Background Information on Parliamentary Reports

What is a Report? What is an Opinion?

12th December 2001

Watson Report on a Recommendation to the Council on Security at meetings of the European Council and other comparable events

GENERAL FRAMEWORK
The European institutions have the right to ascertain whether fundamental rights and other principles laid down in Article 6.1 of the Treaty of the EU have been respected. It must be recalled that Article 7 of the Treaty has recently been strengthened by the Treaty of Nice, which instructs the European institutions to monitor the protection of fundamental rights even in the case of a risk of violation. In carrying out this surveillance, institutions must be guided by the Charter of Fundamental Rights. EU Institutions have to avoid the risk of breaking the mutual confidence between institutions and citizens.

THE REPORT
The report tabled by Mr Watson and adopted by the Parliament attempts to answer two main questions :
1) how to improve political dialogue while protecting fundamental rights of European citizens to demonstrate peacefully and even to protest ;
2) how to prevent or punish criminal behaviour by demonstrators and ensure that reactions by police and security services are not disproportionate.

The main recommendations included in the report are the following:

1) Citizens must enjoy the right to data protection in accordance with Article 8 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights;
2) The blocking of borders or denying the right to cross borders to individuals or groups of people who seek to participate peacefully in legitimate demonstrations should be avoided;
3) A common definition of « dangerous person » and dangerous behaviour should be adopted;
4) A new kind of « black list » or new specialised database between Member States other than the SIS must be prohibited and it must be ensured that the right to rectify information by the individuals concerned is effective;
5) Citizens' rights to safety as outlined in Article 29 of TEU must be reinforced, by combating in an effective way at the European level violent groups (black blok) or criminal organisations which pursue urban violence in EU territory;
6) The disproportionate use of force must be avoided;
7) Any discrimination between nationals and EU citizens must be avoided in the case of arrest or trial.

Press Briefing on the Report

Following the disorder and violence which erupted during anti-globalisation demonstrations at the Nice, Gothenburg and Genoa Summits, Graham WATSON (ELDR, South West) will be making a recommendation, relating to future European Council meetings and similar events.

Reporting for the Committee for Citizen's Rights, Mr Watson states that based on the recent events, there is a need to "guarantee a high level of reciprocal confidence between citizens and their institutions".

The Committee believes this can be achieved through political dialogue, in which the EU addresses the concerns which globalisation is giving rise to in our societies. It suggests that such dialogue needs to be structured and calls on the Commission to establish a working group of Commissioners with the task of preparing a White Paper on the subject, with a view to future negotiations on the Millenium Round at Doha and at the next World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in September 2002.

Author of the report, to be presented before the House, Mr Watson is calling for the establishment of a permanent Forum on Globalisation with European and national parliament representatives. With regard to the protection of fundamental rights and the promotion of cooperation between Member States, he stresses that the universal right of dissent is a correlate of the freedoms of thought, religion, expression, information, assembly and association. The draft recommendation says that "the use of violence to express a political or other opinion is reprehensible in a European Union, destined to become an area of freedom, security and justice...".

The committee takes the view that "dialogue, with civil society, must be preserved and improved, respecting the different actors." In this context, it states that citizens must enjoy the right to express their opinions freely and to assemble peacefully. However, demonstrations must take place in conditions, which do not pose a threat to other citizen's security or property.

Addressing the Member States, the committee emphasises the need for dialogue with the organisers of public demonstrations and the need to avoid any discrimination between nationals and citizens of the other Member States. In addition, citizens must also have the right of data protection.

As far as the institutions are concerned, there is a need, it says, to establish a European concept of "law and order" to avoid inconsistencies and an overlap between European and national institutions, between Schengen and the Europol Conventions and between measures governing cooperation between national law and police services.

The committee proposes specific recommendations to ensure better protection to fundamental rights, including agreement on a common definition of 'dangerous person' and dangerous behaviour, the avoidance of, any kind of 'black list' or the disproportionate use of force - even when controlling lawbreakers.

11th December

The Ombudsman's Special Report on Complaint 713/98 ("Bavarian Lager")

(Rapporteur: Jean Lambert. Adopted in Parliament 11th December 2001)

The immediate issue at stake in the report is whether or not a person who had made a complaint against the UK to the Commission was entitled to receive the names of representatives of a trade association who had participated in a meeting organised by the Commission on the subject of the complaint (the compatibility of the UK "Guest Beer Provision" with the internal market).

Secondly, and more generally, the report is about whether Parliament gives its support to the Ombudsman's interpretation of the Data Protection Directive (95/46) or supports that of the Commission.

