WRITTEN QUESTION E-3242/03 by Jan Wiersma (PSE) to the Council. The Buy American Act in the American defence budget.
Date: 2003-11-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU policy, United States, arms industry, international negotiations, military equipment, national law, protectionism, purchase, trade policy

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.

C 84 E/226

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

The Council understands that the legislation which was given final approval by Congress on 12 November
2003 does not contain the provisions which would have been potentially harmful for the EU industry.

(2004/C 84 E/0271)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3246/03

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Council

(27 October 2003)

Subject: Somalia: internal situation, refugees and terrorism

The deaths (through hunger, poverty and drowning) of a number of Somali refugees (mostly from
Mogadishu) which have occurred off the Italian coast are a reminder of the thousands of Somalis who have
died since 1991 in the Indian Ocean, the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea whilst desperately fleeing a
dictatorial regime linked to the Islamic fundamentalism which is responsible for the deaths of the lay
missionary Tonelli and of two UK citizens belonging to the SOS organisation and which is represented by
terrorist organisations such as Al-Ittihad and Al-Islah.

Knowing that:

(cid:1) the interim president, Salad Hassan (who, according to the list of international terrorist organisations,
was some months ago deposed as head of Al-Islah), has walked out of the Nairobi Conference (which
has been going on for over a year) and is allegedly calling for annulment of all that the Somali
representatives have agreed at Nairobi under the eyes of international observers and (once again) for a
Reconciliation Conference to be held in Mogadishu (cid:1) a city from which Somalis are escaping even if
in so doing they are putting their own lives at risk;

(cid:1) the leader of the Transitional National Government has denounced Somali leaders who report ‘Muslim
brothers’ accused of terrorism to the Kenyans and to the Americans and has requested the release of
the USD 8,5 million belonging to the Al-Barakat financial network on the grounds that the funds are
private ones and include money which is his;

(cid:1) in Somalia, militiamen who rebel against fundamentalism and terrorism continue to be murdered or
executed and it appears that Mogadishu’s ‘new coalition’ includes Jumale, the Al-Barakat leader who
has already been expelled from the United Arab Emirates.

In the light of the above information, can the Council:

1.

galvanise diplomatic circles in order to bring the Nairobi Conference to an end and to provide Somalia
with a federal government which will take the action required in order to enable democratic elections
to be held?

2. make active efforts with a view to eradicating terrorism and isolating those who, in recent years, have
more or less openly accepted and protected the terrorist groupings which have links with Al-Qaeda
and which are responsible,
inter alia, for the attacks carried out in Nairobi, Dar-es-Salaam and
Mombasa?

3.

launch (either on its own or in conjunction with the UN) a humanitarian-aid programme for the local
people?

Reply

(9 March 2004)

1.
The Council believes that a comprehensive and broad-based peace agreement between the different
factions is the most effective way to achieve sustainable peace and to establish a federal
Somali
government. The EU has been actively supporting the IGAD sponsored peace and reconciliation process by
making its position clear in public conclusions and declarations and by diplomatic démarches with the
main players. The EU as part of the international observer group attending the Conference is determined to
help bring the Nairobi Conference to a successful end. Despite recurrent setbacks in the talks it will
continue with its efforts and impress upon all Somali leaders the need to maintain the momentum in the