WRITTEN QUESTION E-3585/03 by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission. The EUMC's shelved report on Muslim anti-Semitism.
Date: 2003-12-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, administration of the Institutions, antisemitism, censorship, disinformation, report

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/599

(2004/C 78 E/0632)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3584/03

by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject: Receipt of supplementary reply

On 6 March, Mrs Reding replied on behalf of the Commission to written question E-3868/02 (1), and
stated that the Commission would provide a supplementary reply.

Why has no supplementary reply so far been sent concerning equal treatment of children studying at
secondary schools or secondary vocational education establishments in the Netherlands, who are eligible
for a Dutch study grant, and of Dutch children studying at secondary schools or secondary vocational
education establishments in Germany or Belgium, who do not receive study grants?

When can the supplementary reply be expected?

(1) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 157.

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2004)

After giving the question close attention, the Commission decided to contact the Dutch authorities to
verify whether the legislation relating to the awarding of study grants was in conformity with the
provisions of Community law relating to freedom of movement, because although it is up to the Member
States to set the conditions governing access to their national education systems and the conditions
governing the awarding of study grants to students wishing to study in another Member State, the Member
States must nevertheless observe Community law and in particular the principle of non-discrimination, as
confirmed by the Judgment of the Court of Justice in the Meeusen case (C-337/97).

On the basis of the documentation obtained, the Commission has no evidence that grants are awarded for
study in the Netherlands in contravention of the principles of freedom of movement.

In particular:

(cid:1) Dutch students have the right, and make use of the right, to study in other countries of Europe;

(cid:1) students who are nationals of other countries of the Union have the right to study in the Netherlands.

(2004/C 78 E/0633)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3585/03

by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject: The EUMC’s shelved report on Muslim anti-Semitism

According to the ‘Financial Times’ and the Danish newspaper ‘Berlingske Tidende’ of 23 November 2003,
the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) in Vienna has shelved a 112-page
report on anti-Semitism which the EUMC had itself commissioned from university research staff in Berlin.

The reason why the report is being shelved is said to be that it did not portray the political image sought
by the EUMC. Indeed, it revealed that it is Muslim immigrants and pro-Palestinian groups who are behind
most of the attacks on Jewish property and persons in Europe, and Beate Winkler, the EUMC’s strongly
pro-Muslim director, did not want this to come out.

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?