WRITTEN QUESTION E-0618/04 by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Commission. Decision by the Dutch parliament to expel thousands of immigrants.
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU migration policy, Netherlands, UN convention, illegal migration, interpretation of the law, removal, right of asylum

C 84 E/822

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

(2004/C 84 E/0916)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0618/04

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 2004)

Subject: Decision by the Dutch parliament to expel thousands of immigrants

On 17 February 2004 the Dutch parliament adopted a government bill to expel some 26 000 immigrants
and refugees who have been living in the country for years, including many young people born in the
Netherlands. The bill also provides for new, more stringent conditions for granting asylum to immigrants,
in line with the tough immigration policy pursued by the Dutch Government over the last few years. The
majority of Dutch society, together with scores of non-governmental organisations, have declared their
opposition to this inhumane and racist decision. The UN High Commission for Refugees has also
expressed its opposition to the plan, since many immigrants in the Netherlands face serious problems, and
there is no prospect of repatriating them safely to their countries of origin.

Will the Commission say whether it considers that the specific measures to expel immigrants from the
Netherlands by force are compatible with the 1951 Geneva Convention and the Tampere commitments to
draw up an integrated European asylum and immigration policy with transparent rules based on European
humanitarian values and respect for the dignity of the human person?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 2004)

The Commission was not sent the Government Bill adopted by the Dutch Parliament on 17 February
2004.

As far as the Commission is aware, the national measures at stake concern only rejected asylum seekers.
The Dutch Aliens law provides for a general possibility of review by Courts of negative decisions. Courts
are competent to decide, on a case by case basis, whether the removals would be in accordance with
obligations under international law, in particular under the 1951 Geneva Convention on the status of
refugees and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Commission would like to underline that,
in general, the possibility of return of rejected asylum
seekers could be the logical consequence where the outcome of an asylum procedure is negative for the
applicant, when the procedure was fair and allowed for all needs for international protection to be
examined. A final negative decision implies that the person at stake was not found to be in need of
international protection. If there are no other grounds for legal stay, return can be implemented.

(2004/C 84 E/0917)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0621/04

by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(24 February 2004)

Subject: Revision of TEN-T

A revision of the EU’s Trans-European Networks (cid:1) Transport (TEN-T) is currently under discussion. A new
concept, ‘Motorways of the Sea’, is being introduced in this connection, which can be endorsed in theory
but, in practice, there is a great risk of distortion of competition depending on the implementation. In the
light of this situation.

Would the Commission provide clarification on the following points:

(cid:1) can ships be regarded as infrastructure in the context of TEN-T and, therefore, be built and purchased

using TEN-T finance;