WRITTEN QUESTION E-4084/03 by Miet Smet (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Suspension of cooperation agreements and postponement in signing cooperation agreements.
Date: 2004-01-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Algeria, Comoros, Cotonou Agreement, Croatia, Côte d'Ivoire, EU relations, Haiti, Liberia, Pakistan, Russia, Zimbabwe, cooperation agreement (EU), human rights, suspension of aid, women's rights

C 88 E/672

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2004)

The Commission and Member States continue to follow closely the developments in Burma/Myanmar
1.
and have noted the introduction of additional trade and investment sanctions by the United States
Administration.

In view of the forthcoming decision about a renewal of Common Position 2003/297/CFSP before 29 April
2004, the Commission and Member States are reviewing the situation in Burma/Myanmar and may decide
to introduce further measures by unanimous decision. The Honourable Members will understand that the
Commission is not currently in a position to comment, or to anticipate the outcome of these discussions.

2.
The EU has a robust Common Position on Burma/Myanmar, which was first adopted in 1996 and
has been strengthened on a number of occasions since. The Common Position includes an EU visa ban and
a freezing of funds held in EU countries for the members and families of the government, senior military
and security officers and other persons or entities benefiting from government policies. All bilateral aid,
other than strictly humanitarian assistance, is suspended. Separately, EU preferential trade concessions were
withdrawn in 1997 because of forced labour.

The Common Position also includes an arms embargo imposed in 1990 and the suspension of defence co-
operation since 1991. The arms embargo was further strengthened in 2003 to include the prohibition of
technical training or assistance related to arms and military equipment. In addition, the Commission and
Member States have committed themselves to using their best endeavours to encourage other arms
exporting States to subscribe to the restrictive principles of the EU Code of conduct on arms export of May
1998. In accordance with this, the Commission has urged a number of third countries to avoid taking any
initiative which may reinforce military control in Rangoon.

(2004/C 88 E/0691)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4084/03

by Miet Smet (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 January 2004)

Subject: Suspension of cooperation agreements and postponement in signing cooperation agreements

In answer to my Written Question E-0520/03 (1) of 24 February 2003 on respect for women’s rights in
Pakistan, the Council informed me that, to date, no agreement with a third country containing a human
rights ‘essential element’ clause had been suspended.

In a number of cases where the essential elements of an agreement had been violated, the EU had
suspended certain provisions of the agreement. This was the case for the financial provisions under the
Cotonou Agreement with regard to Zimbabwe (2002), Comoros (2000), Côte d’Ivoire (2000), Fiji (2000),
Haiti (2000) and Liberia (2001). In my Written Question E-2903/03 (2) to the Commission of 1 October
2003, I asked what infringements of essential elements of the agreement had taken place to bring about
these suspensions. The Commission’s reply of 25 November 2003 is unsatisfactory as it does not answer
my specific question.

The same is true of the question about Croatia (1995), Pakistan (1999), Algeria (1998) and Russia (1995),
where the signature of the cooperation agreements was postponed because of concern about human rights.
What specific infringements of human rights were involved? Were these infringements instances of
violence against women? What were they?

(1) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 62.
(2) OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004, p. 441.

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/673

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(19 February 2004)

The Commission refers to its responses to written questions E-2903/03 by Mrs Smet and E-3343/03 by
Mr Camre (1), and to the response of the Council to written question E-0520/03 by Mrs Smet.

The Commission Communication on the inclusion of respect for Democratic Principles and Human Rights
in Agreements between the Community and Third Countries (2) of 1995 makes clear that there are a range
of measures which could be considered in the event of a breach of the clause, with the proviso that the
application of measures should respect ‘the principle of proportionality between the breach cited and the
degree of reaction’ (3).

The EU has never fully suspended a cooperation agreement. The decision to invoke the ‘essential elements’
clause is taken by the Council of the European Union. It should also be noted that the ‘essential elements’
clause has never been invoked specifically because of violence against women but rather as a result of a
more general deterioration in the human rights situation in a given country.

In response to the specific queries of the Honourable Member on the partial suspension or postponement
of signature of cooperation agreements,
the Commission is in a position to provide the following
information:

(cid:1) Zimbabwe:

Prior to undertaking Consultations pursuant to Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement, the Council
Common Position noted its ‘serious concern’ about the situation in Zimbabwe ‘in particular the recent
escalation of violence and intimidation of political opponents and the harassment of independent
press’ and also ‘about recent legislation in Zimbabwe which if enforced would seriously infringe on
the right to freedom of speech, assembly and association (4)’.

