European Parliament resolution on the communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a European Union Action Plan to Combat Drugs (2000-2004) (COM(1999) 239 - C5-0093/1999 - 1999/2095(COS))
C 189/256 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 7. 7. 2000 Friday 19 November 1999 TEXTS ADOPTED 1. EU action plan to combat drugs A5-0063/1999 European Parliament resolution on the communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a European Union Action Plan to Combat Drugs (2000-2004) (COM(1999) 239 - C5-0093/1999 - 1999/2095(COS)) The European Parliament, having regard to the communication from the Commission of 28 May 1999 on a European Union Action Plan to Combat Drugs (2000-2004) (COM(1999) 239 C5-0093/1999 1999/2095 (COS)), hereinafter referred to as the ‘Action Plan’, having regard to Article 152 of the EC Treaty, having regard to Title VI of the EU Treaty, having regard in particular to Article 34 of the EU Treaty, under which the Commission and the Member States share the right of initiative in the field of police and judicial cooperation, and in this instance in combating drugs, thereby broadening the scope of action and the responsibilities of the Commission and, by extension, the supervisory power of the European Parliament in this field, having regard to Article 39 of the EU Treaty, which strengthens the role of Parliament in the legisla- tive process governing the adoption of framework decisions, decisions and conventions relating, inter alia, to organised crime and drug trafficking, having regard to the incorporation of the Schengen acquis into the Treaties, having regard to the report of 2 June 1998, including key elements of a post-1999 EU drugs strategy, to the European Council on activities on drugs and drugs-related issues under the UK Presidency (7930/2/1998 C4-0409/1998), having regard to the plan of action of the Council and Commission on how best to implement the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an area of freedom, security and justice (0692/98 C4- 0692/1998 1998/0923(CNS)), endorsed by the Vienna European Council in December 1998, having regard to the relevant conclusions reached at the European Council meetings in Dublin in December 1996, in Cardiff in June 1998, in Vienna in December 1998 and in Tampere in October 1999, having regard to the United Nations Conventions of 1961, 1971 and 1988 on combating drugs, as well as the Political Declaration and resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly special ses- sion (Ungass) of 8 to 10 June 1998, having regard to Council Directive 1992/0109/EEC of 14 December 1992 (1) on the manufacture and the placing on the market of certain substances used in the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, as amended by Commission Directive 1993/0046/EEC (2) and completed by Commission Regulation No 1485/1996 (3), and to Council Regulation (EEC) 3677/1990 (4) laying down measures to be taken to discourage the diversion of certain substances to the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, amended by Regulation (EEC) 0900/1992 (5), (1) OJ L 370, 19. 12. 1992, p. 76. (2) OJ L 159, 1. 7. 1993, p. 134. (3) OJ L 188, 27. 7. 1996, p. 28. (4) OJ L 357, 2. 12. 1990, p. 1. (5) OJ L 96, 10. 4. 1992, p. 1. 7. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 189/257 having regard to the European Union action plan to combat drugs (1995-1999) (COM(1994) 234), Friday 19 November 1999 having regard to Decision No 102/1997/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council adopting a programme of Community action on the prevention of drug dependence within the framework for action in the field of public health (1996-2000) (1), having regard to the Council Joint Actions of 17 December 1996 (2) concerning the approximation of the laws and practices of the Member States of the European Union to combat drug addition and to prevent and combat illegal drug trafficking, of 16 June 1997 (3) concerning the information exchange, risk assessment and the control of new synthetic drugs, and of 3 December 1998 (4) on money laun- dering and the identification, tracing, freezing, seizing and confiscation of the proceeds from crime, having regard to the other instruments of judicial, police and customs cooperation cited in the com- munication (pp. 47-49), and in particular to the OISIN, Falcone and Grotius programmes (5), having regard to the proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending Directive 1991/0308/EEC on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering (COM(1999) 352), having regard to the proposal for a Council regulation (EC) completing Regulation (EEC) 0302/1993 establishing a European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) (COM(1999) 430), having regard to its resolutions of 15 June 1995 (6) on the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on a European Union plan of action to combat drugs (1995- 1999) and of 12 May 1998 (7) on the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the control of new synthetic drugs (designer drugs), its recommendation to the Council of 6 October 1998 (8) on European cooperation in the framework of the UN General Assembly special session (Ungass) on drugs, and its resolution of 13 April 1999 (9) on a post-1999 EU drugs strategy on activities on drugs and drugs-related issues under the UK Presidency, having regard to the EMCDDA annual reports on the