WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3696/98 by Glenys KINNOCK Diamond imports from Angola
C 289/72 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 11. 10. 1999 Within the framework of its proposal for a directive on copyright in the information society of 10 December 1997 (4), the Commission proposed the harmonisation of the right of reproduction, in particular with a view to the exploitation of works on the information society networks and the accompanying exceptions. As regards reprography, the proposed harmonisation is limited. In accordance with the provision which appears in Article 5-2a), the Member States have the authorization to uphold or to introduce an exception for reprographic reproductions, whether there is a system of remuneration for proprietors of rights or not. Those Member States which do not provide for such an exception are not, nevertheless, obliged to introduce one. In its opinion (first reading), several committees of the Parliament which were consulted proposed amendments to the area of reprography. On the basis of the final opinion of Parliament, which is expected shortly, the Commission will opt for the solution most suited to the internal market, whilst at the same time taking into account the need to respect the balance between the rights of the holders and the interests of the users. Under these conditions, the Italian legislation cannot be classed as contradictory to Community legislation insofar as at present there is no Community law on reprography. The national legislator has a considerable amount of room for manoeuvre in defining the scope of application and the conditions for implementation of the right of reproduction, including anything falling under the exceptions for reprography. This should, however, be done in a manner respecting the general rules of Community law in terms of copyright and the rules deriving from international standards and, in particular, from the test of prejudice to economic interests also mentioned in the new treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). (1) OJ L 122, 17. 5. 1991. (2) OJ L 77, 27. 3. 1996. (3) OJ L 346, 27. 1. 1992. (4) OJ C 108, 7. 4. 1998. (1999/C 289/095) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3696/98 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission (24 November 1998) Subject: Diamond imports from Angola What measures have so far been adopted by Member States to prohibit the direct or indirect import from Angola into their territory of all diamonds that are not controlled through the GURN certicate-of-origin regime? Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (21 December 1998) Following the adoption by the the United Nations security council of additional sanctions against União Nacional para a Independência Total de Angola (UNITA) (Resolution 1173 of 12 June 1998), the Council adopted common position 98/425/PESC of 3 July 1998 (1) and Council Regulation (EC) 1705/98 of 28 July 1998 concerning the interruption of certain economic relations with Angola in order to induce UNITA to fulfil its obligations in the peace process, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) 2229/97 (2). Prohibiting the import of goods into the Community is an exclusive competence of the Community. For that reason, the import of diamonds originating in or coming from Angola which are not accompanied by a certificate of origin delivered by the Government of unity and national reconciliation of Angola, is prohibited by Article 1(1) of Council Regulation (EC) 1705/98. This prohibition is directly applicable in all Member States. The implementation of this Regulation is the joint responsibility of Member States and the Commission. Article 8 of the Regulation obliges Member States to inform the Commission and other Member States on relevant issues. So far no reports have been received on any difficulties encountered in respect of imports of diamonds not accompanied by a certificate of origin delivered by the government of unity and national reconciliation of Angola. (1) OJ L 190, 4. 7. 1998. (2) OJ L 215, 1. 8. 1998