WRITTEN QUESTION E-0373/04 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Ansaldo-Breda: infringement of environmental protection legislation.
Date: 2004-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, application of EU law, asbestos, competence of the Member States, environmental law, environmental protection, hazardous waste, industrial building, occupational safety, unauthorised dumping, waste management, worker information

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/577

(2004/C 84 E/0654)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0373/04

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(12 February 2004)

Subject: Ansaldo-Breda: infringement of environmental protection legislation

Ansaldo-Breda is an Italian rolling stock manufacturer. In the last few years, its works in Pistoia have been
undergoing renovation, as extremely high levels of asbestos had been detected in its buildings and
production processes.

However, it has emerged from the preliminary judicial investigations now underway that, in the course of
stripping asbestos from the roof, those responsible failed to take the necessary precautions as regards either
prior information and warning or the provision of adequate protective equipment, either for Ansaldo-
Breda employees or for the employees of the firm in charge of carrying out the renovation work. This
infringed the provisions of the Framework Directive 80/1107/EEC (1) as amended by Directive 88/642/
EEC (2), and consequently compensation has been agreed, although it is only partial and relates to a shorter
period than the time taken by the whole operation.

According to Ansaldo-Breda employees it also seems that, subsequently, some of the broken asbestos
panelling was buried in an undeclared dump inside the factory perimeter. The first evidence about the
dump emerged some five years ago and was reported to the competent Italian authorities. Nevertheless, the
employees claim that, to-date, no measures have been taken to avoid any possible dispersion of asbestos
fibres into the air or pollution of the subsoil, nor has any action been taken to ensure the dump is made
safe.

Given the high toxicity of asbestos and its considerable chemical and physical resistance, the stripping,
removal, disposal and sealing required should be carried out by highly specialised experts in order to
safeguard the immediate environment, as prescribed in successive recent Community legislation.

In view of the foregoing:

1. Does the Commission consider that Article 137 of the EC Treaty, and more specifically Directives 89/

654/EEC (3) and 89/656/EEC (4), have been infringed?

2. Does the Commission consider that Directive 90/394/EEC (5), as amended by Directives 97/42/EC (6)

and 1999/38/EC (7), and Directive 98/24/EC (8) have been infringed?

3. Does the Commission consider that Directive 87/217/EEC (9) has been infringed?

4.

Is the Commission aware of the presence of a dump containing asbestos panels on the site?

5. What action can be taken to protect the employees?

(1) OJ L 327, 3.12.1980, p. 8.
(2) OJ L 356, 24.12.1988, p. 74.
(3) OJ L 393, 30.12.1989, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 393, 30.12.1989, p. 18.
(5) OJ L 196, 26.7.1990, p. 1.
(6) OJ L 179, 8.7.1997, p. 4.
(7) OJ L 138, 1.6.1999, p. 66.
(8) OJ L 131, 5.5.1998, p. 11.
(9) OJ L 85, 28.3.1987, p. 40.

Answer given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 2004)

A.

General comments:

(cid:1) With regard to the health and safety of workers, Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 (1)
sets out general principles concerning the prevention of occupational risks, the protection of safety
the informing, consultation, balanced
and health,

the elimination of risk and accident

factors,

C 84 E/578

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

participation in accordance with national laws and/or practices and training of workers and their
representatives, as well as general guidelines for the implementation of the said principles.

(cid:1) In particular, the exposure of workers to asbestos is currently governed by Council Directive 83/477/
EEC of 19 September 1983 on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to
asbestos at work (2). The aim of the Directive is the protection of workers against risks to their health,
including the prevention of such risks, arising or likely to arise from exposure to asbestos at work.
It lays down limit values and other specific requirements, such as the employer’s obligation to provide
workers with adequate information concerning the risks to health from exposure to asbestos, the
precautions to be taken and the need to provide workers with the appropriate respiratory equipment
and other personal protective equipment in certain circumstances.

(cid:1) Moreover, several of the individual Directives provided for in Directive 89/391/EEC, such as those
mentioned by the Honourable Member, also apply in relation to protection of the health and safety of
workers, e.g. 89/654/EEC (3), 89/656/EEC (4), 90/394/ EEC (5) and 98/24/EC (6)
(which repeals
Directives 80/1107/EEC and 88/642/EEC).

(cid:1) These Directives do not affect the right of Member States to apply or introduce laws, regulations or

administrative provisions to ensure greater protection for workers.

