WRITTEN QUESTION E-3977/03 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Mediation in Nepal.
Date: 2004-01-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Nepal, child protection, civil war, international arbitration

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?

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/479

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(9 February 2004)

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that the violence in Nepal is a matter of great
concern and that the interruption of the truce and peace talks by the Maoists on 27 August 2003 has
generated a new wave of instability, urban guerrilla warfare and a high number of victims.

The Commission, whose main cooperation objective is poverty reduction, has programmed resources to
mitigate the impact of the conflict. The new Country Strategy Paper adopted by the Commission on
18 December 2003 gives special attention to poverty alleviation, good governance and consolidation of
democracy, particularly in areas of the Mid-West, improving living conditions of local farmers and the
reduction of Maoist influence. The Commission is also actively engaged in conflict mitigation activities
with the media, civil society and local communities.

the human rights situation. The Commission,

Another key priority of EU action in Nepal
is causing a worrying
through the European Initiative for
deterioration of
Democracy and Human Rights, is committed to stepping up its support to projects aimed at promoting
Human Rights, including the rights of children and adolescents in Nepal. In particular, the EIDHR supports
the Human Rights Commission, and a micro-projects scheme was introduced in Nepal in 2003. The EU is
also committed to observing elections if and when they take place.

is human rights. The conflict

The Commission believes that there cannot be a military solution to the conflict and that it is of the
utmost importance that a new cease-fire be declared. However, there seems to be presently no room for
external mediation. Though the country is faced with a constitutional crisis and a political stalemate, the
Nepalese authorities have not asked for external mediation. The Commission’s current focus is on helping
confidence-building measures to re-establish the necessary level of trust among local political forces and to
promote civil society participation in the peace process.

(2004/C 88 E/0492)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3982/03

by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 January 2004)

Subject: Political rights of the Macedonian minority in Greece

The Macedonian minority in Greece is represented within the European Free Alliance by the Rainbow
Party (Ouranio Toxo).

Following repeated unlawful acts and threats,
conference in preparation for the European elections by Greek fascist-inspired organisations.

this party was physically prevented from holding a

Despite numerous appeals to the Greek authorities at both local and national level, the authorities have
taken no action against these organisations. The party conference, originally scheduled for 30 November
and subsequently put back to 7 December, has been postponed indefinitely because of the risks involved.

Is the Commission aware of this attack on the political rights of minorities?

Does the Commission know the reasons for the Greek authorities’ inaction on the matter?