.

(2004/C 70 E/125)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2630/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(2 September 2003)

Subject: The Eurostat affair

Knowing that:

1.

Letter No 003411 of 18 March 2003 sent by the Director-General of OLAF to the Paris Public
Prosecutor under the reference ‘CMS No 10120021510’ stated that:

(a)

(b)

fraudulent activities detrimental to the Community budget and which could be qualified as
criminal had been carried on;

the investigation has revealed that these activities were carried on by the managers of the
company Planistat Europe SA, whose head office is in Paris, with the active complicity of
European officials;

(c) all the evidence […] would suggest that OLAF is faced with a vast operation for plundering

Community funds; and that

(d) with reference to this case, Mr Yves Franchet, the director of Eurostat, and Mr Daniel Byk, head of
unit at Eurostat, both of whom are officials of the European Commission based in Luxembourg
and who are likely to have orchestrated this system in whole or in part, are French nationals.

2.

Press release IP/03/703 of 16 May 2003 stated that
preliminary information relating to the file sent to the Paris Public Prosecutor’.

the Commission was ‘only in receipt of

3.

Press release IP/03/723 of 23 May 2003 stated that the Commission had:

(a) decided to help (Franchet and Byk) defend their reputations and safeguard their rights of defence;

(b) and was ‘also keen to emphasise that everyone has the right to be presumed innocent and points
out that the information in its possession at this stage does not enable any conclusions to be
drawn as to the accountability of individual officials’.

4.

Press release IP/03/979 of 9 July 2003 stated that ‘disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against
three Commission officials’.

In the light of the above, could the Commission indicate:

(cid:1) whether the preliminary information relating to the file sent to the Paris Public Prosecutor, which the

Commission received from OLAF, included the assessments regarding Mssrs Franchet and Byk;