WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3191/97 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. Abuses of a dominant position by UEFA
16. 4. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 117/163 (98/C 117/221) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3191/97 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (16 October 1997) Subject: Abuses of a dominant position by UEFA Can the Commission confirm that it is studying carefully a complaint from the Football League that the decision by UEFA to deny the winners of the Coca-Cola Cup entry into European cup competitions amounts to an áabuse of a dominant positioní under Articles 85 and 86? Is the Commission aware that should UEFA be allowed to pursue this course of action the knock-on effect for smaller football clubs could be disastrous, as sponsorship and television backing desert the competition? Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (31 October 1997) Yes, the Commission is investigating a complaint lodged by the football league against the Union of european football associations (UEFA) in order to assess the compatibility of UEFAís actions with the Community competition rules. The Commission has already informed the football league accordingly. This assessment must be made in full knowledge of the facts, including those alleged in the second part of the Honourable Memberís question, in their correct economic context and taking into account the specific nature of the sector concerned. The investigation of complaints must be undertaken under the established procedures › in this case Council Regulation (EEC) No 17/62 implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty (1). (1) OJ 13, 21. 2. 1962. (98/C 117/222) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3206/97 by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission (16 October 1997) Subject: Rehabilitation aid for torture victims 1. Can the Commission confirm that there have been delays in the payment of rehabilitation aid for torture victims despite the fact that the European Parliament created a special budget line, B7-7070, in l997 making ECU 6 million available for precisely that purpose? 2. How many of those eligible for such aid actually received it in 1997, and why have some of them not yet done so? 3. Is the Commission aware that the average time for processing applications increased from 3 months in 1994 to 8 months in 1996 and could well be as much as 10 months this year? 4. What does the Commission intend to do to resolve these problems and how will it prevent any recurrence in 1998? Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (17 November 1997) 1. The Commission can confirm that, in order to provide, in line with the wishes of the Parliament, greater transparency in the administration of its grants programmes, there have been delays in the payment of grants to organisations working to rehabilitate torture victims