do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 531/2004 of 22 March 2004 determining the extent to which applications lodged in March 2004 for import licences for certain pigmeat products under the regime provided for by the Agreement concluded by the Community with Slovenia can be accepted
Date: 2004-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Slovenia, agreement (EU), import licence, pigmeat

23.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 85/15

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 531/2004

of 22 March 2004

determining the extent to which applications lodged in March 2004 for import licences for certain
pigmeat products under the regime provided for by the Agreement concluded by the Community
with Slovenia can be accepted

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 571/97 of
26 March 1997 laying down detailed rules for the application
in the pigmeat sector of the arrangements provided for in the
Interim Agreement between the Community and Slovenia (1),
and in particular Article 4(4) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

The applications for import
licences lodged for the
second quarter of 2004 are for quantities less than the
quantities available and can therefore be met in full.

It is appropriate to draw the attention of operators to
the fact that licences may only be used for products
which comply with all veterinary rules currently in force
in the Community,

Article 1

1.
Applications for import licences for the period 1 April to
30 June 2004 submitted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 571/
97 shall be met as referred to in the Annex.

Licences may only be used for products which comply

2.
with all veterinary rules currently in force in the Community.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 April 2004.

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

Done at Brussels, 22 March 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 85, 27.3.1997, p. 56. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 1935/2003 (OJ L 285, 1.11.2003, p. 20).

L 85/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.3.2004

ANNEX

Group No

Percentage of acceptance of import licences
submitted for the period 1 April to 30 June 2004

23

24

25

26

SL

100,00

100,00

100,00

100,00

100,00
Commission Regulation (EC) No 530/2004 of 22 March 2004 determining the extent to which applications lodged in March 2004 for import licences under the regime provided for by tariff quotas for certain products in the pigmeat sector for the period 1 to 30 April 2004 can be accepted
Date: 2004-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: import licence, pigmeat, tariff quota

23.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 85/13

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 530/2004

of 22 March 2004

determining the extent to which applications lodged in March 2004 for import licences under the
regime provided for by tariff quotas for certain products in the pigmeat sector for the period 1 to
30 April 2004 can be accepted

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1458/2003
of 18 August 2003 opening and providing for the administra-
tion of
tariff quotas for certain products in the pigmeat
sector (1), and in particular Article 5(6) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

licences lodged for the
The applications for import
period 1 to 30 April 2004 are for quantities less than
the quantities available and can therefore be met in full.

The surplus to be added to the quantity available for the
following period should be determined,

Article 1

1.
Applications for import licences for the period 1 to 30
April 2004 submitted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1458/
2003 shall be met as referred to in Annex I.

For the period 1 May to 30 June 2004, applications may
to Regulation (EC) No 1458/2003 for

2.
be lodged pursuant
import licences for a total quantity as referred to in Annex II.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 April 2004.

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

Done at Brussels, 22 March 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 208, 19.8.2003, p. 3.

L 85/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.3.2004

ANNEX I

Percentage of acceptance
of import licences submitted
for the period
1 to 30 April 2004

100

100

100

100

100

100

ANNEX II

(t)

Total quantity available
for the period
1 May to 30 June 2004

29 517,5

3 487,8

2 846,0

6 100,0

15 000,0

5 499,0

Group No

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

Group No

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7
Commission Regulation (EC) No 532/2004 of 22 March 2004 concerning applications for export licences for rice and broken rice with advance fixing of the refund
Date: 2004-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: export licence, export refund, rice

23.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 85/17

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 532/2004

of 22 March 2004

concerning applications for export licences for rice and broken rice with advance fixing of the
refund

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(2)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22
December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in
rice (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1342/2003
of 28 July 2003,
laying down special detailed rules for the
application of the system of import and export licences for
cereals and rice (2), and in particular the second subparagraph
of Article 8(3) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1342/2003 provides,
where this paragraph is specifically referred to when an
export refund is fixed, for an interval of three working
days between the day of submission of applications and
the granting of export licences with advance fixing of
the refund and provides that the Commission is to fix a
uniform percentage reduction in the quantities if appli-
cations for export licences exceed the quantities which
may be exported. Commission Regulation (EC) No 343/
2004 (3) fixes refunds under the procedure provided for
in the abovementioned paragraph for 3 000 tonnes for
all the destinations R02 and R03 defined in the Annex
to that Regulation.

