WRITTEN QUESTION E-3982/03 by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Political rights of the Macedonian minority in Greece.
Date: 2004-01-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, national minority, political parties, protection of minorities

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?

C 88 E/480

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(27 May 2004)

As it promised to do in its holding answer to the Honourable Member’s Written Question E-3982/03 (1),
the Commission approached the Greek authorities on 17 February 2004 for information about the facts to
which the Honourable Member refers.

In their reply, which reached the Commission on 30 March, the Greek authorities make the following
observations:

(cid:1) the Rainbow Party’s congress was not prevented by outside persons or organisations. On 7 December
a small march protesting against the planned holding of the congress did take place in the streets in
the centre of Edessa. The march caused no disturbance or threat to public order, so that there was no
need for action on the part of the police present. The demonstrators did not move in the direction of
the place where the congress was to take place;

(cid:1) on both of the dates announced, namely 30 November and 7 December 2003, the police authorities
had taken all necessary steps to ensure the smooth running of the congress. In both cases measures
had been taken the day before the congress was to be held in order to be able to deal with any
protests;

(cid:1) the postponement of the Rainbow Party congress is not due to any danger involved in holding it, or
to allegedly inadequate action on the part of the Greek authorities to ensure that it proceeded
regularly. In the past the Rainbow Party has held meetings and events in the town of Florina without
the slightest incident;

(cid:1) in reality the postponements of the congress are thought to be due to commercial differences with

hotels regarding the final cost of the organisation of the congress.

The Commission considers the explanations given by the Greek authorities to be satisfactory.

The Commission would also inform the Honourable Member that the Greek authorities have protested
against the use of the expression ‘the Macedonian minority’. They stressed that there is no minority of that
name in Greece. They say that there are people living in West Macedonia who in addition to Greek also
speak a local Slavic dialect. Only a few of these want to see themselves recognised as a national minority.
The appropriation of the word ‘Macedonian’ to designate these people is a source of semantic and cultural
confusion, because the term is used exclusively to refer to those Greeks who originate in Macedonia, of
whom there are about two million.

(1) OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004, p. 888.

(2004/C 88 E/0493)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4010/03

by Reino Paasilinna (PSE) to the Commission

(8 January 2004)

Subject: Safeguarding electricity supplies

The directive concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity (2003/54/EC (1)) was adopted
on 26 June 2003. Its preamble (particularly Recitals 23, 24 and 26) stresses security of supply, protection
of vulnerable customers and maintaining public service standards.

What practical measures has the Commission taken to ensure that Member States comply with their
obligations as referred to above? A particular concern, especially in wintertime, is security of supply. The
widespread and protracted power cuts in the past year have demonstrated the vulnerability of the existing
networks.