WRITTEN QUESTION E-1691/99 by Francisca Sauquillo Pérez del Arco (PSE) to the Commission. Situation of an official in the light of the Disciplinary Board's conclusions.
C 203 E/26 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 18. 7. 2000 (2000/C 203 E/032) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1691/99 by Francisca Sauquillo PØrez del Arco (PSE) to the Commission (29 September 1999) Subject: Situation of an official in the light of the Disciplinary Boardís conclusions Even though the former ECHO director has been cleared of any blame by the College of Commissioners following the conclusion of the disciplinary procedures laid down in the Staff Regulations, individuals are launching initiatives within the Commission and other institutions with the aim of reopening the case. 1. Does the Commission take the view that the exoneration of the former ECHO director by the College of Commissioners following the intervention of the Disciplinary Board and the investigation carried out by the former UCLAF constitutes the end of the proceedings and that, now that judgment has been passed, the case can be reopened only under the conditions laid down in Article 11 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations? 2. Will the Commission provide assistance, in accordance with Article 24 of the Staff Regulations, to an official who is continuing to suffer harassment from the staff of the Commission and from members of other institutions even though he has been exonerated under the Commissionís own procedures? What form will this assistance take? How will the Commission make good the harm done to this official now that his innocence in the 3. ECHO affair has been proven? Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (6 December 1999) The Commission can confirm to the Honourable Member that the disciplinary proceedings which 1. were instituted against the former Director of ECHO were closed by the Commissionís decision of 14 July 1999 in accordance with the reasoned opinion delivered by the Disciplinary Board. The decision to close the proceedings was based on the facts which were then at the disposal of the Commission. In any disciplinary case, it is only possible to re-open proceedings if new facts are discovered. 2. and 3. Any official who is threatened, attacked, insulted or defamed as an official in relation to facts in respect of which a decision has been taken not to discipline him or her is entitled to assistance from the Institution of their employment under Article 24 of the Staff Regulations. This assistance will usually take the form of paying the individualís legal fees. The Commission can confirm that it is providing such assistance in the case at issue, in keeping with the Regulation. (2000/C 203 E/033) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1698/99 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (29 September 1999) Subject: Adverse effects of replacing national quality marks with íself-certificationí by manufacturers on the basis of ConformitØ EuropØenneí 1. Can the Commission confirm that introduction of the CE ( ConformitØ EuropØenneí) marking for consumer goods and professional equipment enables manufacturers to decide independently whether their products satisfy the requirements for safety, quality, energy-efficiency and protection of the environment, in contrast to the system currently existing in the various Member States where a product can only be marketed if a quality mark has been supplied by a body designated by the national authority, such as KEMA in the Netherlands? In what way will the Commission verify the extent to which products covered by the European 2. directives on CE marking actually comply with the requirements laid down in those directives?