WRITTEN QUESTION E-3958/03 by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission. Russia — parliamentary elections.
Date: 2004-01-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Russia, election campaign publicity, observer, organisation of elections, parliamentary election, pluralism in the media, political morality

C 88 E/160

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Unfair imports can also be related to dumping practices by foreign manufacturers. Dumping gives the
third country exporters an unfair competitive advantage which causes significant injury to Community
producers. The Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped
the Community (4) regulates the antidumping
imports from countries which are not members of
mechanisms that can be adopted by the Community customs administrations in order to ensure fair
trade practices in the international trade relationships. Currently, more than 200 antidumping measures
are in force in the Community.

As far as World Trade Organisation (WTO) developments and reciprocity are concerned,
it is worth
mentioning that in the Doha Development Agenda Market Access Negotiating Group the EU is calling for
a narrow, common range of duties applied by all members, especially on textiles and footwear.

In relation to origin marking, some of the Community trade partners (United States, Japan) operate systems
comprising compulsory origin marking for imported goods and voluntary origin marks for domestic
production. At present, a Community Regulation on origin marking does not exist. Notwithstanding, there
seems to be a growing interest in the possibility of adopting a Community Regulation on origin marking,
notably in the textile sector, as indicated in the recent Communication from the Commission on the future
of the textile and clothing sector in the enlarged European Union (5) arguing the benefits of developing a
Community origin marking Regulation for the same sector.

The Commission is currently reflecting on the potential benefits and risks of the implementation of such a
scheme considering the interest of all the stakeholders. To this end, the services of the Commission have
published a working document ‘made in the EU origin marking’ (6). This paper gives an overview on the
pros and cons of a made in EU origin marking and indicates the options to be considered, namely: the
option of origin marking both for imports and domestic market products on a purely voluntary basis;
the approach of a mixed system with compulsory origin marking for imports and a voluntary scheme for
domestic products; and the third option of a compulsory origin marking both for imports and for
domestic products. The Commission will consult consumers and industry in early 2004 and invited
Member States to do likewise.

(1) OJ L 196, 2.8.2003.
(2) COM(2003) 46 final.
(3) Decision No 253/2003/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2003, OJ L 36, 12.2.2003 and

OJ L 95, 11.4.2003.

(4) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996.
(5) COM(2003) 649 final.
(6)

available online on the website of the Commission: at DG Trade at:
http://trade-info.cec.eu.int/doclib/html/115557.htm

(2004/C 88 E/0169)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3958/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(5 January 2004)

Subject: Russia (cid:1) parliamentary elections

According to media reports the international observers who were present at the recent parliamentary
elections in Russia (cid:1) in particular the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and
the Council of Europe, which despatched 600 observers (cid:1) expressed concern at the outcome and the
methods used during the election campaign. Although they do not doubt that the elections were free, they
question whether they were fair.

According to the preliminary results the United Russia (UR) party (which is pro-Kremlin and an ally of the
President, Vladimir Putin) was the major victor in the elections.

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/161

The UR won approximately 37 % of the votes for the seats in the Duma (the lower parliamentary
chamber). Vladimir Zhirinovski’s LDP secured approximately 12 % of the votes and has followed in third
place by the ultra-nationalist Motherland party (formed some months ago with the Kremlin’s support),
which was fighting its first election and which secured 9 % of the vote.

David Atkinson (leader of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly observer team) explained to
journalists that, throughout the entire campaign, public funds (i.e. taxpayers’ contributions) and public
television were placed at the disposal of certain political groups, which led the observers to deem the
election ‘free, but manifestly unfair’.

Acknowledging that there had been ‘an unfair for the other parties and candidates’ and emphasising that
the vote ‘failed to meet international standards’, the chairman of the OSCE, Bruce George, stated that ‘in
this election the enormous advantage of
incumbency and access to state equipment, resources and
buildings led to the election result being overwhelmingly distorted’. This constituted ‘regression in the
democratisation process in Russia’.

In view of the above, would the Commission answer the following questions?

(cid:1) What information does the Commission hold regarding the fairness and the freedom of the electoral

procedure in Russia?

(cid:1) In view of

the concerns expressed by observers and opposition parties, what action has the

Commission taken (or is it intending to take) vis-à-vis the Russian authorities?

(cid:1) What effect does the Commission believe the above criticisms may have on Moscow’s efforts to gain

international credibility?

(cid:1) To what extent may relations between the EU and Russia be affected?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(9 February 2004)

The Commission has taken note of the preliminary findings of the International Election Observation
Mission, which state that the Duma elections on 7 December 2003 failed to meet many Organisation for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and Council of Europe commitments for democratic elections.
The preliminary findings indicate that important safeguards were not enforced by the Russian authorities.

The Commission is concerned at these findings. Respect for democratic principles and for human rights,
including media freedom, forms the basis for EU/Russia relations. The Commission has therefore used the
occasion of its political dialogue with the Russian authorities to call for these failings to be tackled and for
Presidential elections in March 2004 to respect Russia’s commitments to hold elections in line with
international standards.

The Commission stresses the need for Russia to continue both political and economic reforms. It hopes
that the new Duma will demonstrate its readiness to engage in such reforms in a constructive manner,
which will in turn positively influence EU/Russia relations.

(2004/C 88 E/0170)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3965/03

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(5 January 2004)

Subject: Measures against China for abusive use of the EC symbol

China is now marking its products in a number of sectors with the words ‘China Export’, abbreviated to
‘CE’. This use of the initials ‘CE’ on numerous Chinese products is a clear case of abusive imitation of
initials which symbolise the European Community on the world market. Such imitations are causing
immense damage to the EU’s producers and its labour market. Can the Commission state what measures it
intends, as a matter of urgency, to put in place vis-à-vis the authorities of the People’s Republic of China?