do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0620/04 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Export of military ammunition to African countries as hunting ammunition.
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, competence of the Member States, export monitoring, firearms and munitions, military equipment

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/517

2. The amount of EU resources allocated since 1999 under other budgetary headings for pilot projects or
(cid:1) as direct aid (cid:1) to universities, research establishments, enterprises and other bodies in the above-
mentioned cities and the district of Mettmann?

3. The number of jobs created or maintained by means of this assistance?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2004)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to
Parliament’s Secretariat.

(2004/C 88 E/0529)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0620/04

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 March 2004)

Subject: Export of military ammunition to African countries as hunting ammunition

Various prestigious NGO’s (Oxfam, Amnesty International, Greenpeace) and the Autonomous University of
Barcelona’s Peace Culture School have claimed that Spain has been exporting military ammunition, as if it
were hunting ammunition, to the following African countries: Ghana, Guinea Conakry, Central African
Republic, Mauritania, Cote d’Ivoire, Senegal, Guinea Bissau, Angola, Burkina Fasso and Cameroon.

Apparently the Customs Registers of the Spanish Tax Agency show that the cartridges exported weighed
on average 40 kg, and cost an average of EUR 120 each.

Given that it is difficult to believe that hunting ammunition of such dimensions exists, and that these
exports of munitions brought in over EUR 4 million in 2002, is the Commission aware of these Spanish
exports?

If the Commission is aware of the claims, has it taken or does it intend to take any steps?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 2004)

The Commission is not aware of the exports in question nor does it possess the authority or the means to
confirm or deny any possible misrepresentation of the stated end use of such exports.

Full responsibility for the licensing of arms exports rests with national governments. Consequently, it is not
for the Commission to comment on Member States’ practices in this area.
Commission Opinion under the second paragraph of Article 245 of the EC Treaty on the requests for amendment of Article 29 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice and Article 35 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, presented by the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance in accordance with Article 64 of the Statute of the Court of Justice
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, General Court (EU), accession to the European Union, enlargement of the Union, judicial proceedings, official language













EUR-Lex - 52004SC0223 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



52004SC0223

Commission opinion under the second paragraph of Article 245 of the EC Treaty on the requests for amendment of Article 29 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice and Article 35 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, presented by the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance in accordance with Article 64 of the Statute of the Court of Justice  /* SEC/2004/0223 final */  









COMMISSION OPINION under the second paragraph of Article 245 of the EC Treaty on the requests for amendment of Article 29 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice and Article 35 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, presented by the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance in accordance with Article 64 of the Statute of the Court of JusticeThe purpose of the amendments requested by the Court of Justice [1] and the Court of First Instance [2] is to add the new official languages of the enlarged Union to their lists of procedural languages and to reproduce in the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance the provisions of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice governing procedural languages in the direct actions that are now to be within the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance under the distribution of jurisdiction in the process of being adopted by the Council.[1]  Doc. 15167/03 JUR 452 COUR 31.[2]  Doc. 15738/03 JUR 468 COUR 33.These purely technical amendments call for no comments from the Commission.The Commission accordingly agrees to the texts presented by the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0613/04 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission. Burma.
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Myanmar/Burma, change of political system, political prisoner, political rights

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/637

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 2004)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that Erasmus rules on mobility for
students and teachers who undertake part of their studies abroad apply not only to degree courses but also
to Master’s courses.

The Honourable Member refers to the circumstances of Portuguese students studying for a Master’s degree
organised by several European universities, including a university in Portugal. In this case we need to know
whether the university in question is an Erasmus Charter institution, a status conferred on universities
which fulfil the conditions for participating in the Socrates/Erasmus programme. If it is, these students
should be eligible for an Erasmus grant to undertake part of their studies abroad.

In order to be able to give a more precise answer concerning this case, the Commission would need
further information on the universities concerned, and perhaps the title and number of the project.