state of the drugs problem in the European Union, having regard to the report of the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy Affairs and the opinion of (A5-0063/1999), A. whereas this Action Plan sets out five objectives: (1) maintaining the fight against drugs as a ‘major priority’ for EU internal and external action; (2) an integrated and balanced approach to demand and supply reduction; (3) procuring comparable data; (4) international cooperation and support for the United Nations; and (5) finding ‘appropriate’ resources, ‘while not bidding for new resources’, B. whereas, however, the ‘major priority’ status which is supposedly worth maintaining does not feature in the legislation of the Union or in its budgetary commitment; whereas it is doubtful that that ‘appro- priate’ resources can be found unless provision is made for additional resources; whereas the Action Plan thus paints an overly optimistic picture of the commitment and real capacity of the Union and its Member States to combat drugs, (1) OJ L 19, 22. 1. 1997, p. 25. (2) OJ L 342, 31. 12. 1996, p. 6. (3) OJ L 167, 25. 6. 1997, p. 1. (4) OJ L 333, 9. 12. 1998. (5) OJ L 7, 10. 1. 1997, OJ L 99, 31. 3. 1998 and OJ L 287, 8. 11. 1996 respectively. (6) OJ C 166, 3. 7. 1995, p. 116. (7) OJ C 167, 1. 6. 1998, p. 29. (8) OJ C 328, 26. 10. 1998, p. 43. (9) OJ C 219, 30. 7. 1999, p. 109. C 189/258 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 7. 7. 2000 Friday 19 November 1999 C. whereas it is not instruments, programmes or structures which are most lacking, but rather strong and overtly unambiguous political resolve in areas such as external policy, the coordination and strict monitoring of agreed efforts and a sizeable budgetary commitment; whereas, inter alia, the resources earmarked in the Community budget for the fight against drugs some ECU 31 million for social measures and barely ECU 24 million for all cooperation measures in the 1998 budget, according to the data presented in this Action Plan are woefully inadequate in comparison with the challenges faced, D. whereas the forthcoming Portuguese Presidency ought to convene an extraordinary ‘inter-pillar’ Coun- cil meeting to address the fight against drugs and invite the applicant countries to attend; whereas that Council should meet once a year in order to adopt an ambitious political anti-drugs project subject to a precise timetable; whereas the said Council ought to convene on a yearly basis to assess and adapt the Plan, E. whereas without prejudice to the invitation to the Council given by the Tampere European Council ‘to adopt the 2000-2004 European Strategy against Drugs before the European Council meeting in Helsinki’, the European Council should decide in principle to convene the extraordinary ‘inter-pillar’ Council meeting referred to above; whereas an interinstitutional conference should be responsible for preparing it, F. whereas the need to convene the ‘inter-pillar’ Council can be deduced from conclusion 59 of the Tampere European Council, which is particularly relevant to action to combat drugs, and states that ‘justice and home affairs concerns must be integrated in the definition and implementation of other Union policies and activities’ and that ‘all competencies and instruments at the disposal of the Union, and in particular, in external relations must be used in an integrated and consistent way to build up the area of freedom, security and justice’, G. whereas the coordinating role in anti-drugs operations entrusted to the Horizontal Drugs Group (HDG) should be strengthened further; whereas the HDG could become a ‘high-level working group’; whereas it would prove beneficial to establish regular, direct contact between the HDG and the com- petent bodies of the European Parliament in order to further informal interinstitutional coordination on the issues relating to drug addiction addressed under this Action Plan, H. whereas policies for demand reduction, care and social rehabilitation of drug addicts and supply reduction are not three alternative or contradictory policies, but, rather, inseparable strands within the same mainstreaming policy whose ultimate aim is always social and individual wellbeing, I. whereas this policy can only be devised to cover the long term and can only deliver results gradually, provided that it makes full use of educational, health and social resources and that the necessary means and funds are made available to it, J. whereas an essential element of the drugs policy within the EU consists in improving cooperation between EU institutions, Member States, regions and cities, K. whereas the raison d’être of the fight against drugs lies in helping drug addicts rid themselves of their dependence; whereas achieving this aim will involve coordination amongst decision-makers in the relentless clampdown on drug traffickers, whose activities currently account for 8% of world trade, according to United Nations figures, L. whereas 80% of organised crime worldwide is linked to drug trafficking; whereas the links between drug trafficking and arms dealing, dealing in nuclear material, terrorism, the ‘mafia’, corruption and a number of armed groups and official circles are common knowledge, M. whereas the abuse of drugs leads to biological, psychological and social problems, illnesses, problems in the home and at work, criminal acts, traffic accidents, etc. ; whereas young people are being exposed to the risk of drugs at an increasingly early age; whereas all available means should be employed to protect the under-18s as a matter of priority and to reduce the number of drug-related deaths; whereas the fight against addiction to one or more drugs must go hand in hand with the fight against alcoholism, whose impact on families and society is also particularly devastating, 7. