The Commission presents its fifth report on the implementation of Regulation (EC) 2320 on the common rules on aviation security. Under the terms of the Regulation, it is required to conduct inspections of Member States' aviation security administrations and of EU airports.

Initial inspections at airports : 19 initial inspections of airports were conducted during 2009, almost double the number carried out in 2008. The overall percentage of core measures found to be in compliance rose once again by a small margin, to almost 85%. The deficiencies which were found tended, by and large, to occur in the same areas as for previous inspections, frequently stemming from human factor issues.

The weakest areas at the airports inspected during 2009 related to the quality of staff screening, the provisions governing staff use of prohibited articles and implementation of cargo security requirements. For instance, staff were not always required to remove their jackets before screening and hand searches of staff did not follow the same methodology as for passengers. Several airports also failed to implement adequate procedures for identifying staff members formally authorised to carry prohibited articles into the security restricted area.

All seven inspections covering cargo security revealed a number of problem areas, including poor security programmes and failure to select the most appropriate screening method, given the nature of the consignment. Other common deficiencies concerned the requirements for taking liquids into the security restricted area (such as the use of proper tamper-evident plastic bags), failure to fully protect baggage in the make-up area, vehicle search and technical standards for equipment.

Compliance with the provisions covering passengers and cabin baggage was mostly high although sometimes continuous random search ratios were not observed and/or the quality of passenger hand search was not fully satisfactory. Compliance in the area of hold baggage screening was extremely high, although at one location dogs were used to screen hold baggage, despite the fact that this was not allowed under the then existing legislative provisions.

As regards air carriers, the areas needing most additional efforts were search and check of aircraft and procedures for dealing with rush bags.

Open files, Article 15 cases and legal proceedings : 20 files (14 airport and 6 appropriate authorities) were closed during 2009. In all, 17 appropriate authority and 20 airport inspection files remained open at the end of the year. There were no Article 15 cases open at the beginning of the year and none were initiated during 2009. The Commission closed 1 infringement procedure in 2009, after a 14 month delay, when the key issues, relating to lack of resources and lack of enforcement, had been resolved. In total three infringement cases were pending at the end of 2009.

Member States own evaluations on the results of their national compliance monitoring : harmonisation of these compliance monitoring regimes in the EU has in fact proved difficult since the programme began in 2003. This has been because the different Member States varied in their understanding of terms, development of methodologies and reporting requirements. This situation has improved over time, but could still be better. A certain number of discrepancies between the results of national compliance monitoring and the findings of Commission inspections stem from the lack of harmonisation, with the latter often indicating a lower level of compliance than the national reports might suggest.

Legislation : the report outlines new security legislative acts published during 2009. Separately, work was also begun on new rules for the screening of liquids, the use of dogs in aviation security screening and the use of metal detectors for screening certain specialised types of cargo.

The greatest efforts of the Commission and Member States during 2009 were concentrated on the preparation of the detailed implementing package and the new inspection and quality control regulations.

Trials : a number of trials were conducted during 2009. These concerned the use of security scanners for passenger and staff screening and the use of dogs for security screening. Information from the scanner trials was passed to the Commission to assist with the preparation of the planned report on the use of this equipment. Information from the dog trials was considered in the work towards a future legislative proposal.

Third countries : the Commission actively continued the dialogue with aviation security issues with the US in a number of fora, in particular the EU-US Transportation Group, which progressed work towards one-stop security. The Commission also intervened on a number of occasions when Member States raised particular concerns about additional US security demands, which appeared to give inadequate consideration to the robust EU systems already in place.

Lastly, the report notes that the security incident on Northwest Airlines flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit which occurred just days before the end of the year served as a reminder that the adequacy of screening options must constantly be reviewed and close cooperation with international partners continued. The Commission will maintain and, as necessary, extend its programme in these two key areas.

COM(2010)0725
EUR-Lex

The Commission presents its fourth report on the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 establishing common rules in the field of civil aviation security.

This report covers the period 1 January – 31 December 2008. It notes that 2008 marked a significant stage in the building of an effective aviation security regime in the EC. It was a time for fundamental reassessment, drawing on 5 years' experience of implementing and inspecting the regime adopted in 2002 after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It was also a year of enhanced international co-operation and further technological development. The reassessment process revealed much that was positive.