For all the destinations R02 and R03, quantities applied
for on 19 March 2004 are in excess of the available
quantity. A percentage reduction should therefore be
fixed for export licence applications submitted on 19
March 2004.

(3)

In view of its purpose, this Regulation should take effect
from the day of its publication in the Official Journal,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For all the destinations R02 and R03 defined in the Annex to
Regulation (EC) No 343/2004, applications for export licences
for rice and broken rice with advance fixing of the refund
submitted pursuant to that Regulation on 19 March 2004 shall
give rise to the issue of licences for the quantities applied for to
which a percentage reduction of 2,03 % has been applied.

Article 2

For all the destinations R02 and R03 defined in the Annex to
Regulation (EC) No 343/2004, applications for export licences
for rice and broken rice submitted from 20 March 2004 shall
not give rise to the issue of export licences pursuant to that
Regulation.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 23 March 2004.

Article 3

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

Done at Brussels, 22 March 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 329, 30.12.1995, p. 18. Regulation as last amended by
Commission Regulation (EC) No 411/2002 (OJ L 62, 5.3.2002, p.
27).

(2) OJ L 189, 29.7.2003, p. 12.
(3) OJ L 5, 9.1.2004, p. 69.
2004/362/EC: Decision No 1/2004 of the European Union-Mexico Joint Committee of 22 March 2004 relating to Annex III to Decision No 2/2000 of the EU-Mexico Joint Council of 23 March 2000, concerning the definition of the concept of "originating products" and methods of administrative cooperation
Date: 2004-03-22
Institutions: EU–Mexico Joint Committee
Subjects: Mexico, administrative cooperation, agreement (EU), originating product

L 113/60

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.4.2004

DECISION No 1/2004 OF THE EUROPEAN UNION-MEXICO JOINT COMMITTEE

of 22 March 2004

relating to Annex III to Decision No 2/2000 of the EU-Mexico Joint Council of 23 March 2000,
concerning the definition of the concept of ‘originating products’ and methods of administrative
cooperation

(2004/362/EC)

THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to Decision No 2/2000 of the EU-Mexico Joint Council of 23 March 2000 (hereinafter Deci-
sion No 2/2000), and in particular Notes 2 and 3 of Appendix II(a) to Annex III and Joint Declaration V
thereto;

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

Annex III to Decision No 2/2000, concerning the definition of the concept of ‘originating products’
and methods of administrative cooperation sets out the rules of origin for the products originating
in the territory of the Parties to the Agreement.

According to Joint Declaration V, the Joint Committee shall review the necessity to extend beyond
30 June 2003 the rules of origin established in Notes 2 and 3 of Appendix II(a) to Annex III, where
the economic conditions which formed the basis for establishing the rule set out in those Notes
continue.

In accordance with the analysis of the relevant economic conditions undertaken according to Joint
Declaration V, it is considered appropriate to extend on a temporarily basis the application of the
origin rules established in Notes 2 and 3 of Appendix II(a) to Annex III,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The origin rules set out in Notes 2 and 3 of Appendix II(a) to Annex III to Decision No 2/2000, shall be
applied until 30 June 2006 instead of the origin rules set out in Appendix II to Annex III to Decision No
2/2000.

This Decision shall enter into force on 1 July 2003.

Article 2

Done at Brussels, 22 March 2004.

For the Joint Committee

Tomás DUPLÁ DEL MORAL
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0865/04 by Miet Smet (PPE-DE) to the Commission. European subsidies paid to the Flemish community.
Date: 2004-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Flemish Community, distribution of EU funding, fraud against the EU

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/453

transposition.
giving a time limit of
On 9 September 2003 the Commission initiated proceedings against Spain before the Court of Justice
(case C-384/03). There is no ruling yet, but it is expected in 6 to 12 months.

two months for adopting all necessary national measures of

Unfortunately infringement proceedings tend to take a long time to reach a decision. The Commission
hopes that Spain will now fulfil its responsibility under the Directive as quickly as possible, in order to
avoid further proceedings before the Court of Justice.

