Parlamentarische Anfrage
Europäische Unternehmen, nicht zuletzt auch deutsche, haben in den letzten Jahren in Waffen im Wert von hunderten von Millionen Euro geliefert. In einer parlamentarischen Anfrage möchte die Europaabgeordnete Franziska Brantner zusammen mit vier Fraktionskollegen von der EU-Außenbeauftragten Catherine Ashton wissen, ob diese Exporte im Einklang mit EU-Recht standen. So verbieten EU-Regeln (PDF) zum Beispiel die Ausfuhr von Militärgütern, wenn eindeutig das Risiko besteht, dass diese zur Repression der Bevölkerung eingesetzt werden könnten.
Ashton hat nun sechs Wochen Zeit, um den Parlamentariern eine Antwort zu geben.
Die parlamentarische Anfrage im Wortlaut:
Written Question to the Council
Authors: Reinhard Bütikofer, Raul Romeva i Rueda, Ulrike Lunacek, Franziska Brantner, Bart Staes
Subject: Arms sales by EU Member States to Libya and compliance with the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports
In 2009 the EU Member States exported the following goods and licences to Libya:
(a) Small and light weapons (category ML1): Italy/Malta (79 million), Belgium (19 million), Bulgaria (3 million), and also France, Austria and the United Kingdom (smaller quantities).
(b) Bombs, torpedoes, missiles and other explosive devices (category ML4) to Libya: Italy (2,5 million) and France, Germany and the United Kingdom small quantities.
(c) Military aircraft and unmanned airborne vehicles (category ML10) to Libya: Italy (107,7 million), France (17,5 million), Portugal (14,5 million), Poland (2 million) and Slovenia and the United Kingdom small quantities.
(d) Ground and armoured vehicles (category ML6 and 13) to Libya: Germany (9 million), France (2,5 million) and the United Kingdom (2,1 million).
(e) Electronic jamming and countermeasures equipment (category ML11 and 15) to Libya: Germany (43,2 million), the United Kingdom (20,6 million), France (2 and 5 million) and Italy (1 million).
1. Is the Council of the opinion that exports listed in points (a)-(e) are in compliance with Common Position 2008/944/CFSP, especially its criteria two, three, four, six and seven?
2. On ML1 one export denial was issued referring to criteria two, on ML4 one denial referring to criteria two, on ML10 two denials referred to criteria four and seven and onML15 three denials were referring to criteria two, five and seven. Which individual EU Member State issued which denial? And which arguments were put forward by these Member States? How to explain that in some cases certain EU Member States see e.g. human rights (criteria two) in danger by an export of small arms (ML1) but others not? Please explain the relationship and rationale between these denials and the exports listed in points (a) and (e).
3. How comes that Malta is listed as exporting country for small and light weapons worth 79,6 million Euros although Italy was, according to media reports, the country of origin and the relevant weapons have been produced by the Italian company Beretta? Did Malta or Italy produce erroneous data or is the EU Code of Conduct an insufficient instrument for correctly addressing the issue of transit?