The main requirements of the legislation were clearly understood and generally well implemented at European airports. Levels of compliance continued to move – albeit slowly – upwards and several Member States had increased their compliance monitoring resources. However, it was also evident that some provisions did require adjustment, to achieve a common understanding, address recurring deficiencies or take account of other developments. The inspection regimes themselves were equally in need of fine-tuning.

The Community response to new and emerging threats was similarly challenged, following the considerable disruption caused by the 2006 liquid explosives alert. This led to increased efforts to collaborate with manufacturers and international partners in the development of security screening procedures. It added impetus to the drive towards reaching agreement with third countries on recognition processes.

Lastly there was recognition of the need for greater transparency . The restrictions on access to much of the implementing legislation had come to be judged as excessive, with members of the public not able to retrieve the facts necessary for making informed decisions. In response, there was an immediate restructuring of the original provisions and a commitment to ensure appropriate levels of access in the future.

In all, 2008 was a year of considerable achievement towards the establishment of a mature aviation security environment. Member States, the aviation industry and manufacturers demonstrated a high level of commitment in working together to find security solutions and minimise inconvenience to passengers. However, at the end of the twelve month period, none would remain in any doubt about the considerable amount of work still to be done.

The Commission draws attention to the following points:

Inspections : under Regulation 2320/2002, the Commission is required to carry out inspections to determine Member States' level of compliance with the legal provisions on aviation security. Switzerland is also included in the programme while Norway and Iceland are inspected against identical provisions by the EFTA Surveillance Authority. There are three types of inspection:

national appropriate authority : the Commission inspected 9 appropriate authorities during 2008. The 2008 exercise demonstrated high standards in 5 and reasonable standards in 2 states; but the remaining 2 reports were unsatisfactory. National civil aviation security programmes generally covered the legal requirements well, despite a few omissions and outdated references. Provisions for small airports for which an exemption had been claimed under the terms of the Regulation were fairly frequently omitted from national civil aviation security programmes, along with some requirements for air cargo. Frequencies for monitoring activities and provision for security audits within the EU definition of the term were often missing from national quality control programmes. A number of national security training programmes failed to include adequate provisions for general awareness and recurrent training. Most deficiencies, however, were found in respect of the capacity to detect and correct failures swiftly; initial inspections at airports : 10 initial inspections of airports were conducted during 2008. The weakest areas at the 10 airports related to access control and staff screening. Overall, air carriers' standards of compliance were less robust than those of airports, although there was a greater overall improvement between 2007 and 2008. The areas needing most additional effort were search and check of aircraft and aircraft protection. Compliance with the provisions covering passengers and cabin baggage was mostly high although serious deficiencies stemming from human factors were reported at some of the inspected airports. Compliance in the area of hold baggage screening was extremely high, with no deficiencies at all recorded against a good number of the provisions; follow-up, to assess deficiency correction activities : 8 follow-up inspections were conducted at EU airports during 2008. The findings revealed that a greater number of deficiencies had been remedied by the time of the follow-up inspection than had been the case in previous years. However, a number of serious deficiencies (about 13% of those found) had not been adequately addressed by the time the Commission inspectors returned. In general terms, deficiencies that could be remedied by structural changes had been addressed very effectively, while those involving human factors were proving particularly intractable.

The consistency of the inspection results enabled the Commission to identify weaknesses and analyse the causes . It could then propose the necessary new legislation, or identify areas for future study or research.

Legislation: although there was much legislative development during 2008, there were few legislative changes. This gave Member States the opportunity to consolidate progress made in previous years , especially in respect of newer provisions, such as those relating to cargo. Following a legal challenge concerning access to information , the Commission reassessed the elements of aviation security legislation that had previously been kept out of the public domain. It decided to publish a new Regulation order to facilitate public access, notably to details of prohibited articles. The report notes that legal challenges resulted in a much greater focus on transparency , communicating with the public and providing opportunities for debate. The agenda was fortunately uninterrupted by any major new terrorist attempts directed against European airports or the discovery of any new terrorist techniques likely to pose a threat to civil aviation.

The main requirements of the legislation were clearly understood and generally well implemented at European airports.

New framework and implementing package :

· The new framework Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 , which will repeal and replace Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 in April 2010, was published in March 2008. Work on the second and third levels of implementing rules and new inspection texts had reached an advanced stage by the end of the year.

