WRITTEN QUESTION E-3406/03 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Installation and operation of mobile telephone antennae in Chortiatis.
Date: 2003-11-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Macedonia, application of EU law, electromagnetic interference, health risk, mobile phone, precautionary principle, public health, technical standard, telecommunications equipment

C 78 E/280

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

with incrustations left by saliva, blood, plaque, filings and remains of metal, and this can go on for days,
months or years. There are 170 million hepatitis C sufferers worldwide, and it now has to be admitted that
some of these have been infected in the course of dental treatment.

In the light of EU Directive 93/42/EEC (1), which concerns biological risks from electromedical instruments
and is based on statistical studies:

1.

Is the Commission aware of these risks?

2.

Is the Commission in possession of studies concerning the incorporation of Directive 93/42/EEC and
the results obtained in the Member States?

3. Does the Commission not consider it desirable to urge the health ministries in the Member States to

ensure that this directive is applied in full?

(1) OJ L 169, 12.7.1993, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(23 December 2003)

The Commission is aware of risks of contamination associated with the use of medical devices. In this
respect, a distinction must be made between medical devices themselves and the use which is made of
devices.

Medical devices Directives, in particular Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993, define the essential
requirements devices have to meet in terms of quality, safety and performance to be put on the market
and into service. The devices in question are assessed by a third party, the ‘Notified Body’, and only those
that meet the state of the art requirements are CE marked and available for health care purposes. An
essential element of the Directives concerns the instructions for use,
in particular re-sterilisation and
replacement.

The question to know to what extent health care providers properly implement instructions for use when
using medical devices, is a different one, that falls with national health policies based in Article 152 of the
EC Treaty. According to this Article, the Community action in the field of public health shall fully respect
the responsibilities of the Member States for the organisation and delivery of health services and medical
care.

The Commission would welcome every initiative that, at national level, Member States may implement to
increase the degree of safety and health protection of patients.

(2004/C 78 E/0281)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3406/03

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 November 2003)

Subject: Installation and operation of mobile telephone antennae in Chortiatis

Over the last few years it has been noted that in Chortiatis in Thessaloniki and many other regions of
Greece mobile telephone antennae have been set up and are operating very close to residential areas and
even in close proximity to school buildings and hospitals.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/281

Bearing in mind all the charges made concerning this specific question and the Greek Ombudsman’s report
on this matter, will the Commission say:

1. What action does it intend to take in response to the above complaints by citizens demanding that
preventive measures be taken to limit the threat of exposure to electromagnetic radiation, particularly
in view of the advent of third-generation mobile telephony, so as to ensure compliance with the
precautionary principle which covers protection not only of the environment, but also of human
health?

2. To what extent are the above installations in breach of Article 6 TEU on environmental legislation?

3. What does it intend to do to protect public health if antennae are located less than 300 metres from

residential areas?

4. What measures does it intend to take against those responsible for locating antennae in areas where
they pose a public health threat, so as to prevent any violation of the precautionary principle and
Council recommendation 1999/519/EC (1)?

5. What does it intend to do about authorisations to locate mobile telephone antennae which fail to

meet legal requirements and pose a public health risk?

(1) OJ L 199, 30.7.1999, p. 59.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2004)

The attention of the honourable MEP is first of all drawn to the replies of the Commission to numerous
other questions on this issue. An overview of these questions is given on (http://europa.eu.int/comm/
enterprise/rtte/questions.htm).

In response to the specific questions the following can be added:

1. Based on the best scientific advice available to date, exposures which are below those recommended in
Council Recommendation 1999/519/EEC of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general
public to electromagnetic fields (0 Herz (Hz) to 300 Gigaherz (GHz)) provide for a high protection of
safety and health of its citizens against all known effects. For this reason, the Greek authorities should
ensure that the public is not exposed above these limits. Measurements of exposure in other Member
States have demonstrated that exposure is greatly (a factor of 1 000-100 000) below the recommended
values. Only in the close vicinity (i.e. a few meters) of the antenna may the exposure exceed the limits
and authorities should in this case prevent access to the public. In most cases this zone is by default
not accessible, certainly where antennas are mounted on high masts.

