WRITTEN QUESTION E-3484/03 by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Follow-up to Written Question E-2055/03 on the Latvian Police Law prohibiting police officers from forming trade unions.
Date: 2003-11-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, European Social Charter, freedom of association, international labour law, interpretation of the law, police, trade union freedom

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/149

Nevertheless, to take into account the specific difficulties that might arise, the re-introduction of customs
duties will exceptionally be progressive, in two steps (1 November 2003, 1 May 2004), in order not to
disturb trade.

Furthermore, the Council adopted, in December 2003, an amendment to the GSP Regulation whereby
beneficiary countries accounting for less than one percent of the GSP imports would no longer be in a
position to be graduated. Colombia will be eligible under this new provision as from 2005, and
accordingly would not be further graduated for any sectors, and the GSP preference should be re-
established for the sector V as from the 1 January 2005.

Concerning import of flowers from Kenya, it is recalled that this country has free access for cut flowers
under the Cotonou Agreement and does not use the GSP scheme.

(2004/C 88 E/0158)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3484/03

by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject: Follow-up to Written Question E-2055/03 on the Latvian Police Law prohibiting police officers

from forming trade unions

In response to my Written Question E-2055/03 (1) on trade union rights for police officers in Latvia, the
Commission states that certain articles of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention allow for
such restrictions.

Is this not an incomplete response given that it does not indicate in which ILO Conventions the

1.
exceptions appear and on which articles they are based?

Can the Commission confirm that, according to the established interpretation of the Committee of
2.
Experts, Convention 87 does not contain an exception that would, for example, exclude Latvian police
officers from the freedom to form trade unions?

If not, what is the basis for the Commission’s interpretation that Convention 87 does contain an

3.
exception?

Can the Commission now urge the Latvian authorities more strongly to lift this ban on forming trade

4.
unions so that Latvia respects fundamental trade union rights in full?

(1) See page 61.

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 2004)

In addition to the answer given to Written Question E-2055/03 by the Honourable Member,
Commission would like to add the following information:

the

(cid:1) Article 9(1) of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention 87 and Article 5(1) of the ILO
Convention 98 provide for the following exception: ‘The extent to which the guarantees provided for
in this Convention shall apply to the armed forces and the police shall be determined by national laws
or regulations.’ Article 5 of the European Social Charter contains an identical provision;

(cid:1) the Commission is aware of different legal interpretations of the above mentioned exceptions and
notes that several current Member States, notably Italy and Greece, appear also to have imposed a
total ban on police trade unions;

(cid:1) within the limits of its mandate, which is rather restricted in that case, the Commission continues to
follow this issue, and has already promoted a dialogue on the trade unions rights for police officers in
Latvia.