(2004/C 84 E/0528)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0865/04

by Miet Smet (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 March 2004)

Subject: European subsidies paid to the Flemish community

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. What percentage of all EU subsidies were received each year by the Flemish community in Belgium

from 1999 to 2003?

2. How much did the Flemish community receive (in euro) over the same period for:

(cid:1) agriculture;

(cid:1) structural funds, by objective and by Community initiative?

3. What amounts (in euro) did the European Union pay to the Flemish community over the same period

for:

(cid:1) research and technological development (framework programmes);

(cid:1) trans-European networks;

(cid:1) education, youth;

(cid:1) others?

4. What were the annual amounts over the period 1999 to 2003 of the subsidies paid:

(cid:1) through official (public) bodies (Flemish community, provinces and so on);

(cid:1) private operators (non-profit-making organisations, universities or colleges of higher education)?

5. What frauds or irregularities in the subsidies were reported and have any recoveries of subsidies been

made in the above areas?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 2004)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0869/04 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. ECHO and Chechnya.
Date: 2004-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: ECHO, Russia, administration of the Institutions, humanitarian aid, non-governmental organisation

C 84 E/898

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

The European Court of Auditors has audited the current management and control systems for Structural
Funds set up by the Flemish Community twice,
in 2002 and 2003, for the years 2001 and 2002
respectively within the framework of the Statement of Assurance. The Honourable Member is referred to
the Court’s annual reports for 2001 and 2002 (1).

(1) OJ C 295, 28.11.2002 and OJ C 286, 28.11.2003.

(2004/C 84 E/0992)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0869/04

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 March 2004)

Subject: ECHO and Chechnya

Many aid organisations which wish to provide humanitarian aid to people in the Chechnya region in
Russia complain that the EU’s humanitarian aid office ECHO does not process their aid applications
sufficiently quickly and efficiently and that accordingly aid does not reach its destination. What criteria
does ECHO apply to aid to Chechnya, and can the Commission accelerate the processing of aid
applications from church and other organisations which provide humanitarian aid?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

The Commission is not aware that many aid organisations which wish to provide humanitarian aid to
people in Chechnya complain that the EU’s Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO) does not process their aid
applications sufficiently quickly and efficiently.

ECHO, which is in charge of humanitarian aid to the Northern Caucasus, has never received such
complaints. The Office is working with quick procedures which allow for a rapid signature of grant
agreements and disbursement of funds.

The Commission adopts, in general, two funding decisions every year for the victims of the Chechnya
conflict. These decisions are based on previous discussions with potential partners who are asked to submit
concept papers where they explain which operations they would like to see funded by ECHO. ECHO then
decides to retain a certain number of these on the basis of the needs, the experience of the non
governmental organisation (NGO) and the coherence with ECHO’s strategy.

Once the decision has been adopted, and approximately one month before the start of the operation,
ECHO asks the partner to submit a proposal. The proposal is then discussed in detail and a contract is
signed in the following weeks. There is therefore no possibility to accelerate the processing of applications,
which is already very short.

As for the destination of the aid, there are very strict mechanisms put in place by ECHO’s partners in order
to ensure that
the aid reaches the intended beneficiaries. Partners work on the basis of a list of
beneficiaries, which is established after an assessment of the households’ economy and needs. The aid is
delivered directly to these beneficiaries, without an intermediary, which ensures that the people who are
on the lists do receive what they are entitled to.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0889/04 by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Elections in Iran.
Date: 2004-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Iran, organisation of elections

C 88 E/548

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

In the Communication it is stated that:

A sale of land and buildings following a sufficiently well-publicised, open and unconditional bidding
procedure, comparable to an auction, accepting the best or only bid is by definition at market value
and consequently does not contain State aid.

and

If public authorities intend not to use the procedure described … [above], an independent evaluation
should be carried out by one or more independent asset valuers prior to the sale negotiations in order
to establish the market value on the basis of generally accepted market indicators and valuation
standards. The market price thus established is the minimum purchase price that can be agreed
without granting State aid.

