WRITTEN QUESTION P-0147/04 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Combating the use of drugs in sport.
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU action, EU policy, intergovernmental cooperation (EU), performance drugs, sport

C 78 E/934

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

authorisations to capture many species included in the Habitats Directive, among them one priority species
(macrovipera schweizeri).

There are no reports regarding the overall population of the species concerned or impact assessments on
the consequences of the permits to the natural populations of these species. The permits were issued
without the knowledge of the relevant National Scientific CITES committee.

The authorisations concerning specific species are alarming.

For example:

(cid:1) the capture of 320 individuals of chamaeleo africanus, when the best available estimate of the size of

the European population is 300, found exclusively in only one locality in Greece, or

(cid:1) the capture of 600 individuals of vipera ursinii

(listed in Habitats Directive Annex II,

in CITES

Annex I), as well as several species listed in Annexes II and III.

Is the Commission aware of these permits and the apparent breach of EU legislation, in particular Council
Directive 92/43/EEC (1) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, in addition to
international commitments under the CITES and Bern Conventions, by the Greek authorities?

What measures will the Commission take to stop the implementation of the permits in question without
further delay, and to prevent permits which risk prejudicing the attainment of the objectives of EU
legislation from being issued by the Greek authorities in the future?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(9 February 2004)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that, on the basis of a complaint (No 2003/
4831) regarding the issue by the Ministry of Agriculture of authorisations to collect and breed a number of
Greek wildlife species included in the Annexes II and/or IV of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May
1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, it has opened a file in order to
examine if this practice complies with the obligations under Articles 12 and 16 of this Directive. The
Commission would like to assure the Honourable Member that it will continue the investigation of the
complaint and will not hesitate to take all necessary measures needed for assuring that Greece acts in
conformity with Community Law.

With regard to the possibility of an infringement of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December
1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (1) (CITES), Articles 5
and 8 of this Regulation allow commercial trade in the species included in Annexes A, B and C, if these
have been legally taken from the wild in the territory of a Member State. Consequently, any breach of this
Regulation would only arise in respect of such species listed in the Regulation (not other species) and then
only if it can be established that the Greek authorities issued permits for such species in defiance of their
own laws or of Council Directive 92/43/EEC.

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997.

(2004/C 78 E/0989)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0147/04

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Combating the use of drugs in sport

In his first speech to the newly elected European Parliament, on 21 July 1999, Commission President Prodi
gave three examples of what ‘renewal’ meant to him. One of these was the fight against drug use in the

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/935

world of sport. Prodi said, ‘We must demonstrate that we are doing our best to contribute at European
level to the search for solutions to these problems, since issues such as this go beyond national borders’.

Can the Commission give an update on the measures taken and results achieved in this policy area?

Has real progress been made in cooperation between the various national and regional anti-drug agencies?

Is the Commission aware that in Belgium at least criminal organisations active in propagating illegal
hormones in the meat industry are now extending their activities to include drugs in amateur, recreational
and professional sport, and has it devised measures to combat this?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(20 February 2004)

The Honourable Member refers to the speech made by the President of the Commission to the Parliament
on 21 July 1999, in which he mentioned the combating of doping as one example of action designed to
bring the Union closer to European citizens.

The Commission immediately began work on specific measures to combat doping. It has done its utmost
within the limits of its powers, given that the EC Treaty does not permit harmonisation in the specific area
of sport. The Commission’s work has therefore been designed to promote awareness-raising, cooperation
and coordination, especially through the organisation of networks and the financing of projects. The
Commission has always focused on prevention (cid:1) information, education and research (cid:1) as opposed to a
more repressive approach, which is sometimes necessary but often inadequate.

At the Commission’s request, an opinion on doping in sport was issued on 11 November 1999 by the
European Group on Ethics. Shortly afterwards, on 1 December 1999, a Community support plan, which
was given a favourable reception by Parliament, was adopted. This plan made it possible, among other
things, to co-finance 16 pilot projects in 2000-2001 and 16 more in 2001-2002. The total amount of
funding was EUR 7 360 212. Of the more important projects, mention should be made of the first
transnational study devoted to doping practices in body-building premises in Europe, whose publication
struck a cord in many quarters. An external evaluation of the first 16 pilot projects has been carried out
and sent to Parliament.

The Commission has also taken an active part in the establishment of the new World Anti-Doping Agency
(WADA). In the start-up phase of the agency, it defended the principles of independence and transparency.
However, owing to an incompatibility between the administrative and financial rules of the Community
and those of this Agency, the Commission has been unable to contribute to its operating budget. On the
other hand, EUR 2 million in subsidies were granted to specific projects for combating doping, such as the
establishment of an athlete’s passport or the training of observers of the Agency, who are present at major
sporting events.

As far as progress achieved in cooperation between the various players involved in combating doping is
concerned, action in this area is becoming increasingly intergovernmental. While it is true that the
establishment of the World Anti-Doping Agency against the background of the 1999 Lausanne Conference
was the result of excellent cooperation between the Commission, the Council and the International
Olympic Committee, the fact remains that the Member States have preferred the intergovernmental
approach (WADA, Council of Europe, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation).

Finally, the Commission is aware of the existence of organisations that supply illegal substances to
sportsmen. It has asked the Member States to join it in studying the possible ways of tackling this problem.
In March 2002, the Commission organised, at La Toja (Spain), in cooperation with the Spanish Presidency,
the first seminar bringing together officials of the Ministries of Sport and colleagues from the border police
and customs. However, although most of the Member States are aware of the seriousness of the problem,
it did not prove possible to adopt conclusions following this meeting.