(cid:1) Ivory Coast:

The Council Decision noted that consultations were to be concluded due to ‘the lack of openness of
the presidential and legislative elections held respectively in October and December 2000, and by acts
of violence carried out against civilians throughout the period of democratic transition. In addition,
the Ivorian authorities have failed to fulfil the undertakings they gave as part of the consultations, held
under Article 366a of the Lomé Convention’ (5).

(cid:1) Fiji:

Following a coup d’état in May 2000, the EU suspended all investment projects under the European
Development Fund (EDF) programmes until
free and fair elections were held and a legitimate
government had assumed office. The Council decision noted that ‘Democratic government has yet to
be fully restored in Fiji’ (6).

(cid:1) Haiti:

The EU suspended its development cooperation in Haiti in 2001 due to various irregularities and
instances of fraud arising during the general elections of 2000. The Council decision noted that
‘Democratic principles are still not upheld in Haiti’.

(cid:1) Liberia:

The basis of EU action taken is to be found in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution
1343(2001) concerning the involvement of Liberia in the conflict
in Sierra Leone. The UNSC
Resolution proposed that a number of sanctions would be imposed on Liberia if it continued its
support to the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) in Sierra Leone and other armed rebel groups in the
region. The EU weapons embargo was necessary to follow up the UNSC Resolution on the prohibition
of the provision of services in respect of arms and other military equipment and military activities.

C 88 E/674

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

(cid:1) Comoros:

Further to the condemnation of the coup of 30 April 1999 in the Islamic Republic of the Comoros,
the EU decided to hold consultations pursuant to Article 366a of the Lomé Convention with the
Comorian military Government.

(cid:1) Russia:

The process of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) ratification was complicated by a
number of circumstances, even temporarily suspended by the EU due to Russian forces’ military
hostilities in Chechnya. With the start of peaceful negotiations in the Chechen Republic,
the
ratification process resumed. The Agreement came into force on 1 December 1997. Following the
launch of the second Chechnya conflict in 1999 and the decision taken by the European Council in
December 1999, the Commission suspended the normal Tacis programme of technical assistance,
instead putting in place a specific programme in 2000 to support civil society, democracy and the
respect of human rights.

(cid:1) Croatia:

The Community recognised Croatia in January 1992. However, recognition did not immediately lead
to economic aid or the establishment of contractual relations because of the war and the country’s
failure to meet
the requirements of democracy. Thus the decision to start negotiations on a
Cooperation Agreement and to extend the PHARE programme was suspended until Croatia
demonstrated a commitment to respect for democratic principles and human rights. Only in the year
2000, when the new Government clearly committed itself to these principles, did the EU decide to
start negotiations on a Stabilisation and Association Agreement, and to provide Community assistance.

(cid:1) Pakistan:

Signature of the ‘Cooperation Agreement between the Community and Pakistan on Partnership and
Development’ was postponed on four occasions, namely:

(cid:1) The May 1998 nuclear tests;

(cid:1) Human Rights concerns (particularly the arrest of the Pakistani journalist and editor of the Friday

Times Najam Sethi, under the Nawaz Sharif government in 1999);

(cid:1) The Kargil conflict in spring/summer 1999;

(cid:1) The military takeover on 12 October 1999.

Signature eventually took place in Islamabad on 24 November 2001 and was accompanied by a Joint
Statement wherein Pakistan reiterated its firm commitment to return to democratic government in
accordance with the roadmap announced by President Musharraf on 14 August 2001.

(cid:1) Algeria:

In 1998 the EU closely followed political developments in Algeria, and conveyed its concern about the
situation in the country on several occasions. In particular, the EU condemned all acts of terrorism,
and expressed support for the Government’s efforts to consolidate democracy and protect its citizens
from terrorism, while respecting national law and human rights. The signature of the Association
Agreement between the EU and Algeria was not officially postponed at that time, however, events
within Algeria slowed down the process leading to the conclusion of negotiations and signature of the
Agreement in 2002.

(1) OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004, p. 526.
(2) COM(95) 216 final.
(3) See annex 2 of the above-mentioned Communication for a list of measures that may be taken in the event of a

serious human rights violations.

(4) OJ L 46, 20.2.2003.
(5) OJ L 183, 6.7.2001.
(6) OJ L 120, 28.4.2001.