2.

Provided that these installations do not expose the public beyond the limits recommended in the
above-mentioned Council Recommendation, one must assume there is no breach of Article 6 of the
Treaty on the European Union on environmental legislation.

3. The distance between a residential area and an antenna is not a proper indicator of its effect on the
overall exposure of the public and scientific evidence does not support the assumption according to
which an antenna within 300 metres would have adverse effects on public health. As long as factual
exposure remains below the recommended levels, the health of the citizens is to our best knowledge
well protected.

4.

It is up to Member States to implement Recommendation 1999/519/EEC into national legislation, and
to ensure that this is implemented. As set out above, on the basis of current scientific knowledge, the
exposure levels set out in the Recommendation are adequate to protect the public.

C 78 E/282

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

5. The surveillance of whether mobile telephone antennae do not respect the legal requirements falls
under the responsibility of Member States. Under Directive 1999/5/EC (1), a Member State should not
allow the putting into service of antennas that would expose the public to levels beyond those set by
the Council Recommendation.

(1) Directive 1999/5/EC of

the Parliament and of

the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and

telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity, OJ L 91, 7.4.1999.

(2004/C 78 E/0282)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3412/03

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(18 November 2003)

Subject: EU funding of independent NGO projects in Tunisia

the government’s decision, on the basis of

The Tunisian authorities have decided to forbid the Tunisian Human Rights League to receive funding
from the Commission, in the second block of funding for a project already concluded by the League and
approved by the Commission in 2002, within the framework of the European Initiative for Democracy
and Human Rights. Last August, the Tunisian Interior Ministry’s political affairs director summoned the
‘legal provisions on
League’s Chairman to inform of
associations’. Some days later, the bank for where the League has one of its accounts sent a letter to
League officials saying that a deposit had been made by Brussels on behalf of the League, but access to
these funds was dependent on the submission of ‘the requisite authorisations, pursuant to Law No. 154 of
7 November 1959, and particularly the provisions of Articles 8 and 14 thereof’
the law on
associations). Tunisian legislation does not, in fact, contain any provision of a nature such as to oblige
the League to request authorisation in order to receive funding. Article 8 specifically and exclusively refers
to charity and aid associations. Article 14 obliges ‘associations recognised as being of national interest’ (cid:1)
which is not the case of the Tunisian Human Rights League (cid:1) to obtain authorisation from the Minister of
the Interior in order to ‘accept donations and legacies’. The funding obtained in 2002 by the League falls
within the EU (cid:1) Tunisian Association Agreement, Article 2 whereof obliges the parties to respect the
principles of democracy and human rights. The conditions imposed by the Tunisian authorities are yet
another instance of the hindrances and harassment the League and its members are subjected to.

(i.e.

What was the Commission’s initial reaction to the manoeuvres of the Tunisian authorities to prevent the
Commission funding a Tunisian Human Rights League project? What initiatives did the Commission take
or will it take to convince the Tunisian authorities to change their legally unjustifiable attitude to the
funding of the League’s project? More generally, what measures does the Commission intend to take to
convince the Tunisian authorities to stop hindering the League’s activities and those of the very few non
governmental organisations which are truly independent of the ruling RCD, party?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(9 January 2004)

The Tunisian League for the Defence of Human Rights Human Rights (LTDDH), beneficiary of project
EIDHR 2002/3485 to restructure the LTDDH, has informed the Commission of the facts referred to by the
Honourable Member.

As a follow-up to the LTDDH’s communication, the Commission has raised this matter at a high level with
the Tunisian authorities in order to clarify the grounds for applying Law No 154 to the Tunisian League
for the Defence of Human Rights in connection with the second instalment of funds for this project, now
at its half-way stage.