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 189/259 Friday 19 November 1999 N. whereas action must be taken to combat the marked increase now visible in some EU Member States in the consumption of alcoholic beverages by young people; whereas this, combined with the use of drugs (especially synthetic drugs), is leading to increased juvenile delinquency, more traffic accidents, more failures at school, greater family tensions, etc. , O. whereas the clampdown should not be conducted against drug addicts themselves, who should, on the contrary, receive help from society, but rather against the drug traffickers and criminal organisations responsible for drug production, trafficking and dealing, by adapting laws to make quick and effective action in bringing drugs criminals to justice a reality, P. whereas there can be no anti-drugs policy in the European Union without cooperation with third countries; whereas international agreements on combating drugs and anti-drugs clauses in agreements concluded between the Union and third countries are, therefore, an absolute priority; whereas, further- more, development cooperation policy must be revised, so as to bring it into line with the principles enshrined in the Political Declaration issued by the United Nations General Assembly special session in June 1998; whereas engaging in ‘constructive dialogue’ under the guise of Realpolitik would not suffice as a pretext for a laissez-faire policy, Q. whereas Article 152 of the EC Treaty (public health) in its newly worded form now makes it possible to conduct varying national programmes to reduce health risks by stipulating that ‘the Community shall complement the Member States’ action in reducing drug-related health damage, including infor- mation and prevention’; whereas ultimate responsibility for practical measures in regard to treatment and rehabilitation must lie with the Member State, which also finances the treatment programme, R. whereas, however, to avoid conveying a confused and counterproductive message, it would be advi- sable for such programmes to be underpinned by an approach overtly aimed at freeing drug addicts from their dependence and improving their quality of life, S. whereas drug use is a threat to public health, including that of the drug addicts themselves; whereas if the number of deaths is to be reduced it is desirable to promote and develop programmes involving aid, information, rehabilitation and damage limitation, while not debarring Member States from adopt- ing ad hoc measures or pilot schemes, T. whereas large numbers of drug addicts are currently imprisoned in the EU for drug-related offences (trafficking, dealing, theft, etc. ); whereas it is desirable to promote and develop similar programmes to those proposed in the previous paragraph in the prison context, U. whereas the EU must encourage medical scientific research which is focussed on improving the chances of breaking addiction patterns so as to help reduce demand, V. drawing attention to the need to link the fight against poverty and unemployment to the problems of drug addiction and urban delinquency, while the subsidiarity principle is observed and respected in regard to matters concerning juvenile and urban delinquency; taking the view that a project of this kind could form part of action to combat urban delinquency, which Parliament ought to include in the 2000 budget (line B5-820N), W. whereas the projects under the programme of Community action on the prevention of drug depen- dence (1996-2000) and those to be funded under the forthcoming action programme should be prop- erly targeted, rigorously assessed and devised to work in synergy with national programmes, in line with the aims of the action plan, X. sharing the particular alarm expressed by the Commission at the ‘major reduction of financial com- mitment by Member States to social sector activities’ (p. 55), Y. whereas the confiscation of proceeds from drug-related crime should be backed up by the necessary decisions for those proceeds to be allocated to programmes on prevention and the rehabilitation of drug addicts and support programmes for their families, C 189/260 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 7. 7. 2000 Friday 19 November 1999 Z. whereas there is good reason to exploit every possibility afforded by Article 30 of the EU Treaty governing police cooperation, especially by involving Europol, and by Article 31 of the same, which deals with common action on judicial cooperation in criminal matters, including the establishment of minimum rules relating to drug trafficking; whereas the plan of action to establish an area of freedom, security and justice endorsed by the Vienna European Council refers to the establishment of such rules, AA. whereas, likewise, the money laundering directive which, on the Commission’s own admission, has enjoyed only limited success in confiscating assets, must be made tougher and its strict implementa- tion assured; whereas the fight against money laundering will fail to deliver credible results unless