(2004/C 84 E/0717)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0613/04

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 2004)

Subject: Burma

Would the Commission give details of its position on Burma’s ‘Road Map’ for democracy?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2004)

The Commission has taken note of the roadmap for the transition to democracy presented by Prime
Minister Khin Nyunt in August 2003.

While the Commission appreciates that the Burmese Government has been willing to present its plans for
the
the transition to democracy,
Commission views as key requisites for achieving lasting national reconciliation. The first of
these
requisites is that all legitimate stakeholders, political parties and ethnic nationalities, should be included in
the political process.

there are aspects which are not mentioned in the Roadmap that

This calls for the immediate and unconditional release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and all National League
for Democracy (NLD) members, the release of political prisoners and freedom for all political groups and
parties to exercise their political activities, without preconditions.

(2004/C 84 E/0718)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0614/04

by Harlem Désir (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 2004)

Subject: Closure of the 280-employee DHL site at Blanc Mesnil (France)

At the start of 2004, news was leaked to the 280 employees of the small-package carrier DHL France
(a subsidiary of the European consortium Deutsche Post World Net [DPWN]) that the DHL site at Blanc
Mesnil was to close and that a total of 1 200 jobs at several centres in France would be lost.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0610/04 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission. Irish stud farms.
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Ireland, State aid, control of State aid, equidae, livestock farming, restriction on competition, tax relief

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/635

The national authorities are responsible for selecting and submitting projects for Cohesion Fund part-
financing to us. We examine them using the criteria set in Article 10 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1164/
94 of 16 May 1994 establishing a Cohesion Fund (1). These criteria do not include location. In the Official
Journal references have been given for the decisions for 2000 (2), 2001 (3) and 2002 (4) granting Cohesion
Fund assistance to Spain. Those for 2003 will be published this year.

(1) OJ L 130, 25.5.1994.
(2) OJ C 361, 17.12.2001.
(3) OJ C 126, 28.5.2002.
(4) OJ C 123, 24.5.2003.

(2004/C 84 E/0713)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0592/04

by Helle Thorning-Schmidt (PSE) to the Commission

(26 February 2004)

Subject: Aid to stud farms

What is the Commission’s position on Irish state aid to stud farms? In Ireland, there is no tax on
‘nomination fees’ which a stud farm owner receives when a stallion impregnates a mare. The opposite is
the case in Denmark, which gives Irish stud farms a competitive advantage over the other Member States.

Will the Commission say whether Irish practice in this respect is consistent with EU competition and state
aid rules?

(2004/C 84 E/0714)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0610/04

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 March 2004)

Subject: Irish stud farms

Would the Commission comment on the issue of tax breaks given by the Irish Government to stud farms?
Each year Irish stud farms earn from the ‘nomination fees’ that an owner receives when a stallion
impregnates a mare, and yet pay nothing in tax. This gives them a major advantage over British stud
farms, resulting in lost revenue and jobs in the UK.

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0592/04 and E-0610/04
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 2004)

The Commission has received a formal complaint in this matter and is investigating the issue. Before the
investigation has been finalized, the Commission is not in a position to indicate whether the scheme is
compatible with the EC Treaty.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 385/2004 of 1 March 2004 amending Regulation (EC) No 2341/2003 derogating from Regulation (EC) No 780/2003 as regards a tariff subquota for frozen meat of bovine animals covered by CN code 0202 and products covered by CN code 02062991
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: beef, tariff quota

L 64/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.3.2004

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 385/2004

of 1 March 2004

amending Regulation (EC) No 2341/2003 derogating from Regulation (EC) No 780/2003 as regards
a tariff subquota for frozen meat of bovine animals covered by CN code 0202 and products
covered by CN code 0206 29 91

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17
May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef
and veal (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article
32(1) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

Following a successful appeal of an operator to an inde-
pendent body under Dutch jurisdiction against the deci-
the Dutch authorities not
sion of
to approve that
operator
in accordance with Articles 8 and 9 of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 780/2003 of 7 May
2003 opening and providing for the administration of a
tariff quota for frozen meat of bovine animals covered
by CN code 0202 and products covered by CN code
0206 29 91 (1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004) (2) and,
consequently, to reject his application for an import
licence lodged during the first period (1 to 4 July 2003)
in accordance with the first indent of Article 12(2) of
that Regulation, the Dutch authorities were bound to
approve this operator retrospectively and to issue an
import licence in respect of 33,34071 tonnes of frozen
meat of bovine animals for that period.

