WRITTEN QUESTION P-0405/00 by Pasqualina Napoletano (PSE) to the Commission. Commission-funded mission for the reform of the Albanian customs system.
24. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 303 E/189 Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission (27 March 2000) According to the case law of the Court of justice, sport and sport-related activities such as the organisation and broadcasting of sporting events have to comply with Community law in so far as they constitute an economic activity within the meaning of Article 2 of the Treaty (1). The Community competition rules therefore in principle apply to practices such as the collective selling by sports federations of the television (TV) rights to the events which are organised under their auspices. However, whether the collective selling of the TV rights to bobsleigh events is compatible with Commun- ity competition law cannot be decided without thoroughly examining the concrete facts and circum- stances. In that context, it must be examined whether the practice affects trade between Member States and restricts competition to an appreciable extent in the relevant market, which is likely to be the case at least when the collective selling concerns highly priced broadcasting rights to major mass-attractive sports. As far as freedom to provide services is concerned, the principles of free circulation within the internal market not only apply to the action of public authorities but extend also to rules of any other nature aimed at regulating gainful employment in a collective manner. The Commission has not received any complaints or notification concerning the broadcasting of bobsleigh events or related collective selling of TV rights for violation of the principles of free circulation (notably the free circulation of services). Since the Commission is currently examining collective selling of TV rights to other sports events, the result of which will also be relevant in respect of the collective selling of TV rights to bobsleigh events, it does not intend to investigate this matter at present. (1) See cases 36/74 (Walrave) of 12/12/1974 or C-415/93 (Bosman) of 15/12/1995. (2000/C 303 E/216) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0405/00 by Pasqualina Napoletano (PSE) to the Commission (9 February 2000) Subject: Commission-funded mission for the reform of the Albanian customs system A few days ago Mrs Natalina Cea, head of the mission sent, with Commission funding, to Albania to reform that countryís customs system, said that she would be leaving her job, which she has performed in a highly professional, committed and courageous manner over the past three years. The mission, which has overhauled the Albanian customs system, has been a success: it has brought about an extremely substantial increase in customs revenue and played a decisive role in the redrafting of Albanian customs law. However, Mrs Cea has drawn attention to a general climate of intimidation and obstruction during her work in Albania. The Italian Customs Service, from which Mrs Cea was seconded, has actively supported and praised it has forwarded a proposal for her Mrs Ceaís work as head of mission. In response to her request, replacement to the Commission, thus confirming its commitment to continuing with the difficult task of combating illegal activities and stepping up the fight against crime. Given the above, would the Commission: 1. state its views on what is happening in Albania in this extremely delicate area of cooperation; 2. not agree that the mission should be strengthened and actively supported, not least in view of the problems experienced to date; C 303 E/190 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 24. 10. 2000 3. not agree that, given the commitment which the Italian Customs Service has shown and the experience which it has gained in this area, it should continue to maintain close links with that service and should therefore give priority to its nominee for Mrs Ceaís replacement, with a view to ensuring that the mission can continue to operate in an effective manner? Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission (13 March 2000) 1. Following the 1997 crisis, the Customs Assistance Mission to Albania was set up in June of that year to support extensive reforms in the Albanian customs service, near to total collapse at the time, and guarantee improvements in the revenue collected for the state budget (two-thirds of budget revenue being obtained from customs duties). This objective was achieved rapidly and the collection of customs revenue has since continued satisfactorily. Far-reaching reforms have been introduced, notably a new customs code in 1999 and an action plan for the customs service. The person mentioned by the Honourable Member filled the post of head of the customs assistance mission. The Director-General of the Customs and Indirect Taxation department of Italyís Ministry of Finance has notified the Commission that it wishes to reinstate the person concerned in the department. 2. The Commission believes that this work needs to be continued and adapted to the future needs expressed by the Albanian Government. The establishment of a stable administrative structure for customs is a prerequisite for Albaniaís participation in the stabilisation process and for association with the Union. 3. One factor critical to the effectiveness of any assistance mission is that it is staffed with a competent team. The selection of the new head of mission will be done by means of a procedure based on the professional qualifications of candidates suited to the special circumstances now prevailing in Albania. (2000/C 303 E/217) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0412/00 by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission (9 February 2000) Subject: Articles 6 and 7 of the Treaty on European Union Does the Commission not consider that it should clarify, as a matter of urgency, how and according to what timetable and criteria it applies and will continue to apply Articles 6 and 7 of the TEU, in order to prevent political abuse of the provisions of the Treaty and unwarranted interference in the political life of certain Member States which have nothing to do with actual documented violations of human rights in other Member States? Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission (23 March 2000) Article 6 of the European Union Treaty sets out the principles on which the Union is founded and does not require any implementing measure on the part of the Community. The criteria for triggering the mechanism provided for in Article 7(1) of the European Union Treaty are laid down in that Article, namely when the áexistence of a serious and persistent breachí by a Member State of principles mentioned in Article 6(1) has been determined. The Commission would draw the Honourable Memberís attention to the fact that its role in this procedure cannot be compared to its role in the traditional infringement procedure. Finally, in the Commissionís view the nature of the assessment required to trigger the procedure provided for in Article 7 is not compatible with the laying down in advance of precise procedures and criteria