The above principles might also be relevant in assessing sales of other types of public assets.

In view of the information provided, the Commission intends to address a letter to the Italian authorities
requesting information, in order to gather further elements, both in relation to other aspects of the case,
and to assess the possible presence of State aid.

(1) OJ C 209, 10.7.1997.

(2004/C 88 E/0558)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0889/04

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(22 March 2004)

Subject: Elections in Iran

The recent elections in Iran were a travesty of democracy. Most of the independent candidates were
disqualified by the religious council, demonstrating once again that
is all-powerful. Despite this
intervention, the elections nonetheless went ahead. This shows that the so-called reformists in Iran have
achieved nothing.

it

The European Commission has defended dialogue with Iran as a means of promoting human rights and
democracy.

What conclusions does the Commission draw from recent events as far as dialogue with the Iranian
authorities is concerned?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2004)

In its February 2004 conclusions, the Council expressed its deep regret and disappointment that large
numbers of candidates were discriminated against in their prevention from standing in the 20 February
2004 parliamentary elections in Iran. The Council expressed the hope that Iran would return to the path
of reform and democratisation.

The Commission shares the above sentiment and believes that the flawed elections had a negative impact
on the overall climate in the EU’s relations with Iran. Further reflection and analysis is needed to calibrate
the precise approach towards Iran against the background of this setback in the democratic process. The
Commission nevertheless continues to believe that a re-establishment of the Comprehensive Dialogue is in
the EU’s interest. It notes, inter alia, that the specific Human Rights dialogue launched in December 2002
has yielded some small yet tangible results and believes that (cid:1) despite its difficulties (cid:1) it should be given a
further opportunity.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0880/04 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003, Article 5.
Date: 2004-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Azores, Canary Islands, Madeira, application of EU law, fishing regulations, fishing rights, fishing vessel

C 84 E/900

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

(2004/C 84 E/0994)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0880/04

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(22 March 2004)

Subject: Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003, Article 5

There is an ambiguity in the text of Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 (1):

(cid:1) does this article come into effect immediately, or does the Commission first have to adopt the

implementing rules;

(cid:1) if the Member States can restrict ‘fishing to vessels registered in the ports of those islands’, how are the

Member States going to confirm that they wish to do so;

(cid:1) what is the definition, and who does the defining, of traditional fishing carried out by non-Azores

vessels allowed within the 1 000 mile limit;

(cid:1) how, and in what direction, are these existing restrictions to be reviewed in the next three years?

(1) OJ L 289, 7.11.2003, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 2004)

The Commission’s position on the questions raised by the Honourable Member is as follows:

(cid:1) In accordance with Article 16 thereof, Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 (1) entered into force on the
i.e. on

the European Union,

Journal of

seventh day following its publication in the Official
14 November 2003.

It follows that Article 5 entered into force on that date, since there is no stipulation to the contrary
regarding that provision in the body of the Regulation.

(cid:1) As follows from the previous point, that Article’s entry into force was determined by the provision

referred to (Article 16), independently of any adoption of implementing rules.

(cid:1) The restriction of fishing activity in the area defined in that provision is to be effected in accordance
with the legislation of each Member State concerned. Within the framework of cooperation between
the Commission and the Member States, the latter are to provide the Commission with all the
information permitting identification of the conditions for that Article’s proper implementation.

(cid:1) The identification of Community vessels that

traditionally fish in those waters will be made,
if necessary, by means of the implementing rules for that provision, following consultation of the
interested parties.

(cid:1) It is not possible at this stage to foresee the requirements for reviewing the current system of
restriction. In any case, an evaluation of the framework created by that Article and of its impact will
be carried out as part of the report provided for in paragraph 2 of that provision.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 of 4 November 2003 on the management of the fishing effort relating to
certain Community fishing areas and resources and modifying Regulation (EC) No 2847/93 and repealing
Regulations (EC) No 685/95 and (EC) No 2027/95.