(2)

(3)

As a consequence, the quantities available for the period
3 to 7 May 2004 in accordance with Article 1(2)(a)(ii) of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2341/2003 (3) should
be adapted in order to guarantee that the quantity of
34 450 tonnes overall available for the year 2003/2004
as stipulated in the second subparagraph of Article 12(2)
of Regulation (EC) No 780/2003 is not exceeded.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
accordance with the opinion of
the Management
Committee for Beef and Veal,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In Article 1(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 2341/2003, point (ii) is
replaced by the following:

‘(ii) 5 708,65929 tonnes for the period from 3 to 7 May

2004;’.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter
into force on the third day
following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 1 March 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 21. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 1782/2003 (OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 1).

(2) OJ L 114, 8.5.2003, p. 8.

(3) OJ L 346, 31.12.2003, p. 33.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 382/2004 of 1 March 2004 derogating from Regulation (EC) No 1535/2003 as regards the delivery periods for prunes obtained from d'Ente plums for the 2003/04 marketing year
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aid system, dried product, stone fruit

2.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 64/15

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 382/2004

of 1 March 2004

derogating from Regulation (EC) No 1535/2003 as regards the delivery periods for prunes obtained
from d'Ente plums for the 2003/04 marketing year

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/96 of 28
October 1996 on the common organisation of the markets in
processed fruit and vegetable products (1), and in particular
Article 6c(7) thereof,

(3)

(4)

To prevent producers from being penalised by these
circumstances,
the 2003/04
exceptionally and for
marketing year only, a derogation should be made from
the dates laid down in Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No
1535/2003.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
the Management
accordance with the opinion of
Committee for Products Processed from Fruit and Vege-
tables,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1535/
2003 of 29 August 2003 laying down detailed rules for
applying Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/96 as regards
the aid scheme for products processed from fruit and
vegetables (2) provides that aid is to be granted solely on
prunes obtained from d'Ente plums delivered to the
processing industry between 15 August and 15 January.

Exceptional weather conditions affected the French
production regions in the summer of 2003. As a result,
sorting the lots by producers
required more time,
leading to delays in delivery.

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Notwithstanding Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1535/
2003, and for the 2003/04 marketing year only, aid shall
hereby be granted for prunes obtained from dried d'Ente plums
delivered to the processing industry between 15 August 2003
and 31 January 2004.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that
of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 1 March 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 29. Regulation as last amended by
Commission Regulation (EC) No 453/2002 (OJ L 72, 14.3.2002,
p. 9).

(2) OJ L 218, 29.8.2003, p. 14.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 380/2004 of 1 March 2004 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit, stone fruit

2.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 64/11

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 380/2004

of 1 March 2004

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and
vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of
21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the
import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particu-
lar Article 4(1) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the
outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade nego-
tiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the
standard values for imports from third countries,
in
respect of the products and periods stipulated in the
Annex thereto.

(2)

In compliance with the above criteria,
the standard
import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regu-
lation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex
hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 2 March 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 1 March 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 1947/2002 (OJ L 299, 1.11.2002, p. 17).

