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 43kWORD 9k
13 May 2020
E-002944/2020
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 138
Thierry Mariani (ID), Nicolas Bay (ID), Virginie Joron (ID), Jean-Paul Garraud (ID), Maxette Pirbakas (ID)
 Subject: Does terrorist financing still constitute an ‘exceptional case’ triggering exclusion from the GSP+ scheme?

According to the answer that Mr Hogan gave to question E-000417/2020 on behalf of the Commission, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and the Commission are concerned about terrorist financing in Pakistan.

In the past decade, Pakistan has been placed on the FATF's grey list a number of times. In June 2018, the country received an action plan with 27 points to implement. In February 2020, the FATF announced that none of the deadlines in this action plan had been met and reiterated its concern about the risks of terrorist financing coming from the country.

The FATF's grey list carries weight in the international arena; this explains why the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank have downgraded Pakistan’s rating, while Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch have done the same to its credit rating.

Does the Commission take account of the FATF’s warning when drawing up its assessment of Pakistan for the purposes of the GSP+?

Does it consider terrorist financing to constitute an ‘exceptional case’ justifying the withdrawal of the GSP+?

If not, what does make for an ‘exceptional case’, and where does this leave the credibility of the GSP+ scheme in view of the values it is supposed to promote?

Original language of question: FR
Last updated: 29 May 2020Legal notice - Privacy policy