WRITTEN QUESTION E-0780/04 by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission. Violation of religious freedom in the United Kingdom.
Date: 2004-03-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, United Kingdom, application of EU law, competence of the Member States, freedom of religious beliefs, public order, religious sect, restriction of liberty

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/877

The compensation measures presented by the Spanish authorities in relation to La Breña II reservoir
project are substantial and should outweigh any marginal impacts which may occur. To compensate for
the loss of the Iberian lynx habitat, it is proposed to expropriate an area of 2 134 hectares (ha) and actively
manage favouring the lynx. The Iberian lynx compensatory measures not only focus on habitat
conservation and prey species re-introduction; but also target the problems of interconnectivity between
two Iberian lynx subpopulations. For this reason, special measures to improve ecological corridors have
been designed. Moreover, the compensation package not only focuses on the Iberian lynx, but on other
key species present in the site in order to guarantee the overall coherence of the site.

The proposed compensation measures were drawn up by the promoter with the support of key scientific
institutions such as the Biological Research Station (Estación Biológica Doñana) and the Department of
Ecology, University of Córdoba. Those compensatory measures have been assessed by the Regional
Ministry of Environment of the Government of Andalusia and the Spanish Ministry of Environment
through the ‘Iberian Lynx Expert Group’. Both institutions have made a favourable assessment.

The reservoir is located in the south-east of the Natura 2000 site overlapping the site’s limits. This
situation could be qualified as peripheral
in relation to the Natura 2000 site. It will affect 625 ha,
representing about 1,05 % of 60 000 ha of the site.

The Commission will make available the list of compensation measures, as well as its opinion on this case
and other available environmental information related to this project, in accordance with Articles 4(4) and
4(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding
public access to Parliament, Council and Commission documents (2).

The Commission considers that given the probable effects of the construction of the La Breña II reservoir
on the priority species Iberian lynx and the species in Annex I of the Birds Directive (3), and the likely
results from the planned compensatory measures contained in the Compensatory Measures Project
prepared by the competent authority, it can be concluded that in the long-term, the overall coherence of
the Natura 2000 network will not be significantly affected.

The Commission expects to receive yearly monitoring reports on the implementation of the project from
the Spanish Government.

(1) Written reply, 9.3.2003.
(2) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001.
(3) Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2004/C 84 E/0971)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0780/04

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(11 March 2004)

Subject: Violation of religious freedom in the United Kingdom

In view of the following:

(cid:1) Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

(cid:1) Articles 10 and 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU;

(cid:1) Article 6 of the EU Treaty;

(cid:1) the International Religious Freedom Report for 2003 issued by the US Department of State;

C 84 E/878

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

and the fact that:

(cid:1) the Unification Church has tried to have the ban on its leader, the Reverend Sun Myung Moon,

visiting the United Kingdom lifted;

(cid:1) on 15 May the Reverend Moon was sent a letter telling him that he should not attempt to enter the
country on the grounds that his ‘presence there would not be conducive to the public good for
reasons of public order’.

Can the Commission say whether it is aware of these facts?

Whether it considers the actions described as an infringement of the fundamental rights guaranteed in
Articles 10 and 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and that they therefore affect the
essence of the rights, which are explicitly protected by Article 52 of the Charter?

Whether it also considers that these actions are contrary to Article 6 of the EU Treaty and therefore the
principles common to all the Member States regarding respect for human and fundamental rights?

How it intends to dissuade the United Kingdom from carrying out such actions against religious freedom?

If it does not explicitly condemn these actions, on what legal principles it bases its attitude?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(22 April 2004)

The matters raised by the Honourable Member have not been referred to the Commission.

With regard to the UK authorities’ decision to refuse entry to the leader of the Unification Church,
Mr Moon, the Commission would point out that, under the EC Treaty, each Member State is responsible
for maintaining public order and ensuring internal security and may, on that basis, decide to refuse
permission to third-country nationals to enter and stay in the country.

Furthermore, the Commission is empowered to intervene in respect of violations of fundamental rights,
including religious freedom, only where such violations take place within the framework of Community
law and its implementation, and on condition that Mr Moon is not a citizen of a Member State other than
the United Kingdom.

Lastly, if an individual believes that his fundamental rights have been violated, he can institute proceedings
in the European Court of Human Rights after exhausting all domestic legal remedies.

(2004/C 84 E/0972)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0781/04

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 March 2004)

Subject: Liberalisation of the electricity market (cid:1) licences for river diversions

The existence of varying systems aggravates imbalances, and this results in there being considerable
competitive pressure on Member States which have already set
licences. An
asymmetric market would not only render such competitive pressure intolerable, but could also jeopardise
part of the liberalisation of the electricity market. It would be interesting to know whether corrective
measures and interventions are currently being planned in this connection.

the exact duration of

Can the Commission provide information on how the licence and approval systems are regulated in the
various EU Member States and in the new accession countries?