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 104kWORD 17k
16 October 2018
Question for written answer P-005283-18
to the Council
Rule 130
Philippe Lamberts (Verts/ALE)

 Subject:  Libyan funds frozen in Belgium
 Answer in writing 

In his reply to a parliamentary question from the Belgian MP Georges Gilkinet, Belgium’s finance minister justified his government’s decision to release the interest earned on Libyan funds — frozen in Belgium under Regulation (EU) 2016/44 — by referring to the opinion issued by the Legal Service of the Council of the European Union at the RELEX Group meeting on 20 October 2011.

However, in its final report of 5 September 2018, the UN Panel of Experts on Libya considered that such payment of interest and other income runs counter to the decision to freeze Libyan assets and to the sanctions regime in general.

Assuming you can confirm that the RELEX Group did indeed meet on 20 October 2011:

Who participated, what was the prior opinion of the Council’s Legal Service, and what was the nature of the ensuing decision?

Which countries then considered this as a green light to release the interest earned on frozen Libyan funds?

And which countries have continued to respect the spirit and the letter of Regulation (EU) 2016/44 by refusing to release this interest?

Original language of question: FR 
Last updated: 25 October 2018Legal notice - Privacy policy