· The second level elaborates the framework by, inter alia, listing screening techniques that may be used for passengers, baggage or cargo, categories of prohibited articles and criteria for making agreements with third countries. Based on positive results from trials, the Commission originally proposed including provisions to allow the use of body scanning equipment, within parameters yet to be defined. The European Parliament, however, felt that a number of questions regarding human rights, health and data protection would have to be answered before this could be accepted. The Commission accordingly amended the draft legislation to remove this possibility, pending further study.

· The third level will provide the detailed implementation requirements and address the issues of overly onerous provisions in some areas of the current legislation and security gaps in others. Amongst the issues discussed were possible modifications in the aircraft search and check requirements, lifting the requirement for all airlines to submit security programmes to Member States for approval, providing an updated, internationally agreed prohibited articlelist, developing more detailed rules for catering and cleaning supplies and elaborating policies for staff recruitment and training.

Dialogue with third countries : bilateral efforts with third countries essentially fall into two categories: work towards future one-stop agreements and preparations for liquids exemptions. The one-stop element is the most advanced with the US, which has similar high standards of security. An EU-US transport co-operation group was set up in 2008 and a detailed comparison between the measures implemented on each side of the Atlantic has been drawn up. Significant differences are few and Member States have indicated considerable interest in reaching an agreement.

Potential threats : the Community response to new and emerging threats was similarly challenged, following the considerable disruption caused by the 2006 liquid explosives alert. This led to increased efforts to collaborate with manufacturers and international partners in the development of security screening procedures. It added impetus to the drive towards reaching agreement with third countries on recognition processes. Throughout, the EU demonstrated its willingness and ability to make an effective contribution towards facilitating passenger movements and finding global solutions. The Commission notes that dealing with the potential threat from liquid explosives has strengthened international co-operation and links with manufacturers. This should pave the way towards a more seamless aviation security environment for travellers moving between continents, while raising the awareness of legislators concerning future technological possibilities.

Financing aviation security : this issue has been raised regularly during discussions on aviation security measures. Member States generally take the view that the industry should meet the costs, with the freedom to pass them on to passengers, while the industry and some MEPs argue for a greater State contribution. In the context of adopting the new framework Regulation (EC) No 300/2008, the Commission undertook to produce a report on the subject, in order to identify principles which could form the basis for a future legislative initiative.

Future work : the Commission's work programme for 2009 will include:

finalising the new implementing legislation; finding better ways of addressing the threat from liquid explosives; advancing one stop security agreements with third countries; continuing the inspection programme (including involvement as observers in some inspections in the US); assisting Member States to improve and harmonise national quality control programmes; analysing the results of studies; considering the most appropriate approach to the funding of aviation security.

COM(2009)0518
EUR-Lex

The Commission has presented its third report on the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 establishing common rules in the field of civil aviation. It covers the period January-December 2007 and is based in particular on the conclusions drawn from 28 new inspections carried out by the Commission during this period.

The report confirms continuing progress in the implementation of common rules for civil aviation security, from a strong global base - although there is certainly still room for improvement. It also details the proactive approach being taken by the Community in developing a flexible, practical and harmonised system, designed to facilitate the movement of passengers and cargo through a secure airport environment.

Altogether, 117 inspections were undertaken between February 2004 and December 2007. Between 1 and 6 airport inspections have been completed in each Member State (except Bulgaria) and all Member States' appropriate authorities (except Rumania) have been monitored at least once. Switzerland has also been included in the Community programme, while since December 2005 Norway and Iceland have been inspected against parallel provisions by the EFTA Surveillance Authority.

Inspections of national appropriate authorities : each Member State is required to adopt a national aviation security programme and nominate a single appropriate authority to co-ordinate and monitor its implementation. All 27 have done so. Appropriate authorities must:

develop and implement a quality control programme; monitor airport and airline security programmes; develop and implement an aviation security training programme.

During 2007, the Commission inspected 10 appropriate authorities. The inspections involved an examination of documentary evidence, supported by interviews and - for the first time in 2007 - on-site verifications at an airport implementing the national measures. The findings of the inspections were consistent with those from previous monitoring exercises, essentially:

there is a good level of compliance as regards the establishment of an adequate legal framework; there is a less satisfactory achievement as regards the effectiveness of implementation of the common standards.

