WRITTEN QUESTION E-0362/04 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission. Latvian passport names.
Date: 2004-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Latvia, accession criteria, language policy, passport, surname

C 88 E/176

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

On 21 May 2003 the Commission published the EU Action Plan for Forest Law Enforcement, Governance
and Trade (FLEGT). The Commission has stated that it intends to submit a proposal for a regulation in
2004 to implement the Action Plan and to provide the basis for a voluntary partnership scheme to control
illegal timber imports.

The opinion of the European Parliament’s Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy,
delivered on 19 January 2004, notes that although a voluntary licensing scheme would prevent unlicensed
timber from participating countries being released for free circulation within the EU, not all producing
countries are likely to agree to enter bilateral agreements. It recommends that urgent binding legislation be
illegally sourced timber and forest products,
drafted to prohibit
irrespective of the countries of origin, so as to enable the authorities in EU Member States to prosecute
companies and individuals.

the import and marketing of all

Can the Commission confirm whether it will introduce binding legislation, and what its next steps will be?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 2004)

The Commission is aware that the voluntary licensing scheme proposed in the FLEGT Action Plan
Communication (1) would not cover all timber producing countries; hence there is a risk that illegally
harvested timber could enter the EU from countries without such schemes. Nevertheless, if those countries
with the most serious illegal logging problems enter into bilateral agreements with the EU, this should
have a considerable impact.

In the FLEGT Action Plan, the Commission stated that it would investigate possible additional legislative
measures aimed at halting the importation and marketing of illegally harvested timber, beyond the
proposed voluntary licensing scheme. The Commission will put forward to the Parliament and Council
options for such potential legislation during the course of 2004. A decision on whether to introduce
further legislation will depend on the feasibility and nature of the options.

It should be noted that, while intuitively attractive, a general ban on the importation of illegally harvested
timber raises some difficult legal and practical issues, such as who would determine legality and how to
track timber from the forest through processing to the point of importation. Furthermore, some potential
measures may fall under Member State rather than Community competence, eg. where criminal law is
concerned. Nevertheless, the Commission recognises the gravity of the problem, as referred to in the
Honourable Members’ question, and is committed to ensuring the Community assumes its responsibilities
in this matter.

(1) COM(2003) 251 final.

(2004/C 88 E/0185)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0362/04

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 February 2004)

Subject: Latvian passport names

Could the Commission please tell me why it is necessary under Latvian legislation to demand that
individuals passport names comply with the dictates of the Latvian language? For example, if a woman
marries, her name cannot be changed on her passport to Smith, it must be written Smite as this is the
nearest Latvian version.

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/177

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2004)

The Commission has always addressed the issue of ‘latvianisation’ of names in passports in its annual
Regular Reports under the heading of the so-called Copenhagen political criteria,
i.e. the respect for
democracy, the rule of law, human rights and the protection of minorities. It is certainly an individual
right derived from dignity and liberty of a person that his/her name be respected by the State authorities.
Moreover, in the case of spouses, they are able to invoke the obligation of the State to respect family life,
as for instance, enshrined in Article 7 of the European Charter of Fundamental rights.

In its 2002 Regular Report (1), the Commission noted the changes made by Latvia, following a ruling of its
own Constitutional Court. These changes led to a more visible placement of the original name in the
in particular that the
passport. However, the Commission also noted the limitation of these changes,
latvianised form is kept most prominently on the data page. It therefore concluded that the legislation
might still be open to challenge from a human rights point of view. But it is for the Courts and not for the
Commission to decide about the legality of the Latvian legislation, unless a formal complaint is submitted
to the Commission after accession for non-compliance with certain provisions of EU law.

(1) COM(2002) 700 final.

(2004/C 88 E/0186)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0378/04

by Hartmut Nassauer (PPE-DE)
and Bernd Lange (PSE) to the Commission

(12 February 2004)

Subject: Planned draft second directive on limit values providing for the establishment of an indicative

occupational exposure limit value, ‘inter alia’ for nitrogen monoxide (NO)

Given that the Commission is planning to drastically reduce the occupational exposure limit value for
nitrogen monoxide on the recommendation of SCOEL,

can it answer the following questions:

1. What is the scientific basis for the proposal that the indicative limit value for nitrogen monoxide in

the workplace should be 0,2 ppm?

2. Are conditions in the Member States, above all those in the various branches of industry, including in
particular the different types of mining, taken into consideration when setting a limit value, even if it
is only an indicative limit value?

3. To what extent are valid epidemiological investigations used when setting an occupational exposure

limit value?

4. What method can be used to measure nitrogen monoxide in the order of 0,2 ppm? Can this
measurement method also be used underground? Which measurement method was established by the
Commission as the available measurement technique,
in line with Article 3(2) of the fourteenth
individual directive, when it set the limit value for nitrogen monoxide? Has this method been
validated?

5. What is the justification for reducing the occupational exposure limit value for nitrogen monoxide by

a factor of 125 in comparison with the present limit values in most Member States?

6. Why has nitrogen monoxide been included in the second directive on limit values, although no

occupational diseases have been found which are caused by the substance?