WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2672/98 by Gerhard HAGER to the Council. Assessment of transposition of the acquis communautaire in the applicant countries
C 135/90 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 14. 5. 1999 The precise definition of an ‘illegal immigrant’ has not yet been determined. The Commission notes, 4. however, that there is general agreement that the purpose of fingerprinting illegal immigrants is to facilitate the implementation of the Dublin Convention. The relevant articles of the Dublin Convention are Article 6 and, depending on the outcome of discussions in the Council, Article 10. (1999/C 135/105) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2672/98 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Council (1 September 1998) Subject: Assessment of transposition of the acquis communautaire in the applicant countries A British Home Office Minister has stated that the third pillar acquis has already been listed in detail in anticipation of enlargement. The lists in question are to be used to gauge the progress of the accession negotiations and transposition of the acquis. A common assessment procedure has been laid down for that purpose, and an expert working party of Member State representatives set up to monitor the transposition. 1. What is the basis and underlying criteria of the assessment procedure? 2. Will the public be able to keep track of the assessment procedure? What specific form does the procedure take? For whom will the expert working party draw up its assessments, and will the public be allowed to 3. inspect them? 4. Who represents Austria in the expert working party? Reply (14 December 1998) 1. The basis of the assessment procedure is the Joint Action establishing a mechanism for collective evaluation of the enactment, application and effective implementation by the applicant countries of the acquis of the European Union in the field of Justice and Home Affairs (1) approved by the Justice and Home Affairs Council at its meeting on 28 and 29 May 1998. On 10 June 1998 the Permanent Representatives Committee set up the expert group referred to in Article 2 of that Joint Action. The first meeting of this Collective Evaluation Working Group took place in Brussels, on 30 September 1998. Since then country-by-country evaluations have been carried out on a regular basis. 2. The evaluation procedure involves analysing information relating to the effective implementation by the candidate countries of the acquis of the Union. The information examined by the Evaluation Working Group is essentially based on Member States’ experience of working with the candidate countries, on the reports from Commission delegations in these countries and the information available to the Commission within the framework of the overall process of accession (including reports concerning the PHARE programme) together with reports from the Council of Europe or from any other source deemed to be relevant. The Commission should take account of the evaluations in its proposals for significant adjustment of the priorities and objectives of the accession partnerships. 3. The Collective Evaluation Working Group will report to the Council on the progress and results of the evaluations through Coreper and in close cooperation with the K. 4 Committee and with the other Council bodies involved in the enlargement process. 4. It is the responsibility of each Member State to designate its representative to the Group. (1) OJ L 191, 7. 7. 1998, p. 8