Legal framework : as a general rule, the contents of Member States' national aviation security programmes accurately reflect the requirements of European legislation. However, the updating of the programmes to reflect changes in Community law has not always been carried out as promptly as would have been desirable. Most Member States have established satisfactory national quality control programmes, clearly setting out the recruitment, training, duties and powers of the national inspectors, the priorities and methodology for the inspection programme. Sometimes, however, the programmes fail to meet all requirements, for instance they do not make provision for a test programme or omit frequencies for monitoring activities. There is a clear case for improved sharing of best practice and generally for greater harmonisation of national programmes.

Inspections at airports: in general terms, the level of security at European airports is high – especially when measured against global standards and practices. The level of compliance has improved by almost 40% since inspections began and the number of serious deficiencies continues to fall. The 2007 findings tend to repeat the pattern of earlier inspections. As regards what may be regarded as the core areas of aviation security - airport security, aircraft security, passenger and cabin baggage screening and hold baggage screening – the results are certainly improving; but there nonetheless remain significant areas of non compliance. These relate in particular to areas where the human factor is key, but other relevant issues would be:

overly prescriptive requirements in parts of the current legislation; lead times required for adjusting to new requirements; insufficient monitoring at national level; lack of enforcement powers at the level of the appropriate authorities.

The 2007 inspections also initiated EU monitoring of areas which were rarely included in previous reports – catering, cleaning, company mail and material and technical requirements for equipment. Although there is still insufficient data in these areas to provide meaningful conclusions, Commission inspectors have expressed some concerns about the monitoring of standards for equipment. This may reflect a lack of available technical expertise in some Member States.

Follow up inspections: 8 follow up inspections were conducted at EU airports during 2007. In these cases, it has generally been found that at least a third of the serious deficiencies identified during the initial inspection were rectified within a reasonable time frame; but no airport was able to remedy all serious deficiencies before the follow up inspection was carried out. The most intractable difficulties appear to involve staff screening (human factors, the inappropriate use of hand held metal detectors) and aircraft security.

The results of the Commission inspections have indicated a number of difficulties in connection with implementation of the Regulations. Annual reports and other information from Member States and the industry have flagged up similar problems. The main issues appear to be:

lack of clarity or over-onerous requirements in the current legislation; variations between Member States' requirements, leading to a lack of harmony across the Community; lack of transparency and proper review ; a perception that operational requirements are not sufficiently taken into account; lack of standardisation on technological requirements; variations between Community requirements and those of third countries , particularly the US; excessive demand on Member States resources arising from duplication of requirements , especially in relation to different inspection regimes (ICAO and TSA in addition to EU).

Considerable efforts were made to address each of these issues in 2007, with the express aim of facilitating passenger movements through Community airports and easing the burden on the industry, without compromising security standards.

Regulatory Developments in 2007: 2007 saw a heavy programme of legislative development, including: i) the second reading and conciliation stage of the adoption of the framework regulation to replace Regulation 2320/2002; ii) further development of the planned new implementing Regulation to replace Commission Regulation 622/20037; iii) further work on new texts to replace Regulations 1217/2003 (national quality control) and 1486/2003 (Commission inspections of Member States); iv) a new layer of legislation to give the European Parliament greater powers of scrutiny for implementing legislation in the field of aviation security; v) agreement on technical standards for threat image projection; and review and amendment of the legislation addressing the threat from liquid explosives (cabin bag size, third country agreements).

2008 work programme : the Commission intends to:

finalise the new implementing legislation; find better ways of addressing the threat from liquid explosives; consider the most appropriate approach to the funding of aviation security; continue the inspection programme (including involvement as observers in some inspections in the US); introduce new technical standards; assist Member States to improve and harmonise national quality control programmes; analyse the results of studies; and advance agreements with third countries.

While security considerations must always be paramount, the active involvement of stakeholder groups, rigorous appraisal of new proposals and regular review of existing legislation will ensure that this programme will be developed in a way which takes full consideration of practical concerns and benefit from the lessons of experience.

The report concludes that progress since 2002 has been substantial. The future programme will build on this achievement, enhancing security on flights in to and out of the Community, protecting European interests and maintaining public confidence in the air transport system. It will lead to a further, and significant, stage in the development of a comprehensive air transport security regime, taking full account of the needs of passengers and the industry.