conducted on an international scale, which does not, however, preclude vigorous action within the EU, AB. whereas the new synthetic drugs constitute a potential danger and a new problem, particularly given the diversion of their precursors, many of them licit, for illicit ends, the ease with which they can be manufactured and the frequently unusual behavioural patterns of their users; whereas if the effec- tiveness of the early warning system at EU level seems satisfactory, the results of the action to which it leads in the Member States should be evaluated, AC. whereas the means must be found to combat the use of the Internet in facilitating drug trafficking and production; whereas crimes such as drug trafficking should be prosecuted in accordance with applicable law even if it occurs via services over the Internet, AD. whereas Internet providers who remove from the Net information which gives rise to crime should be awarded a quality symbol to strengthen their competitive position; whereas information which combats drug sales and drug abuse is of common interest and should be increased; whereas the Member States should use health information to highlight the health hazards involved in drug abuse, AE. drawing attention to the impact of new technologies, and especially the Internet, on drug abuse through the dissemination of information on chemical precursors and the manufacturing of drugs which is sometimes a direct incitement to drug-taking, AF. whereas the growing problem of doping in sport, which, besides constituting a health matter, raises legal, judicial and police issues, must be included in the European Union’s strategy and Action Plan to Combat Drugs; whereas the Action Plan has paid scant attention to the problem of the harmo- nisation of laws and judicial and police cooperation in this field, goals which a number of sports ministers from the Member States hope to see attained; whereas the willingness of the Member States and the Commission ‘to help in setting up an international agency to deal with this problem in cooperation with sports organisations’, as mentioned in the Commission’s conclusions, does not go far enough, AG. whereas the link between drug taking and road accidents should lead to a policy initiative at Union level, AH. whereas there is good cause to cooperate fully with the United Nations and the UNDCP (United Nations Drug Control Programme), to subscribe to the principles established in the June 1998 Ungass Political Declaration namely joint responsibility, inclusion of drug control in development policies, a balanced approach to demand reduction and supply reduction, respect for human rights and multilateral approaches and to enforce the resolutions adopted on that occasion, AI. AJ. whereas it is necessary to ensure that, in line with Parliament’s request, the handling of European Union funding of the UNDCP should not be entrusted to those governments of third countries which fail to offer guarantees with regard to the sound management of the said funding and respect for human rights, whereas one of the most important prerequisites for combating drugs is the reduction of poverty in the southern developing countries; whereas all possible efforts should be undertaken to remove the social and economic causes that favour continuing drug production; whereas the special preferences granted by the European Union in the Andean Pact countries and the countries of central America under the GPS scheme should be extended further, at least to the level granted by the EU to other 7. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 189/261 developing countries; whereas the GPS scheme alone, however, is not sufficient to encourage farm- ers to shift to other products; whereas communities that have decided to stop the production of drugs and raw materials should be granted special support to develop alternatives, Friday 19 November 1999 AK. whereas the necessary resources should be allocated for the implementation of the EU/Latin Amer- ica/Caribbean coordination and cooperation mechanism in the field of drugs adopted at the first summit of heads of state and government of the three regions in Rio de Janeiro on 28 June 1999, AL. whereas, where external policy is concerned, it is vital that resolute and coherent action be devised and implemented at EU level to combat drug production and trafficking, first and foremost through money laundering agreements and tougher anti-drugs clauses comprising suspension and penalty arrangements, AM. whereas the European Union must maintain close contact with the Dublin Group (the Member States and the Commission, the US, Canada, Japan, Australia and Norway) and its ‘mini-groups’, AN. whereas, in the context of the pre-accession strategy, it would be advisable to give high priority to the acquis in the area of freedom, security and justice, and in this case to the acquis on combating drugs; whereas there is a need to re-evaluate the measures under the Phare and Tacis programmes devoted to combating drugs and strengthen all aspects of cooperation in the fight against drug trafficking and transit with the applicant countries of central and eastern Europe and all countries concerned, especially the Balkan states, Russia and the NISs, Turkey and the Maghreb countries; whereas, as the Commission has proposed, the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) should see its remit extended as soon as possible to include