WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3616/98 by Nelly MAES to the Commission. Degree of responsibility for the ECHO affair borne by the current Director of ECHO
28. 6. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 182/109 (1999/C 182/145) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3615/98 by Nelly Maes (ARE) to the Commission (3 December 1998) Subject: Disappearance of documents, computer equipment, office furniture and office supplies when ECHO’s external unit was shut down in June 1995 Is it true that, immediately before ECHO’s external unit was shut down in June 1995, all the documentation, computer equipment, office furniture and office supplies ‘disappeared’? Is there a list or summary of the equipment which disappeared? If so, what sums of money are involved? (1999/C 182/146) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3616/98 by Nelly Maes (ARE) to the Commission (3 December 1998) Subject: Degree of responsibility for the ECHO affair borne by the current Director of ECHO In its answer dated 11 September 1998 to the question raised in Mr Fabra Vallés initial working document (PE 226. 913) on the measures taken by the Commission in response to Special Report No 2/97 of the Court of Auditors and the ECHO affair, the Commission indicated that just one official, who had now been suspended, was suspected of involvement. Mr Fabra Vallés working document also posed questions about the degree of responsibility borne by the current Director of ECHO, given that, on 3 June 1998, he had written a letter of thanks to the firm that had perpetrated the fraud in the ECHO affair. Will the Commission please tell me how it can continue to maintain that the current Director of ECHO could have been unaware of the suspicions against the company accused of fraud, since no ‘decisive’ elements had been found to incriminate the now suspended official at the time when he wrote the letter? Can the Commission continue to maintain that the current Director of ECHO was not aware of the UCLAF investigation, all the more so since, in February 1998, UCLAF investigators interviewed at length the official who has since been suspended? Can the Commission continue to maintain that the current Director of ECHO was unaware of the fact that UCLAF was interviewing his predecessor and his predecessor’s assistant? Can the Commission agree with the statement that: either the current Director of ECHO manifestly had no clue about what was going on in his department or that the current Director of ECHO was particularly imprudent in writing a letter of thanks on 3 June 1998 to the company accused of fraud, all the more so since the relevant UCLAF report on the current inquiry had been completed as early as mid-May 1998? (1999/C 182/147) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3617/98 by Nelly Maes (ARE) to the Commission (3 December 1998) Subject: Degree of responsibility borne by the former Director of ECHO in the ECHO affair In its answer dated 11 September 1998 to the question raised in Mr Fabra Vallés initial working document (PE 226. 913) on the measures taken by the Commission in response to Special Report No 2/97 and the ECHO affair, the Commission indicated that only one official, who had now been suspended, was suspected of involvement