WRITTEN QUESTION E-2778/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Criteria for the assignment and removal of special adviser status for officials and their disappearance from the Commission's establishment plan.
Date: 2003-09-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, European official, appointment of staff, organisation chart, personnel administration, regulations for civil servants

C 84 E/38

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

100 % of the uncultivated land in the village of Agridia on Imvros which is a purely Greek village has been
registered as belonging to the Turkish State, although Greeks hold legal property titles to this land. Bearing
in mind a previous statement by the Council that Turkish-EU relations must be based on a clear
commitment to respect law and international agreements, and given that the Treaty of Lausanne provides
for self-rule for the Greek inhabitants of Imvros and Tenedos and in particular for respect for their
language, religion and property and that Turkey is a candidate country, will the Council say how it intends
to intervene with the Turkish authorities to guarantee the protection of the property of Greek on Imvros?

Reply

(8 March 2004)

The Council

1.
Moslem minorities as regards the protection of persons and property.

is well aware that under the Lausanne treaty Turkey has obligations towards non-

2.
The Council expects all countries aspiring to EU membership to respect international law and their
treaty obligations, in particular in the field of human rights. Moreover, Turkey should ensure full and
effective implementation of reforms to ensure that Turkish citizens can enjoy human rights and
fundamental freedoms in line with European standards including civil and property rights. This is being
constantly made clear to Turkey and is also reflected in the revised Turkey accession partnership by the
relevant priority, requesting Turkey to ‘comply with the European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms’.

3.
The Council is keeping the matter under close review and will continue to make this point. The
Commission’s regular report for 2003 on Turkey’s progress in the accession process, (November 2003),
[will give] a full assessment of the State of Turkey’s compliance with membership requirements. Human
rights (cid:1) including the implementation aspect (cid:1) will feature prominently in this report.

Specific action in respect of the facts referred to by the Honourable Member is not being considered

4.
at this stage.

(2004/C 84 E/0042)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2778/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 September 2003)

Subject: Criteria for

the assignment and removal of special adviser

status for officials and their

disappearance from the Commission’s establishment plan

1.
On the basis of what criteria are Commission officials who are temporarily suspended from their
posts assigned the status of ‘special adviser’, ‘chief adviser’ or ‘adviser hors classe’ in the establishment plan
of DG Admin?

2.
On the basis of what criteria do Commission officials disappear from the establishment plan referred
to at 1? Does this mean that they have now been appointed to another, more permanent post? Or may it
also mean that they are going to be dismissed?

3.
Inter alia in the light of the problems at Eurostat and previous reports of undesirable developments
in the management of EU funds, does the Commission consider it desirable that the officials to whom such
status has been assigned and who possess financial know-how should remain available to serve the EU, at
least so long as they have not committed fraud but on the contrary have demonstrated their aversion to
that offence?

4.
In this context, what significance is to be attached to the fact the Commission’s former chief
accounting officer, Mrs Marta Andreasen, no longer figures in this establishment plan? When was she
removed from it, for how long and why?

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/39

Can the secrecy which has so far existed with regard to officials’ being assigned or deprived of special
5.
adviser status soon be replaced with public arrangements which do not afford any scope for rumours or
accusations of arbitrariness?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(4 November 2003)

1.
As appointing authority the Commission may, under the provisions of the Staff Regulations and
operational rules, decide to reassign an official from a management position to a non-management
function at any time, if it considers this to be in the interest of the service. Directors can therefore be
reassigned to a function of ‘principal adviser’. The corresponding non-managerial function for Directors
General and Deputy Directors General is ‘adviser hors classe’.

‘Special advisers’ are individuals who -on account of their expertise and qualifications- are given a contract
as special adviser and are attached to one of the Commissioners. They can be outside experts or retired
(high level) Commission officials, and in the latter case are only entitled to reimbursement of expenses.
Special advisers to the Commission are not (or no longer) Commission officials and hence do not exercise
managerial functions, nor do they appear in the organisation chart.

Persons who occupy a function as ‘principal adviser’ or as ‘adviser hors classe’ feature in the
2.
organisation chart. An assignment to these functions can either be for a long or short period and the tasks
and responsibilities are defined by the relevant appointing authority.

The Commission agrees that it is desirable that officials to whom such status has been assigned

3.
should remain available to serve the institution, unless the interest of the service requires otherwise.

4. Mrs Andreasen has not been removed from the organisation chart which is drawn up for
information purposes and in any case has no legal status. Her name is included in the most recent
version (16 September 2003) of the organisation chart of Directorate General (DG) for Personnel and
Administration as well as in the updated Commission Directory recently published on the Commission’s
intranet ‘IntraComm’.

5.
‘Special advisers’ are not officials but staff falling under the scope of the Conditions of Other Servants
of the Communities. As indicated under point 1, they are attached to one of the Commissioners and are
selected for their expert capabilities to serve the Institution on that basis. The Commission is not aware of
any ‘rumours or accusations of arbitrariness’, or of any evidence of arbitrariness in their selection.

(2004/C 84 E/0043)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2808/03

by Albert Maat (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 September 2003)

Subject: Risks of hormone therapies

At the beginning of August the British journal The Lancet published findings which demonstrated the
existence of a link between certain hormone therapies and breast cancer. The findings were particularly
concerned with hormone therapies for problems associated with the menopause or osteoporosis using
estrogens and the synthetic hormone tibolon, and with preparations combining estrogens and
progestogens.

Moreover, research by the University of Groningen has shown that the use of hormones after the
menopause can also increase the risk of cardiovascular diseases, whereas previously it was assumed that
hormone therapies actually afforded protection against cardiovascular diseases and osteoporosis.

What is the Commission doing to protect citizens of the Union and consumers of such products against
these recently demonstrated risks, and to inform them of the dangers?