the implementa- tion of drug awareness projects funded under the PHARE programme, AO. whereas the admission of a shortage of resources for programmes targeting developing nations con- trasts with the unfounded assertion that Community efforts have met with considerable success, AP. whereas, failing a drastic improvement in the monitoring of the instruments and programmes under the Action Plan, the indispensable condition for a policy to be effective will not be met; whereas, for evaluation at EU level to be feasible, the Member States must present an exhaustive appraisal of their policies, employing transparency equal to that applied in the economic field, AQ. whereas the persistent lack of comparable data on the drugs problem in the various Member States, as highlighted once again in the analysis of public spending undertaken in chapter VII of the EMCDDA 1998 Annual Report is alarming, AR. whereas the EMCDDA has an essential role to play in gathering data and statistics and analysing policies, legislation and penal practice both in the European Union and in the applicant countries; whereas without comparable data, based on common definitions and concepts, and a budget com- mensurate with the tasks entrusted to it, the Monitoring Centre will be unable to perform its task optimally, AS. whereas at the special meeting on the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice in the European Union held in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999 the European Council: underlined the importance of addressing the drugs problem in a comprehensive manner and called on the Council ‘to adopt the 2000-2004 European Strategy against Drugs before the European Council meeting in Helsinki’ (conclusion 50), called for priority to be given to cooperation in preventing drug-related crime (conclusion 42), called for joint investigative teams to be set up without delay, as a first step to combat in particular trafficking in drugs, on the initiative and with the participation of representatives of Europol, thus encouraging the proper implementation of the provisions of Article 30(2) EU (conclusions 43 and 45), C 189/262 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 7. 7. 2000 Friday 19 November 1999 agreed to set up Eurojust which should act in the matter of judicial cooperation as Europol acts in police cooperation (conclusion 46), designated drugs trafficking as one of the areas in which priority should be given to efforts to harmonise national criminal law, thus calling for the start of joint action provided for under Article 31(e) EU (conclusion 48), with regard to money laundering, called for common standards to be developed to prevent the use of corporations and entities registered outside the territory of the Union and for arrange- ments to be concluded with third country offshore-centres (conclusion 57), stressed the need to define clear priorities, policy objectives and measures for the Union’s exter- nal action in justice and home affairs (conclusion 61); Performance and overall aims 1. Shares the objectives of the Action Plan; congratulates the Commission on its honesty in acknowl- edging shortcomings; considers, however, that it paints an overly optimistic picture of the commitment and performance of the Union and its Member States in combating drugs; 2. Welcomes the long-term and cross-sector strategy in the Commission’s Action Plan which takes account of the need for further treatment and evaluation; at the same time, however, stresses that the strategy must be flexible in order to cope with new trends in drug abuse, particularly amongst young people, and that it must also include approaches geared to the local and regional levels; Political resolve and the decision-making process Notes that, at present, the overall budgetary resources implemented by the European Union appear 3. woefully inadequate and the monitoring of action weak; considers that the European Union should be allocated further resources to strengthen its measures to prevent drug addiction, help drug addicts and combat crime; believes that every Member State should set aside resources for treatment programmes to enable every addict to obtain help to get off drugs in accordance with national conditions; calls on the Commission to make suitable financial proposals with a view to facilitating the proposed actions; 4. Calls on the Member States and the Union to show greater political resolve and, if the need for more effective measures to combat drug abuse and drug trafficking cannot be met with existing resources, to commit higher resources on the one hand for internal action, notably in the educational, social, health and medical scientific field, particularly as regards the effects of drugs on health and life expectancy, and, on the other, for international action; condemns, in the light of Article 6(4) of the EU Treaty which requires the Union to ‘provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies’, the persistent lack of comparable data provided by the Member States on drugs and drug addiction and calls on them to remedy this situation forthwith; 5. Considers that urban and regional policy experiments on reducing harmful (health) effects, reducing demand for drugs and crime prevention and investigating the adverse effects on health of various drugs are important as regards finding new ways of dealing with drug-related problems; 6. Welcomes the Commission’s objectives of reducing drug abuse among young people and the number of deaths among addicts but regrets the lack of clarification regarding the measures, timetables and follow- up strategies needed to achieve those objectives; calls therefore on the Commission to elaborate on its objectives in this respect; Calls on the Commission to involve non-governmental organisations in implementing the action plan 7. in order to maintain an integrated and balanced anti-drug strategy in which reductions of supply and demand are regarded as mutually reinforcing factors; Calls on those Member States which, according to UN statistics, are transit countries for drug traf- 8. ficking to clamp down on such activity as soon as possible; 7. