WRITTEN QUESTION E-3881/03 by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Encroachment on the Almyra wetlands in the prefecture of Xanthi.
Date: 2003-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, application of EU law, environmental impact, environmental protection, heritage protection, protected area

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/477

(2004/C 88 E/0489)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3881/03

by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(16 December 2003)

Subject: Encroachment on the Almyra wetlands in the prefecture of Xanthi

From the mid-1980s the coast in the region of Xanthi has been subject to intense development, a process
which has led to the disappearance of large areas of wetlands.

In addition, the last few years have seen the illegal artificial draining of the Almyra wetlands which are
contained in the RAMSAR Convention as some sections of these wetlands which are special protection
areas (pursuant to Directive 79/409/EEC (1)), and antiquities have been found in other sections.

The work which began in 1997 covers approximately 25 hectares, and this area has been earmarked for
housing. The government has so far done nothing to restore the environment there.

Is the Commission aware of these developments and, if so, what measures has it taken to restore the
environment of the Almyra wetlands?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

The Commission has been informed by local non-governmental organisations (NGOs) of the situation in
the Almyra wetlands in the prefecture of Thrace and the concerns voiced about the protection of the site.
The majority of the issues raised refer to housing developments in the area, to property issues and to the
the
bad implementation of
Community has no competence in such matters. In addition, the national authorities have already taken
appropriate enforcement measures in this regard (revocation of permits, imposition of penalties).

the legislation concerning the rules of urban construction. However,

issue related to the adequate protection of the site ‘Limnes kai Limnothalasses
However, the general
Thrakis -Evryteri perioxi kai paraktia zoni’, which has been proposed as a Site of Community Interest
under the Habitats Directive, Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural
habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1) (code GR113009) in view of its conservation objectives, has not yet
been tackled. Following the investigation of complaints,
the Common
Ministerial Decision 5796/1996 designating the zones of the Nestos Delta and the Vistonida and Ismarida
Lakes as a national park, was no longer in force. According to Greek law, the necessary legal framework
aiming at the protection of the sites and complying with the objectives set out in Council Directives 79/
409/EEC of 2 April 1979, on the conservation of wild birds, and 92/43/EEC, is composed of an approved
management plan (specific environmental study), a Common Ministerial Decision and a Management Body.

the Commission noted that

According to the information available,
the Greek authorities have adopted Law 3044/2002 which
provides for the establishment of 25 Management Bodies for a number of sites that Greece has already
proposed for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network. This Law establishes a Management Body for the area
‘Delta of Nestos-Vistonida-Ismarida’ and was followed by the Common Ministerial Decision 125208/394/
30.1.2003, which determined the composition of the Management Body Board. It appears that the process
of creation and full operation of the Management Body has not yet been finalised. Its full establishment is
expected to contribute towards the conservation objectives of these areas, the implementation of the
approved management plans and their efficient protection.

C 88 E/478

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Nevertheless, as the national legal framework was not in place, the Commission initiated an infringement
procedure under Article 226 of the EC Treaty, considering that Greece had failed to provide the special
protection area with an appropriate legal
framework capable of ensuring its protection and its
conservation. The Commission wishes to assure the Honourable Member that it will not hesitate to take
all the appropriate measures, in order to guarantee the correct application of Community environmental
law.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2004/C 88 E/0490)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3967/03

by Gian Gobbo (NI) to the Commission

(5 January 2004)

Subject: Compensation for expropriated property of Istrian refugees in Croatia

In view of the impending decision by the Council to open negotiations with Croatia, does the Commission
not believe it desirable and necessary to raise the sensitive issue of the expropriations suffered by Italian
citizens and other Europeans who were obliged after the Second World War, by the new Yugoslavian
authorities, to abandon their property and land?

Does the Commission not believe that the legislation invoked by the Croatian authorities to justify their
refusal to return this property to the Istrian refugees is contrary to the principles of both the European
Union and the European Convention on Human Rights?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2004)

The issue of the expropriations after the Second World War is an open bilateral
countries concerned and the Commission has no legal competence on the matter.

issue between the

However, the Commission, on the basis of the principle of good neighbourly relations, has on several
occasions recommended Croatia to find an acceptable solution to the problem through a dialogue with the
parties concerned. The problem has been mentioned in the last Stabilisation and Association Report on
Croatia of April 2003, and in the regular meetings between the Commission and Croatian Government.

(2004/C 88 E/0491)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3977/03

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(5 January 2004)

Subject: Mediation in Nepal

The civil war in Nepal has worsened considerably over the last few years, and a number of non-
governmental organisations, some of them based in Nepal and others based in Europe, recently visited the
European Parliament and expressed their concerns.

One of their main concerns is the disastrous impact of the war on children and adolescents, who are
forced to collaborate in guerrilla activities or, even when they have not been involved, are suspected of
doing so and treated accordingly by the authorities.

Does the Commission not believe that the European Union could play a useful mediation role in this
conflict?