Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 6kWORD 18k
3 September 2018
Question for written answer E-004474-18
to the Commission
Rule 130
Xabier Benito Ziluaga (GUE/NGL) , Bodil Valero (Verts/ALE) , Julie Ward (S&D) , Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE) , Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz (ALDE)

 Subject:  Missing Basque citizen found dead in Sweden: Identification of remains and dealings with the family
 Answer in writing 

The case of Miguel Ángel Martínez Santamaría, who disappeared under mysterious circumstances in Sweden, is characterised by numerous irregularities.

After an autopsy had been performed by the Swedish authorities, the Consular Section of the Spanish Embassy in Stockholm registered the death of Mr Martínez Santamaría on 11 October 2005.

However, there is no indication that the Embassy in any way documented the identification of Mr Miguel Ángel Martínez Santamaría, whose death was officially registered on the basis of notification by the Swedish authorities.

In addition, neither the Stockholm Police nor the Spanish Consulate has to date provided any official documentation regarding registration of the death in Sweden.

1. Does the Commission consider that the Spanish authorities have infringed the law by failing to provide a certified copy of the document identifying the body as that of Miguel Ángel Martínez Santamaría?

2. Does the Commission consider that the Swedish authorities should have provided an official civil registry death certificate?

3. Does the Commission consider that directive 2012/29/EU has been infringed in this connection, given the treatment of the family of the deceased, which was not even allowed to view the body?

Original language of question: ES 
Last updated: 18 September 2018Legal notice