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 189/263 Friday 19 November 1999 9. Calls on the forthcoming Portuguese Presidency to convene an extraordinary ‘inter-pillar’ Council meeting devoted to combating drugs and to invite the applicant countries to attend; calls on the European Council meeting in Helsinki to decide in principle on this convocation; calls for an interinstitutional con- ference to be responsible specifically for preparing this ‘inter-pillar’ Council meeting; 10. Calls on the said Council, which should meet once a year, to signal clearly its refusal to consider the drug problem as inevitable by adopting an ambitious political anti-drugs project subject to a precise time- table; 11. Calls on the ‘inter-pillar’ Council to examine each year, on the basis of an EMCDDA report, the progress in implementation by the Monitoring Centre of a global information system on drugs and to develop the methodological tools needed for implementation; Specific objectives and international action 12. Emphasises the need to use all available means to protect the under-18s as a matter of priority through preventive work and focusing on rehabilitative measures for addicted parents of minors, to con- sider increasing Community and national budgets, and pursue measures targeting new synthetic drugs; asks for early prevention measures to be taken in schools as part of coordinated action amongst the Member States; calls for the Comenius programme to make a greater contribution in this vein; 13. Considers that the rehabilitation of drug addicts is, like other measures, of fundamental importance in the fight against drugs, since it helps to curb demand; to this end, supports and encourages the impor- tant social work carried out by therapeutic communities in helping addicts recover, and considers that their capacity to take action must be stepped up; Calls on the Commission, in implementing the action plan, to emphasise the need to intensify 14. efforts in the Member States to combat drug-abuse in prisons, in which care, measures to promote reinte- gration into society and working life, access to drug-free units and the possibility of converting a prison sentence into treatment should be seen as important elements; 15. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the various approaches to treatment and to introduce a range of different treatment programmes with individualised criteria for admission and the objective of non- dependence on drugs; Calls on the Member States to implement programmes to protect public and individual health, and 16. measures to treat drug addicts in prison; 17. Supports the research priorities outlined for drugs under the fifth framework programme and wishes also to include the social aspects of production, the reduction of health risks of drug use and the evaluation of a multilateral approach designed to restrict trade and production; 18. Urges the European Union to apply a coherent policy to combat drug production and trafficking in a consistent manner, using its capacity for bringing political influence to bear and providing effective help to the countries concerned; insists to this end on the urgent need for broader coordination in the fields of justice and home affairs and of external policy, in particular development and trade policy; Calls on the EU and its Member States to encourage and develop damage limitation policies, with- 19. out debarring individual Member States from adopting measures and pilot schemes in this area; 20. Favours the strengthening and rigorous evaluation of action on money laundering; stresses the role which Europol and, in due course, Eurojust should play to this end in conjunction with the European Judicial Network; calls on the European Union to work towards making this action a priority at interna- tional level and towards concluding bilateral and multilateral money laundering agreements; reiterates its request that the funds confiscated from criminals be allocated to programmes to combat drug addiction; C 189/264 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 7. 7. 2000 Friday 19 November 1999 Considers that FATF plays an essential part in combatting money laundering and that its mandate 21. should be extended for a further five years; Calls on the Union and Member States to cooperate constructively with the United Nations and the 22. UNDCP and in particular to apply the principles contained in the Political Declaration and resolutions of the June 1998 United Nations General Assembly special session (Ungass) on combating drugs; hopes, in this respect, to see the respective responsibilities of the European Union and the Member States in enfor- cing those resolutions made clear; 23. Reiterates its request that the handling of European Union funding of the UNDCP should not be entrusted to those governments of third countries which fail to offer guarantees with regard to the sound management of said funding and respect for human rights; Calls for meticulous checks on compliance with the anti-drugs clause in international agreements; 24. asks to that effect that it be accorded the same ‘essential clause’ status as the ‘human rights’ clause; Expects that the control on the external trade of chemicals based on Council Regulation (EEC) 25. 