You are on page 1of 2

C 155 E/16 Official Journal of the European Union EN 3.7.

2003

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(14 November 2002)

The letter to which the Honourable Member refers was based on preliminary findings of an on-going audit
and, in keeping with normal practice in organisations of all kinds, it should not have been circulated
outside the Institution. Neither the Financial Regulation nor the relevant professional standards for internal
auditing provide that preliminary results of ongoing internal audit work are shared outside the institution.
This is to protect the relationship between internal auditor and auditee, which is essential to an effective
internal audit function. It would not, therefore, be appropriate for the Commission to communicate
material which it does not consider to be proper for others to communicate.

As provided for by the Financial Regulation, the Parliament regularly receives reports by the Internal
Auditor, which summarise audit findings, recommendations and follow-up.

The internal notes referred to by the Honourable Member were preparatory to the establishment of the
Annual Activity Report and Declaration of the Director General for Budgets. As the Honourable Member
will have observed, the Budget Director General’s Annual Activity Report and Declaration, as well as the
Internal Auditor’s Annual Report, both of which have been transmitted to Parliament, contain ample
indications of the problems in the Commission’s accounting system which have been previously identified
by the Court of Auditors and the Commission and are, consequently, the subject of ongoing reforms.

During a recent meeting of Parliament’s Budgetary Control Committee, in which the Member of the
Commission in charge of the Budget and a Member of the European Court of Auditors participated, the
Internal Auditor stated that in his opinion there was a clear convergence of views on these problems
between all parties. This was confirmed by the statements made by the different parties during the
meeting.

The Member of the Commission in charge of the Budget wrote to Mrs Andreasen on 29 May 2002
inviting her to put her criticisms in writing and to substantiate one allegation in particular. Mrs Andreasen
explicitly refused to do that in an e-mail dated 30 May.

(2003/C 155 E/016) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2348/02


by Bastiaan Belder (EDD) to the Council

(24 July 2002)

Subject: Activities of Laskar Jihad in Papua

More and more rumours are circulating about increasing activities by the Laskar Jihad in Papua (Indonesia).
Even though these are only rumours, they are becoming more and more persistent. In view of the
escalating role played by the Laskar Jihad in the Moluccas and on Sulawesi, it is urgent that these rumours
should be taken seriously. There must be a thorough, independent investigation of this organisation’s
activities in Papua. If these rumours are constantly denied, they may prove, too late, to have been true.

Will the Council of Ministers cast any light on the role of the Indonesian government as regards the
following questions:

 Is Indonesia prepared to carry out an independent and thorough investigation on the activities of this
organisation in Papua?

 Is the Indonesian government prepared to take the necessary measures, should it become clear that
Laskar Jihad is preparing action against Christians?

 Will the Council urge Indonesia to take all possible action to prevent the situation in Papua from
escalating?
3.7.2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 155 E/17

Reply

(3 March 2003)

1. The Council has not discussed the specific rumours concerning the possible increase of Jihad Laskar
activity in Papua. The Council would, however, refer the Honourable MEP to the reply given to Question
H-0968/01 by Lennart Sacredeus for the Plenary session, of February 2002 and which remains valid.

2. However, during their extensive visit in Papua in late March 2002, EU Heads of Mission raised on
various occasions the question of inter-communal violence and possible solutions with the Indonesian
authorities and representatives of the local communities. As a result, the EU has reiterated its call on the
Government of Indonesia to implement the policy of change contained in the Special Autonomy Law, to
better respect the rights of indigenous people, to investigate human rights violations and to bring their
perpetrators to justice.

3. The EU has, during the EU-Indonesia Foreign Ministers meeting on 24 September in Copenhagen,
also discussed the situation in several regions of Indonesia, including Aceh, Papua and the Moluccas.

(2003/C 155 E/017) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2382/02

by Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 August 2002)

Subject: Treatment of asylum-seekers in the EU

1. How does each Member State count the number of migrants (refugees, asylum-seekers, etc.) seeking
admission (i.e. do they include all family members in their calculations or just heads of families)?

2. What State benefits are these migrants entitled to in each of the Member States of the EU?

3. At what stage are migrants entitled to vote in each of the Member States of the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(14 October 2002)

Member States count in different ways the number of third country nationals seeking admission to their
territory making a distinction in particular as to whether they are refugees, asylum seekers, labour migrants
or persons seeking temporary protection.

For the purpose of producing Community statistics, definitions have been agreed with respect to the
counting of asylum applications and the positive decisions resulting from these applications, including the
granting of refugee status, humanitarian status and all other types of subsidiary protection equivalent to
asylum (e.g. protection granted under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights). However,