WRITTEN QUESTION E-3607/03 by Olivier Duhamel (PSE) to the Commission. Vienna Observatory.
Date: 2003-12-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, administration of the Institutions, antisemitism, censorship, report

C 78 E/600

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Beate Winkler and her monitoring centre have systematically sought to portray an image of Europeans as
racist irrespective of the fact that this image is a false one in all essentials. All Muslim communities in the
EU (cid:1) as in the rest of the world (cid:1) are witnessing flagrant breaches of the European Convention on
Human Rights. This primarily takes the form of wide-scale oppression of women with many Muslim
communities in the EU implementing Sharia law in the form of discrimination against women in the
matter of inheritance in breach of the legislation in the Member States; still worse, there are what are
known as the ‘honour killings’ of women wanting their freedom and even the killing of women who have
been the victims of rape. These grave matters have never been dealt with by the EUMC.

The EUMC has systematically portrayed a false image of who the racists are and who is infringing human
rights in the EU. Now Beate Winkler also wants to conceal the anti-Semitism of Muslims.

What action does the Commission intend to take in order to halt the one-sided politicising activity of the
EUMC and ensure truthful information about racist threats and human rights’ infringements in the EU?

(2004/C 78 E/0634)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3587/03

by Koenraad Dillen (NI) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject: Report on anti-Semitism by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia

The Financial Times and other European newspapers this week reported that the European Monitoring
Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, based in Vienna, has decided not to publish a recent report on anti-
Semitism. The European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia is made up of representatives of
Member States, the Council of Europe, the Commission and the European Parliament. The 112-page report
in question was compiled by Berlin Technical University at the request of the European Monitoring Centre
on Racism and Xenophobia. The newspapers state that, according to the report, there has been a sharp
increase in anti-Semitic statements made and crimes committed by immigrants. For reasons of ‘political
correctness’, it was therefore decided not to make the report public.

Are these newspaper reports accurate?

Was the Commission aware of the decision not to publish this report? Can the Commission state how
much this research cost?

By whom and on the basis of what discussions was it decided not to publish this report? On the basis of
what arguments was it decided to invalidate the scientific research of Berlin Technical University in this
way?

On the basis of what subsidies is the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia financed?
What are the sums involved? How many members of staff are employed at the Centre? What is the
composition of its Management Board? To what extent is this Centre sponsored by the Commission?

Can this report still be made available to MEPs?

(2004/C 78 E/0635)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3607/03

by Olivier Duhamel (PSE) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject: Vienna Observatory

Does the Commission consider it acceptable for the EUMC,
the European agency responsible for
monitoring racism and xenophobia, to censor the publication of the report requested from the Centre for
Research on Anti-Semitism at the Technical University of Berlin?

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/601

Does it share our view that it is not by concealing the appearance of new forms of anti-Semitism that we
will help to combat them?

Is it aware of the risks that the EU may give the, albeit false, impression of being tolerant of anti-Semitism,
on the pretext of not jeopardising young Palestinian supporters in the suburbs, who sometimes veer
dangerously, or unconsciously, towards anti-Semitism?

Can it ask the Vienna Observatory not to hide behind this kind of cautious attitude, which provides
grounds for accusations that it tolerates anti-Semitism? Can it advise the Vienna Observatory, and any
other EU body, not to ask unnecessary questions when carrying out surveys, as these are always a delicate
and sometimes imperfect matter, as we saw with the controversies following the publication of the
Eurobarometer on threats to peace in the world?

We need a strong, clear and rapid reaction. The EU and its various representatives must not equivocate in
their analysis of anti-Semitism or in the fight against it.

(2004/C 78 E/0636)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3700/03

by Marco Pannella (NI), Maurizio Turco (NI),
Marco Cappato (NI), Gianfranco Dell’Alba (NI),
Benedetto Della Vedova (NI)
and Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Withholding of a study on anti-Semitism in Europe by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism

and Xenophobia (EUMC)

Knowing that:

(cid:1) on 22 November 2003 the Financial Times published on its front page a report to the effect that the
European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) had withheld a 112-page report on
anti-Semitism in Europe which the Monitoring Centre itself had commissioned in 2002 from Berlin
University’s Centre for Research into Anti-Semitism;

(cid:1) the Director of the Monitoring Centre, Beate Winkler, has stated that the decision not to publish the
research was based partly on the fact that the period selected for consideration (May and June 2002)
was not deemed representative and partly on the irreconcilable differences of opinion between the
Monitoring Centre and the Berlin Research Centre concerning the concept of anti-Semitism.

Would the Commission say:

(cid:1) why a report which furthers understanding of the way in which forms of anti-Semitism develop has

been withheld from the people of the EU?

(cid:1) what differences of opinion have arisen between the Monitoring Centre and the Berlin Research

Centre concerning the concept of anti-Semitism?

(cid:1) why the Eurobarometer survey (which was not based on scientific criteria) was published immediately
(with consequences which are known to all), whereas the Monitoring Centre’s report was kept secret?

(cid:1) whether the Commission’s representative to the EUMC was informed of the decision not to disclose

the report?