Thirdly, the report deals with the question of the relation between the right to information and data protection and, thus, with the scope, interpretation and "construction" of fundamental rights. The Committee has heard the Ombudsman and Commissioner Bolkestein on the matter.

The Ombudsman considers that the Commission wrongly applies the Data Protection Directive to information which concerns public decision making, arguing that the directive (and data protection in general) has as its objective and purpose to defend the integrity and private life of individuals and to ensure that "sensitive" information is not disclosed which could result in discrimination (cf. Article 13 of the EC Treaty).

The Commission argues that any time a name occurs, for instance, in a document, they have the right (and "duty") to balance the interest in data protection against the interest in disclosure of information.

The Data Protection Working Party, set up on the basis of the directive, has issued an opinion on the issue, which, although it agrees with the Ombudsman that disclosure could be justified in the concrete contested case, nevertheless supports the Commission's argument regarding the case-by-case balancing.

Jean's report considers that before "balancing" one fundamental right against another, one needs to verify whether or not the respective rights (both) are applicable to the situation in question. The report, thus, follows the Ombudsman's judgement in respect to the a priori non-applicability of data protection to "non-sensitive" information about persons when participating in a professional capacity in public affairs.

The committee had followed the rapporteur and adopted the report unanimously.

Public Participation in Environmental Planning (vote 23/10/01)

Outcome of the vote
Parliament wants the public to have more say over planning permission decisions on schemes affecting the environment, for example the construction of a new airport terminal, and to be allowed a role in environmental policy-making. MEPs voted today 500 votes to 7, with 13 abstentions, to endorse a Commission proposal to bring Community legislation into line with the Aarhus Convention, an international agreement on public participation in environmental decision-making, but say the Commission must further emphasize the public's rights to be informed, consulted and involved in planning decisions and must include some aspects of the Convention that it has left out of the draft directive. The amendments approved are designed to allow members of the public to take part in drawing up environmental policies as well as plans and programmes. Parliament also wants to ensure that national defence projects are not automatically excluded from the legislation and, to prevent abuse of the review procedure allow he public to challenge decisions. There is therefore a stipulation that the public concerned must have 'a sufficient interest in' or 'claim the impairment of a right' to have access to the review procedure.

What is a Report? What is an Opinion?

Information and Consultation of Workers (vote 23/10/01)

Background: Parliament voted on amendments designed to strengthen Council's common position on a proposal relating to worker consultation. The report stresses that employees must be consulted and informed at the planning stage, before decisions are taken. The information given must contain all relevant facts, including details of the company's financial situation and strategic plans. If a decision has an adverse effect on employees, such as large scale redundancies or the closure of an establishment, the final decision should be postponed so that consultations can continue with a view to avoiding or mitigating these consequences. MEPs also want the Member States to provide for more stringent sanctions in cases of serious breaches by employers of the directive. The report points out that social partners may not conclude agreements below the minimum standards laid down in the framework directive. They say the rights of employees' representatives should be specified and their legal protection strengthened. It also suggests that Member States should take measures to prevent companies from evading the thresholds by breaking up companies into smaller units. In addition, MEPs invite Member States and the two sides of industry to examine ways to implement the general principles of the directive in the public sector. The report rejects Council's agreement to grant transition periods for those Member States which do not have a general system of information and consultation of employees. MEPs also want to speed up the transposition of the directive by limiting the period to two years instead of three years proposed by the Council.

What is a Report? What is an Opinion?

Report on Possible Toxic Effects of Nuclear reprocessing plants

Background: The report was commissioned originally in response to a Petition received by the Parliament's Petitions Committee expressing concerns about radioactive discharges from nuclear reprocessing plants at Sellafield in the UK and La Hague in France, and their possible adverse health effects. It concludes that, on balance, the Petitioner's concerns over radioactive discharges from Sellafield and La Hague are justified. The report presents evidence and data on:

- radioactive discharges from the Sellafield and La Hague sites;
- resulting nuclide concentrations in environmental media including foodstuffs;
- radiation doses from nuclide discharges to critical groups near the sites;
- adverse health effects near the two sites;
- resulting collective doses from nuclide discharges.

The report also examines a number of current issues in radiobiology concerning health effects from exposure to ionising radiation, in particular genetic and in utero effects. In addition, in accordance with contract specifications, the report examines other major factors that might influence future decision-making on reprocessing. It provides information on the legal framework, the operational history of the plants and the economic case for reprocessing compared with available alternatives for spent nuclear fuel management. The report also makes policy-related recommendations that take into account current knowledge and uncertainties in risk assessment and the availability of alternatives to reprocessing in spent fuel management.