L 64/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.3.2004

to the Commission Regulation of 1 March 2004 establishing the standard import values for determining the
entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0707 00 05

0709 10 00

0709 90 70

0805 10 10, 0805 10 30, 0805 10 50

0805 50 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
204
212
999

052
068
204
999

220
999

052
204
999

052
204
212
220
624
999

052
400
999

060
388
400
404
508
512
524
528
720
999

060
388
508
512
528
720
999

85,0
48,2
108,5
80,6

145,5
143,9
43,6
111,0

68,9
68,9

93,2
59,3
76,3

39,0
47,5
52,9
40,5
63,6
48,7

56,0
36,4
46,2

35,6
143,9
112,9
107,9
67,7
113,4
79,2
96,0
86,9
93,7

65,7
72,9
69,3
75,3
79,9
149,5
85,4

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2081/2003 (OJ L 313, 28.11.2003, p. 11). Code ‘999’ stands for

‘of other origin’.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 391/2004 of 1 March 2004 amending for the 30th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 467/2001
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Afghanistan, air transport, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, foreign capital, international sanctions, terrorism, trade restriction

L 64/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.3.2004

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 391/2004

of 1 March 2004

amending for the 30th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific
restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden,
the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 467/2001

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27
May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures
directed against certain persons and entities associated with
Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and
repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 prohibiting
the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan,
strengthening the flight ban and extending the freezing of
funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of
Afghanistan (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation
(EC) No 180/2004 (2), and in particular Article 7(1),
first
indent, thereof,

Whereas:

(2)

(3)

On 27 February 2004, the Sanctions Committee of the
United Nations Security Council decided to amend the
list of persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing
of funds and economic resources should apply. Annex I
should therefore be amended accordingly.

In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this
Regulation are effective, this Regulation must enter into
force immediately,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 is hereby amended in
accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.

(1)

Annex I
to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 lists the
persons, groups and entities covered by the freezing of
funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publica-
tion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 1 March 2004.

For the Commission

Christopher PATTEN

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 139, 29.5.2002, p. 9.
(2) OJ L 28, 31.1.2004, p. 15.

2.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 64/37

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 is amended as follows:

The following entry shall be added under the heading ‘Natural persons’.

ANNEX

‘Shaykh Abd-al-Majid AL-ZINDANI (alias (a) Abdelmajid AL-ZINDANI; (b) Shaykh Abd Al-Majid AL-ZINDANI). Date of
birth: 1950. Place of birth: Yemen. Nationality: Yemeni. Passport No: A005487 (Yemen) issued 13 August 1995.’
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0616/04 by Klaus Hänsch (PSE) to the Commission. Allocation of EU resources.
Date: 2004-03-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU action, North Rhine-Westphalia, Structural Funds, aid system, distribution of EU funding, job creation, job preservation

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/957

In the reform plans, the Commission rightly intends to emphasise farming which promotes animal
3.
welfare and is environmentally sound, as an additional condition for payment of subsidies. How will the
Commission ensure that this emphasis does not result in the most subsidies going to large farms which
have greater resources by means of which to apply new and expensive techniques, while smaller farms
which have already opted to adopt organic cultivation methods unaided are placed at a disadvantage?

4.
Small farms in the new Member States which currently operate without new environmentally friendly
techniques are particularly likely to find themselves at a disadvantage as regards the share they receive of
grants to help finance desirable technical innovations. What will the Commission do to prevent this?

In view of the anticipated unintended effects, will the Commission amend elements of its reform

5.
plans?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2004)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2004/C 78 E/1014)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0616/04

by Klaus Hänsch (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 2004)

Subject: Allocation of EU resources

As regards the allocation of EU resources to the district (Kreis) of Mettmann and the cities of Duisburg,
Düsseldorf, Neuss, Remscheid, Solingen and Wuppertal (in North Rhine-Westphalia), will the Commission
give:

1. The total amount and breakdown of EU structural resources received under the individual funds and

the various Community programmes and initiatives?

2. The amount of EU resources allocated since 1999 under other budgetary headings for pilot projects or
(cid:1) as direct aid (cid:1) to universities, research establishments, enterprises and other bodies in the above-
mentioned cities and the district of Mettmann?

3. The number of jobs created or maintained by means of this assistance?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2004)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.