3677/90 and Commission Regulation (EEC) 3769/92 and on a number of precursor control agreements concluded with eight countries of the organisation of American States will be extended to other countries; 26. Calls for the inclusion within the Action Plan of an ‘inter-pillar’ initiative on doping in sport, which should also address the harmonisation of laws, the involvement of sports organisations and judicial and police cooperation as well as comprising preventive measures and public health initiatives, also for ama- teur sport; Calls for use to be made of Article 71(1)(c) of the EC Treaty so as to harmonise provisions in the 27. Member States’ highway codes relating to road accidents caused by drug taking; Pre-accession strategy 28. Deplores the rise of new drugs markets and trafficking syndicates in the countries of central and eastern Europe encouraged by the economic and political difficulties in some of these countries and insists on the importance of the PHARE multibeneficiary drugs programmes; 29. Emphasises that the pre-accession strategy must give high priority to the fight against drugs; stres- ses, however, that the evaluation made hitherto of the success of the projects funded from the measures under the PHARE and TACIS programmes devoted to combating drugs, which received ECU 11 and 4 mil- lion in 1998, has by and large proven inadequate; calls for a fundamental review of these measures; approves the Commission proposal regarding the broad involvement of the applicant countries and Turkey in the EMCDDA; Evaluation 30. Demands that the Commission begin the systematic and rigorous monitoring and evaluation of all action pursued in the fight against drugs, including action taken at international level, drawing in particu- lar on the expertise of the EMCDDA; urges the Member States to present an exhaustive annual appraisal of their policies; urges the Commission to submit an annual report on this basis, setting out a comprehensive review of action to combat drugs, so that the policies pursued in this field can be compared; 31. Calls on the Commission to fund programmes to evaluate the practices used in the fields of preven- tion, treatment and reintegration as well as the social and health implications and, on the basis of its conclusions, to help the Member States frame their national policies; Role and resources of the EMCDDA 32. Calls on the EMCDDA to contribute fully towards the systematic monitoring of the above-men- tioned anti-drug actions, to expand its assistance to the Member States in evaluating their activities to reduce demand, to implement the five harmonised epidemiological indicators, to strengthen its system for evaluating the risks posed by the new synthetic drugs and broaden its scope to cover the risks linked 7. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 189/265 to performance-enhancing drugs; calls therefore for the EMCDDA to be equipped with the harmonised statistics and resources it needs to carry out its task; Friday 19 November 1999 * * * 33. Calls on the European Council to consider this resolution as recommendations for its meeting in Helsinki; reserves the right to react, before the meeting of the ‘inter-pillar’ Council which it demands should be convened, to the general guidelines which the European Council will have laid down in the fight against drugs; Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Commission and 34. Council, and the parliaments and governments of the Member States and applicant countries. 2. Counterfeit travel documents * A5-0050/1999 Initiative of the Federal Republic of Germany with a view to the adoption of a Council Decision on the improved exchange of information to combat counterfeit travel documents (8457/1999 - C5-0011/1999 - 1999/0804(CNS)) The initiative was amended as follows: INITIATIVE OF THE FRG (1) AMENDMENTS BY PARLIAMENT (Amendment 1) Title Initiative of the Federal Republic of Germany with a view to the adoption of a Council Decision on the improved exchange of information to combat counterfeit travel documents Initiative of the Federal Republic of Germany with a view to the adoption of a Council Regulation on the improved exchange of information to combat counterfeit travel docu- ments Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particu- lar Article 34(2)(c) thereof, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 66 thereof, (Amendment 11) First citation (Amendment 3) Recital 2a (new) (2a) the Commission announced in its statement on this Joint Action that it would adopt the necessary initiatives to develop the European image archiving system after the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty; (Amendment 4) Recital 2b (new) (2b) in the long term it would not be rational to allow two parallel systems for exchanging information about forged documents to remain in existence; (1) OJ C 176, 22. 6. 1999, p. 1