(cid:1) It is the responsibility of each Member State to transpose and implement the above Directives. It is
primarily the responsibility of the relevant national authorities in Italy to ensure that the Directives are
properly applied and to make provision in national legislation for administrative and judicial redress.
However, if there is evidence to show that national legislation transposing the Community Directives
is not being applied, the Commission, as guardian of the Treaty, could invoke the provisions of the
Treaty, in particular Article 226.

B.

Specific answers to the Honourable Member’s five questions:

1. and 2. The information given by the Honourable Member concerns the application in practice of
Italian legislation transposing the Directives mentioned in this written question. The monitoring and
supervision of
the Italian authorities. The
Commission does not have sufficient information to establish whether these Directives have been
infringed. However, it will take the necessary steps to obtain more detailed information and to ensure,
within the limits of the powers conferred on it by the Treaty, that Community law is complied with.

its application are primarily the responsibility of

3. and 4. As regards the alleged illegal asbestos landfill, a breach of EC waste legislation could be
envisaged, and in particular of Articles 4, 8 and 9 of Directive 75/442/EEC, on waste (7), as amended,
and of Article 2 of Directive 91/689/EEC, on hazardous waste (8).

As the Commission is not aware of the specific situation described by the Honourable Member, it will
take the appropriate steps in order to gather detailed information and to ensure, within the limits of
the powers conferred on it by the EC Treaty, that Community law is complied with.

Should the Commission come to the conclusion that Community law is being breached in the specific
case, it will not hesitate, as the guardian of the EC Treaty, to take all necessary measures, including
infringement procedures under Article 226 of the EC Treaty, in order to ensure compliance with the
relevant Community law.

Directive 87/217/EEC on the prevention and reduction of environmental pollution by asbestos mainly
addresses the control of pollution from the production of raw asbestos and the working of products
containing asbestos. It contains only a few general provisions related to the transport and disposal of
waste containing asbestos. On the basis of the information given by the Honourable Member, it is not
possible to assess with certainty whether there has been a breach of this Directive.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/579

5. Action to be taken to protect employees’ rights, in particular the right to compensation, comes under

the administrative and judicial redress procedures established by Italian national law.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.
(2) OJ L 263, 24.9.1983.
(3) OJ L 393, 30.12.1989.
(4) OJ L 59, 6.3.1991.
(5) OJ L 196, 26.7.1990.
(6) OJ L 131, 5.5.1998.
(7) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.
(8) OJ L 377, 31.12.1991.

(2004/C 84 E/0655)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0389/04

by Gianfranco Dell’Alba (NI), Olivier Dupuis (NI),
Marco Cappato (NI), Benedetto Della Vedova (NI), Marco Pannella (NI),
Maurizio Turco (NI) and Emma Bonino (NI) to the Commission

(12 February 2004)

Subject: African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights

On 25 January the Protocol for the establishment of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
entered into force. This is a major development in the history of the international protection of human
rights. Currently, 15 African states are subject to the jurisdiction of this new court. Some of them are
troubled by widespread violations of human rights and civil strife, such as Algeria, Burundi, Côte d’Ivoire
and Rwanda. Botswana, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Niger, and others, are expected to ratify soon.

As in the erstwhile European human rights system, and, as in the case of the current system for the
Americas, the establishment of the African Court will not abolish the African Commission on Human and
Peoples’ Rights. Rather, the Court will complement the Commission. In tandem, they can alter the
landscape of accountable government in Africa. Unlike the case of the African Commission on Human and
Peoples’ Rights, which has existed since 1987, the judgments of the Court will be legally binding and thus
enforceable in courts of law across Africa. Moreover, in the case of those countries who have accepted to
do so, individuals will be able to approach the Court directly. This is a not-to-be-missed opportunity to
strengthen the effectiveness of the African human rights regime and promote democracy in that continent.

1. What is the Commission doing, or planning to do, to facilitate the process of the establishment of
the African Court of Human and Peoples’ rights, and promote widespread ratification in the African
continent?

Is the Commission going to make available funds to this end, and, if so, through what channels and

2.
procedures?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2004)

1.
The coming into force of the protocol establishing the African Court on Human and People’s Rights
indeed paves the way for the continent’s first ever judicial institution dedicated to protecting basic human
rights. The Commission has restated several times its support for the launching of the Court as an
institution that could make a significant contribution in safeguarding and ensuring observance of human
rights throughout Africa as well as in promoting democracy, the rule of law and good governance.