WRITTEN QUESTION E-3932/03 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Sexual exploitation of children.
Date: 2003-12-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU policy, child, child pornography, child protection, prostitution, trafficking in human beings

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/881

The three largest fines imposed at Community level for restrictive practices engaged in by firms in the euro
two years were: EUR 118 125 000 (on Degussa in the Methionine decision) (9),
zone in the last
EUR 249 600 000 (on Lafarge in the Plasterboard decision) (10) and EUR 99 000 000 (on Hoechst in the
Sorbates decision) (11) … For abuse of a dominant position, the largest fines were: Deutsche Telecom
(EUR 12 600 000) (12) and Wanadoo (EUR 10 350 000) (13). No fine has been imposed at Community level
in the last two years on a Greek firm.

(1)

From 1 May 2004, the relationship between Community competition rules (restrictive practices and abuse of a
dominant position) and national competition law will be governed by Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and
82 of the Treaty, OJ L 1, 4.1.2003. As regards unilateral acts by companies (as opposed to restrictive practices
between companies), the Member States may apply even stricter competition rules than those laid down in
Community law.

(2) Council Directive 84/450/EEC of 10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and

administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising, OJ L 250, 19.9.1984.

(3) Directive 97/55/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 1997 amending Directive 84/450/

EEC concerning misleading advertising so as to include comparative advertising, OJ L 290, 23.10.1997.

(4) Parliament and Council Directive 98/6/EC of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of the

prices of products offered to consumers, OJ L 80, 18.3.1998.

(5) Proposal for a Parliament and Council Directive concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in
the Internal Market and amending Directives 84/450/EEC, 97/7/EC and 98/27/EC (Unfair Commercial Practices
Directive), (COM(2003) 356 final).

(6) As with abuse of a dominant position, this is prohibited only where the practice in question affects trade between

Member States.

(7) Council Regulation (EEC) No 17/62: First Regulation implementing Articles 85 (now Article 81) and 86

(now Article 82) of the EEC Treaty, OJ P 13, 21.2.1962, p. 204.

(8) Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid

down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty, OJ L 1, 4.1.2003.
(9) Commission Decision of 2 July 2002, OJ L 255, 8.10.2003.
(10) Commission Decision of 27 November 2002, not yet published.
(11) Commission Decision of 1 October 2003, not yet published.
(12) Commission Decision of 21 May 2003, OJ L 263, 14.10.2003.
(13) Commission Decision of 16 July 2003, not yet published.

(2004/C 78 E/0933)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3932/03

by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 December 2003)

Subject: Sexual exploitation of children

The recent report by the German section of Unicef on child exploitation states that the phenomenon is
growing with particular speed in western, northern and southern Slovakia and Moldova. There are
numerous other studies informing us that young girls and boys are offered voluntarily or pimped by their
own parents. The child trafficking routes mentioned are from Russia, Ukraine, Hungary, Finland and the
Baltic states to the EU, in particular to Germany and the Netherlands, and also from Romania to Italy,
Turkey and Cyprus. According to statistics published by the United Nations in Berlin on 30 October 2003,
children are increasingly forming part of the illegal sex industry, charging prices ranging from EUR 5 to
EUR 25.

What is the Commission’s position on these facts? In view of the increasing risks that enlargement will
bring with it, does it intend to take specific measures and initiatives in 2004 to reduce this phenomenon?
Does it have a report on the Union’s policies that have been implemented to date to deal with this
scourge? What does it believe are the reasons for the lack of success in combating these phenomena?

C 78 E/882

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 2004)

Trafficking in human beings (cid:1) and trafficking in children in particular (cid:1) is an abhorrent and worrying
phenomenon. It involves practices such as coercive sexual exploitation, labour exploitation in conditions
akin to slavery, exploitation in begging and juvenile delinquency as well as domestic servitude.

The Commission has been actively engaged since 1996 in developing a comprehensive and multi-
disciplinary approach towards the prevention of, and the fight against, trafficking in human beings
involving all relevant actors (cid:1) non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and social authorities, judicial, law
enforcement and migration authorities. Child exploitation, child trafficking or child pornography are
matters of particular concern in this context. Programmes such as Daphne, STOP and AGIS have been
continuously used to financially support exchange and research projects in the areas concerned.

In December 2001, the Commission issued a Communication: ‘Combating trafficking in human beings and
combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography’ (1). Meanwhile, on the basis of
proposals of the Commission, the Council adopted two Framework Decisions on combating trafficking in
human beings (2) and on combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography (3). In 2002,
the Commission supported the elaboration of the Brussels Declaration on Preventing and Combating
Trafficking in Human Beings. The document contains,
‘inter alia’, specific recommendations concerning
child trafficking. Further to the Brussels Declaration, the Commission set up the Experts Group on
Trafficking in Human Beings that is currently preparing a report aiming at the implementation of the
Brussels Declaration. The Commission intends to issue a Communication and an action plan taking the
findings of the group into due consideration. In this context the problem of child trafficking shall also be
addressed.

Furthermore, the Commission will ensure proper follow-up to the Council Resolution of 2001 on the
contribution of civil society in finding missing or sexually exploited children. As required by the
resolution, a study has been drawn up on the actual extent of the phenomenon of missing and sexually
exploited children as well as on the role of civil society organisations and relevant legal issues. The study
was financed from the STOP and Daphne Programmes and has been carried out and almost finished by the
Belgian organisation Child Focus together with the Ghent University and partner organisations in Member
States and Accession Countries. Once the results have been presented and published, the Commission will
report on them to the Council.

Finally, the Daphne II programme should be adopted during the first half of 2004. It will cover the period
2004-2008 with a budget of EUR 50 million. All new Member States will be able to participate fully in
this programme. Therefore, the Commission is convinced that local organisations from that particular
region will be active in the fight against this phenomenon.

(1) COM(2000) 854 final.
(2) OJ L 203, 1.8.2002.
(3) OJ L 13, 20.1.2004.

(2004/C 78 E/0934)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3933/03

by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) and Mikko Pesälä (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 December 2003)

Subject: Recognition of the ergonomic saddle chair in the EU’s chair classifications

Salli Systems, the Finnish manufacturer of saddle chairs, has asked for help in securing recognition for its
product. Salli Systems makes chairs which take account of ergonomics in connection with sedentary work.
The problem is that, according to Salli Systems, standards for chairs do not at present recognise this new
concept, and this is causing difficulties in the marketing of the chair. Salli Systems has requested help in
obtaining recognition of its business idea.

Salli Systems’ saddle chair is ergonomically designed so as to minimise medical problems caused by
sedentary office work. The traditional sitting posture causes disorders because it is not physiologically
appropriate to maintain an angle of approximately 90o between the pelvis and the thighs, and indeed such