COM(2008)0582
EUR-Lex

The Commission has presented its second report on the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 on civil aviation. This second report covers the period July 2005-December 2006 and is based more particularly on the conclusions drawn from some fifty new inspections carried out by the Commission. It enables a comprehensive evaluation to be made of the state of security in the European Union four years after the entry into force of the European legislation.

Since February 2004 when inspections began, the Commission has carried out 89 inspections, including 47 new inspections conducted between July 2005 and December 2006 in EU-25 and

Switzerland . To date, all Member States have been inspected between two and five times, with visits either to the national appropriate authorities for civil aviation security or to airports themselves.

Inspections of national appropriate authorities : the initial conclusions drawn in 2005 can be confirmed: while transposition of the regulatory obligations is more or less satisfactory, the effectiveness of the Member States' national quality control is not. The operational implementation of national quality programmes has been found to have numerous deficiencies which are often considered by inspectors to be serious; the effectiveness of national quality control is at present structurally inadequate in ten or so Member States. The report notes the following:

in many Member States, audits are neither regular enough nor comprehensive enough; many of the Member States do not have enough national inspectors to carry out quality control tasks with adequate frequency; the performance of the rectification process, i.e. the speed at which deficiencies found required to be put right, varies; in some Member States, sanctions are imposed only in exceptional circumstances.

Inspections at airports : the results of the 23 new initial inspections carried out since July 2005 confirm the main points highlighted in the Commission's first report. The basic principles, such as 100% screening of passengers, hand luggage and hold luggage, are being soundly applied.

In overall terms, the level of security in the European Union is high. However, the level of security is not uniform throughout the Union as there are substantial differences between airports. Deficiencies are still regularly found which compromise the general quality of the security measures: i) recurring deficiencies of minor or average seriousness were found in respect of essential procedures concerning access control, aircraft protection, the screening of passenger and the protection of hold luggage; ii) the cases of non-compliance with European regulations are often more serous as regards the screening of staff, aircraft searches, and the screening of hand luggage and cargo. Within the same airport, for example, identical procedures might not be used for the screening of staff and passengers, the methods applied to staff being more flexible and not allowing the systematic detection of prohibited articles; iii) the tests carried out during inspections confirm the need for technical harmonisation of security equipment; this process has been initiated and 2 regulations have been approved; iv) some operators find the regulations unclear, and further provisions have been drafted in this respect too.

The seriousness of the deficiencies found must not be underestimated: nine initial inspections out of ten are still pointing to serious deficiencies which have repercussions on the security chain. Given the principle of one-stop security which underpins Regulation No 2320/2002, the deficiencies are often likely to have a direct negative impact on security at other European Union airports.

Regulatory developments in 2006 : numerous Regulations have been adopted to try to improve the existing systems in place. They aim to: i) give greater precision on security procedures for those vehicles that are entering ‘security restricted areas’ of airports; ii) lay down more harmonised rules on air cargo security; iii) implement a regulatory solution to allow for Member States to deviate from the technical standards laid down in the legislation in order to trial new technologies; iv) adopt of a Commission Regulation on the risks of liquid explosives arising from the events of 10 August 2006 in the United Kingdom.

In 2007 , several lines of action in particular should be pursued:

1) Action to strengthen the performance of quality control by the appropriate authorities of the Member States :

Member States' performance of quality control has so far been identified as the weak link in the civil aviation security chain. Strengthening it should therefore have a lever effect. It is in particular essential that Member States carry out quality control in line with Community requirements and make the lessons drawn known at all their airports. This means combining the mobilisation of human resources in the form of the inspectors needed with the use of adequate implementing powers; cooperation between Member States on auditing with a view to the regular evaluation of operators with business activities throughout the EU should also be encouraged; the Commission for its part will continue to conduct inspections and infringement proceedings will be brought where necessary.

2) Actions to improve the present regulatory framework :

in order to strengthen the complementarity between Community and national audits, Regulations (EC) Nos 1486/2003 and 1217/2003 should be revised. Requirements regarding national audit procedures, the rectification of deficiencies and the proportionality of quality control with the national airport system will have to be defined more clearly; given the importance of the human factor for the quality of the security control process, the Commission is examining proposals for improving training requirements for security staff; it is the Commission’s intention that Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 should be developed further on a regular basis in order to revise security requirements either whenever technical developments or the need for additional precision at the Community level justifies it; the Commission intends to re-assess the continued necessity of the range of regulatory requirements in the field of aviation security based on operational experience and on updated risk assessments. Successive incidents over past years have necessitated emergency action to respond to immediate threats, putting considerable strains on available security control resources and on operational requirements at airport level. It is clear, however, that reviewing and subsequently removing or redefining some of the current requirements will necessitate prior adoption of the Commission's proposal for a new, simplified and more flexible framework Regulation which is currently in the legislative process. There would be considerable potential for operational facilitation if ways could be found to extend the intra-EU concept of one-stop security to like-minded third countries with equivalent high standards of security; the Commission is actively working on this concept and is expecting first results in due course following adoption of the new framework Regulation.

