WRITTEN QUESTION E-3206/03 by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Council. Search made of the offices of the newspaper Il Giornale: violation of press freedom in Italy.
Date: 2003-10-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, newspaper, professional secret, search, seizure of goods

C 84 E/224

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. What aid has been granted to Portugal under the Daphne programme? Which institutions benefited

from this aid?

2. What other programmes, Community funds or budgetary items could be used by institutions working
on the prevention and social reintegration of women who are victims of prostitution? What subsidies
have been granted to Portugal?

3. What monies have been granted to Portugal in connection with sexually transmitted diseases?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(12 December 2003)

As regards the first question concerning the Daphne programme, the following information can be
provided.

Since 1997 nine projects carried out by Portuguese organisations were financed under the Daphne
programme for a total of EUR 680 000. Information on each of them is being transmitted direct to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

In addition, 59 Portuguese organisations or local authorities were partners in 32 Daphne projects.

With regard to Community aid for institutions which work on the prevention of prostitution and the
social reintegration of women who are victims of prostitution, the European Social Fund can co-finance (cid:1)
under the Community Support Framework (CSF) III (cid:1) measures for the benefit of disadvantaged groups in
general. Special reference should be made to the operational programme ‘employment, training and social
development’, which, in section five on social development, provides for measures to encourage social and
occupational integration of the most vulnerable groups in society.

With regard to Community action in relation to sexually transmissible diseases, the main financing tool at
present is the ‘public health’ action programme (2003-2008). The Commission has not yet taken a final
for proposals under this
decision on the projects accepted for financing following an initial call
programme and so cannot yet state its position on participation by Portugal. With regard to precursor
programmes, and in particular the programme on the prevention of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome
(AIDS), the projects financed by the Community usually cover almost all Member States. Given that the
Community aid is granted to the project coordinator, who, for his part, is responsible for distributing it to
the project partners, the Commission cannot put a figure on the amount of aid granted to the Portuguese
partners under this programme.

(2004/C 84 E/0269)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3206/03

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Council

(30 October 2003)

Subject: Search made of the offices of the newspaper ‘Il Giornale’: violation of press freedom in Italy

On Friday, 17 October 2003 the main office of ‘Il Giornale’, the major Italian daily which is currently
investigating the takeover of Telekom Serbia by Telecom Italia, was searched by decision of the Perugia
Public Prosecutor’s Office. The search by the police forces lasted 13 hours, at the end of which a
considerable amount of material belonging to journalist Gian Marco Chiocci was confiscated. It is believed
that the only charge against the journalist is that of defamation of a Rome magistrate via the press.

Does the Council consider that these decisions represent a blatant violation of freedom of the press and
freedom of expression?

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/225

Does the Council consider that these decisions violate the EU Council of Ministers recommendations of
8 March 2000 to the Member States, under which no interceptions, inspections or searches may be carried
out where such measures tend to infringe a journalist’s right not to reveal his sources?

Does the Council not consider the decisions of the Perugia Public Prosecutor’s Office to be contrary to the
European Court of Human Rights’ famous Goodwin ruling, which acknowledged the right of journalists to
professional secrecy?

Does the Council not also consider that the decisions of the Perugia Public Prosecutor’s Office are contrary
to the European Court of Human Rights ruling No 33400/96 of 15 July 2003, which clearly stated that
searches of newspaper offices to ascertain the sources of articles are a serious violation of the freedom of
expression?

Reply

(9 March 2004)

The Council does not comment on cases under jurisdictional procedure nor does it interpret rulings of the
European Court of Human Rights with respect to individual cases.

(2004/C 84 E/0270)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3242/03

by Jan Wiersma (PSE) to the Council

(3 November 2003)

Subject: The ‘Buy American Act’ in the American defence budget

Is the Council aware that a law has been included in the American defence budget of the House of
Representatives that extensively commits the Pentagon to buying American defence materiel, viz. the so-
called ‘Buy American Act’?

What is the Council’s position in relation to the ‘Buy American Act’ that has been incorporated into US
Defense Authorization Bill FY 2004?

What efforts has the Council made in seeking to prevent the act’s adoption?

To what extent does the act amount to a violation of international trade treaties?

What impact will the act’s adoption have on the arms industry in Europe and on cooperation in the area
of arms production between the EU and the USA?

What countermeasures will the Council take if the act is definitively adopted?

Does the Council intend, if the act were to be adopted, to recommend to EU Member States that they
adopt the same arrangements as those that the act would impose on the Pentagon?

Does the Council consider that adoption of the ‘Buy American Act’ will put the already strained relations
with the United States under even more pressure?

Reply

(9 March 2004)

The Council is aware of a bill adopted by the US House of Representatives which contained amendments
to existing procurement laws requiring the Pentagon to favour US manufacturers.

The EU has been following developments very closely and has repeatedly conveyed its concerns on this
issue to the US Administration, not least during political dialogue meetings held in the framework of the
New Transatlantic Agenda. The US Administration has repeatedly assured the EU that it did not support
the bill as proposed by the House of Representatives.