92002E3422

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3422/02

by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 December 2002)

Subject: EU economic aid for countries infringing human rights

I have repeatedly drawn the Commission's attention to the illegal confiscation of property belonging to Community citizens (mainly of Italian, Dutch and Greek nationality) living in Ethiopia under the Mengistu Communist Regime which has since collapsed. It is no secret that the present government of Ethiopia is refusing to remedy matters, while the EU, far from taking any action whatever, is continuing to provide unconditional economic aid for this country.

The United States on the other hand has not hesitated to call into force the pre-war Hall Rule which authorises President of the United States to suspend immediately economic aid to countries harming the interests of American citizens. The Ethiopian Government has complied with its demands and compensated American citizens whose property had been illegally confiscated by the Mengistu regime something which I repeat the European Union has failed to achieve for its own citizens.

Finally, the international press has indicated that the totalitarian regime of Zimbabwe under Robert Mugabe announced that the Prime Minister Tony Blair and the members of his government would be banned from entering the country since the United Kingdom was imposing visa requirements on all Zimbabwean citizens wishing to visit the United Kingdom. It is moreover a known fact that the United Kingdom

has repeatedly castigated the communist regime of that country for its repressive policies and for the confiscation of property belonging to Community citizens. It should be noted that the EU has criticised the Zimbabwean regime for its use of humanitarian aid which is reaching only Mr Mugabe's political allies and not the million of starving inhabitants of the country.

Why has the EU condemned Zimbabwe while on the other hand approving or at least tolerating in practice similar behaviour on the part of Ethiopia? What view does the Commission take of the stance adopted by the British Prime Minister? What view does it take of the action taken by the United States administration which has proved that it is able to defend effectively the interests of American citizens? Why does the EU not decide on the immediate suspension of aid to countries which indulge in illegal practices and the unfair treatment of Community citizens?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2003)

The Commission's position on the return of property confiscated from European citizens under the Mengistu régime in Ethiopia continues to be as stated in the answer to written question by the Honourable Member on the same subject of 2001 (E-879/01(1)). Legally, the Commission has no mandate to represent Community citizens' cases vis-à-vis the Ethiopian authorities, and claims for compensation can only be pursued through the national courts.

However, respect for human rights, democratic principles and the rule of law underpin the Cotonou Partnership Agreement, and constitute its essential elements. Both the Commission and its Member States, through dialogue with the Government of Ethiopia, as well as through development aid in support of good governance, strive to ensure that those essential elements are respected and that democratic cultures are developed.

Aid is only suspended in such cases where, despite political dialogue, a country is considered to be in clear breach of its commitments on human rights, democracy or the rule of law, and where it has not demonstrated any readiness to remedy the situation. This was the case for Zimbabwe: it is not the case for Ethiopia. The Union remains vigilant in Ethiopia, however, and continues to express its concerns to Government on issues relating to human rights and democracy in the context of its ongoing political dialogue.

(1) OJ C 318 E, 13.11.2001.