COM(2007)0542
EUR-Lex

This report is published pursuant to the requirement that the Commission should publish each year a

report on the implementation of the common rules in the field of civil aviation security and on the situation in the Community as far as aviation security is concerned, drawing conclusions on inspections conducted by the Commission.

The Commission’s inspections started in February 2004 and a total of 43 Commission inspections have been conducted since (as at 30 June 2005). 23 Member States had already been inspected by the Commission at least once. All the Member States of the EU 15 had been inspected at least once in 2004. Since December 2004 the inspections have been extended to the 10 new Member States.

Inspections have been particularly valuable in allowing the implementation of the legislation to be examined objectively. In this regard the report concludes that, in general, the sum total of Regulation 2320/2002 and its associated implementing legislation is helping to ensure a satisfactory level of security throughout the EU. In the absence of data on the actual level of security before the Community legislation entered into force, it is certainly difficult to assess the scope of progress made in each of the Member States and at the airports inspected.

There are a number of areas of non-conformity repeatedly detected during inspections of Community airports. Examples include the following:

-the screening of staff showed noticeable variations in the extent of such controls. Significant harmonisation and improvement of security standards in this area can be expected upon entry into force on 1 January 2006 of the second phase foreseen in Regulation 1138/2004 requiring the screening of all staff entering any area to which screened passengers have access.

-the performance of the air carriers is not always homogenous, with some complying better with the requirements than others. Verification and protection of aircraft should in particular be improved.

-non-conforming practices have also been observed with regard to freight, where there seems to be a strong need for a more harmonised common approach.

-particular provisions of the regulations are sometimes considered insufficiently unclear by the air carriers concerned.

Internal quality control mechanisms among all air transport operators – in particular airport authorities, air carriers and freight managers – would enable them to measure their own performance with regard to security and their conformity with the European standards.

Despite these areas of non-conformity it can be concluded that the introduction of binding Community legislation in the field of aviation security has contributed to a significant improvement of the protection of European citizens from acts of unlawful interference against civil aviation.

The existing legal system including the powers to ensure proper enforcement rules as well as legal requirements more demanding than the obligations and recommendations laid down in Convention of International Civil Aviation allows for the conclusion that the quality of aviation security in the EU is standard-setting in a global context.

On the need to develop Regulation 2320/2002, the report states that, overall there is still some room for improving the protection of European citizens further without compromising the operators’ legitimate interests. These improvements should be addressed by means of a revision of Regulation 2320/2002.

This revision is necessary to meet various needs connected with the simplification of procedures for adapting existing specifications, technical harmonisation, clarification of particular provisions, improvement of the level of security, and determination of mechanisms for cooperation with third countries.

COM(2005)0428
EUR-Lex

32003R0622
OJ L 089 05.04.2003, p. 0009-0010

Regulation 2002/2320
OJ L 355 30.12.2002, p. 0001-0022

T5-0584/2002
OJ C 027 30.01.2004, p. 0025-0110 E

T5-0584/2002

3660/2002

3660/2002

A5-0402/2002

A5-0402/2002

COM(2002)0327
EUR-Lex

T5-0217/2002
OJ C 180 31.07.2003, p. 0023-0085 E

T5-0217/2002

Debate in Parliament

A5-0134/2002

A5-0134/2002

SEC(2002)0065
EUR-Lex

15029/4/2001
OJ C 113 14.05.2002, p. 0017 E

15029/4/2001

T5-0628/2001
OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0031-0247 E

T5-0628/2001

CES1485/2001
OJ C 048 21.02.2002, p. 0070

Debate in Parliament

A5-0415/2001

A5-0415/2001

2374

EUR-Lex
COM(2001)0575
OJ C 051 26.02.2002, p. 0221 E

EUR-Lex
COM(2001)0575