WRITTEN QUESTION P-2970/03 by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission. Withdrawal from the Common Fisheries Policy.
Date: 2003-10-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU competence, EU legal system, European Constitution, European Union membership, European treaties, common fisheries policy

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/181

(cid:1) What national rules have defined the status and the powers of national members of Eurojust since the
entry into force of the decision? What are the terms of these rules and the main differences between
them?

(1) OJ L 63, 6.3.2002, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 2003)

By letter of 23 June 2003 the Commission asked the Member States to provide information on their
measures to implement the Council Decision setting up Eurojust of 28 February 2002. On the basis of the
information provided, the Commission will draw up a report.

Up to now (13 October 2003), eight Member States have sent a written reply.

The following preliminary conclusions can be drawn from the information available:

(cid:1) Three Member States replied that they have fully implemented the Council Decision and that there is
no need for national
legislation (although they plan to adopt additional measures, these are not
expressly required by the Council Decision). One Member State has adopted a law in order to
implement the Council Decision. One Member State has adopted a government regulation on the legal
personality of Eurojust and the privileges and immunity of
its national members, while a law
implementing the Council Decision is still being discussed by the national Parliament. The remaining
answers refer to drafts in the legislative pipeline.

(cid:1) As concerns the status and powers of the national members, almost all members have the formal
status of a national prosecutor (two rather have the status of a judge, one is a deputy chief of police).
However, only a few of them can exert judicial and/or prosecutorial powers. Most of the national
members work under the authority of the Ministry of Justice, some under the authority of a General
Prosecutor. This situation may change with the adoption of further national implementation laws.

(cid:1) For more detailed information the Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to the

coming implementation report. The Commission aims to issue this report by end of 2003.

(2004/C 70 E/190)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2970/03

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(6 October 2003)

Subject: Withdrawal from the Common Fisheries Policy

Could the Commission comment on the feasibility of a Member State leaving the Common Fisheries Policy
under the current Treaties and draft European Constitution?

Would either this action or taking fisheries policy under national control involve either withdrawal of the
Member State concerned from the European Union or renegotiation of
the Treaties requiring the
unanimous approval of all Member States?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2003)

As Community law currently stands (Article 3(1)(e) of the EC Treaty) the Community’s activities include a
common fisheries policy whereby it holds exclusive authority on matters of fishery resource conservation
and management in both inland waters and at sea. This exclusive authority as regards organisation of the
sector and conservation of marine biological resources arises from Article 37 of the EC Treaty and

C 70 E/182

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

the 1972 Act of Accession. The Court of

the
Article 102 of
Community’s authority, confirming that it has replaced that of the Member States in both Community
waters and beyond these. The Community’s exclusive authority where non-Community waters are
concerned involves international commitments entered into with either individual countries (negotiation
and conclusion of agreements) or groups of countries (Community representation in international fishery
organisations) (1).

Justice has determined the range of

The scope of the common fisheries policy was recently confirmed by Article 1 of Council Regulation
(EC) No 2371/2002 (2). Thus there are two aspects to the Community’s authority: it embraces live aquatic
resources, aquaculture, and the processing and marketing of fishery and aquaculture products in waters
falling under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of the Member States, and covers all fishing activities in these
waters, whether carried out by fishermen and vessels of the Member States or by those of other countries;
it takes in all fishing by fishermen and vessels of the Member States both within Community waters and
on the high seas and within the fishing zones of other countries, in the latter instances in conformity with
the rules of international law.

The regulatory corpus of the common fisheries policy is directly applicable in the Member States’ domestic
legal systems and takes precedence over their domestic laws (3). Accordingly national authorities would be
in violation of their obligations were they to adopt legal acts setting aside application of the EC Treaty or
of Community law adopted under it. Nothing a Member State does can affect the uniform validity of
Community law throughout the Community.

The provisions of the EC Treaty can be modified only by a fresh Treaty ratified by all Member States.

Article 59 of the Draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe makes provision for voluntary
withdrawal from the Union but not for withdrawal from a specific Union policy.

It will be clear from what has been said that, as Community law stands at present and would stand under
the Draft Constitution, a Member State cannot depart from its obligation to apply the common rules
adopted within the compass of the common fisheries policy.

(1) See the Court’s judgments of 14 July 1976 (Cases 3, 4 and 6/76, ECR 1976 p.1279), 16 February 1978 (Case 61/77,
ECR1978 p. 417), 25 July 1991 (Case C-258/89, ECR 1991, p. 3977), 24 November 1992 (Case C-286/90,
ECR 1992 p. I-6019) and 24 November 1993 (Case C-405/92, ECR 1993, p. I-6133).

(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of

fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy, OJ L 358, 31.12.2002.

(3) The Court of Justice established the principle of the primacy of Community law over national law in its judgment of

25 July 1964 in Case 6/64, ECR 1964, p. 614 of the English edition.

(2004/C 70 E/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2976/03

by Heinz Kindermann (PSE) to the Commission

(6 October 2003)

Subject: Export refunds for ovalbumin (cid:1) my question P-2696/03

My question P-2696/03 (1) raised two issues concerning export refunds for ovalbumin. In its answer, the
Commission addressed the first of these but not the second more important aspect.