WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1429/97 by Marco FORMENTINI to the Commission. Commission inquiries regarding the project for the construction of new premises for La Scala, Milan
C 45/30 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 10. 2. 98 The Commission therefore does not consider the preparation and adoption of a Directive to be the appropriate response to the real problems encountered. (1) OJ L 384, 31. 12. 1986. (2) OJ L 40, 11. 2. 1989. (3) OJ L 393, 30. 12. 1989. (98/C 45/36) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1429/97 by Marco Formentini (NI) to the Commission (16 April 1997) Subject: Commission inquiries regarding the project for the construction of new premises for La Scala, Milan On 17 March 1997, in a letter signed by Mr Mogg of DG XV, the Commission asked the Italian Government for clarification regarding the above scheme, which had formed the subject of agreements between Milan City Council, the Board of La Scala and private entities. The Commissionís attention had been drawn to the matter by complaints about the project which various professional organizations in Milan had submitted after having made unsuccessful attempts to block the councilís decision by appealing first to the supervisory body, then the Administrative Tribunal of the Lombardy Region and the Council of State. All these bodies had ruled that the councilís decision fully complied with both Italian law and Community law and rejected the application for suspension of the project. On the basis of the above complaints alone › and thus without taking any account of the views expressed by the relevant regional and national authorities › the Commission decided to ask for clarification. The details provided by the parties concerned, including Milan City Council, demonstrated that the arguments put forward by the professional associations were groundless. There is nothing particularly unusual about the above situation, except for the unwarranted zeal shown by the Commission. I would thus ask the Commission, which must realize that, owing to the extreme complexity of the project, a number of stages of which have already been completed, it is essential to meet the appointed deadlines, why it felt it necessary to contact the Italian authorities with a view to determining whether all further activity should be suspended? How does it justify interfering in such a disruptive manner in the affairs of a free city of the European Union before even being in possession of all the facts? Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (2 June 1997) By the letter to which the Honourable Member refers, the Commission sought clarification from the Italian authorities of the procedure followed in the case of the Scala 2001 project since the complaints to the Commission, which were supported by official documentation, had brought to light certain aspects of the procedure that gave rise to doubts as to their conformity with Community legislation on public procurement. In accordance with its obligations under Article 155 of the Treaty, the Commission has asked the Italian Government to provide the clarification necessary to verify that the complaints are well founded. As regards the request to intervene in the procedure that it addressed to the Italian Government, the Commission would point out that, in accordance with its normal practice in such cases and with the relevant case-law of the Court of Justice (see in particular the Order of the President of the Court of Justice of 22 April 1994 in Case C-87/94), it requested the Italian authorities to refrain from taking any measure that might prejudice compliance with Community law. Such a request is designed to draw the attention of the authorities of a Member State to the risks attaching to the adoption of further measures that could interfere with the rights of individuals in the event of an infringement of Community law being subsequently discovered. In the aforementioned case-law, the Court emphasized that the Commission must act in a manner such that the awarding authority is made aware that it is pursuing the procedure in question at its own risk