Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-09-15-Speech-3-023"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19990915.3.3-023"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, you have already expressed our jointly felt sadness regarding the aircrash and the Greek delegation, but I would still like to say how overcome with grief I was today when I heard of the death of my good friend and colleague and that of other Greek citizens. I would ask you to pass these sentiments on.
We shall pay special attention throughout to human rights and transparency, which are an essential part of the foundations of an area of freedom, security and justice. I might point out that everyone living within the territory of the Union must enjoy human rights, without discrimination. Apart from that, I want to make the point that when we respect the rights of minorities, we not only respect their human rights and dignity but, at the same time, we also increase the stability of our society and, hence, the security of all our citizens.
Then I would like to speak in rather more detail about immigration and asylum policy which, as I am aware, the Minister for Home Affairs and the Minister for Justice have already given an account of here. In my opinion, all who reside or who are hoping to reside in the Union area have a right to security. A key aim of the European Council meeting in Tampere should be an agreement to create for the Union a common policy on immigration and asylum. At Tampere, we should achieve consensus on the creation of a European asylum system based on common principles. And what, then, should it be based on? It should be mainly based on the Geneva Convention relating to the status of refugees and Article 63 of the Treaty on European Union. The aim is to offer a high level of protection, common to all countries as far as is possible, to those who need it. Our goal must be a single European asylum area, which observes common minimum provisions and procedures. In this way, the system will be simpler, clearer and quicker, which is good as far as human beings are concerned. At the same time, obviously, we must the whole time ensure that this cannot lead to situations that compromise human rights. We must remember that the right to asylum is an individual right.
The crisis in Kosovo showed that it is high time the Union agreed, inter alia, the divisions of responsibility and principles to follow in times of temporary protection. The Union must be ready to offer swift protection in mass evacuation situations. The offer of temporary protection relies on the will to be protected and the will and ability on the part of the recipient state to take responsibility. I believe that we shall achieve results in this respect at Tampere. For me, it seems natural that in mass evacuation situations, Community funds could be used and other Community joint financing measures could be taken to provide economic compensation. In this way, solidarity among the Member States would come about in a more natural way.
Secondly, the basis for allowing immigration and the prevention of illegal immigration must be standardised. The rights and obligations of foreigners legally resident in the Member States of the Union must be safeguarded in a more standardised way. For me it would be quite conceivable that the rights of someone who has immigrated into a country should be closer to those of the citizens of that country after that person has lived there legally for a certain period of time. It would certainly be most important for a migrant to find out, for example, about social services and his or her rights in respect of political activity. There is experience of this in certain countries that we can draw on.
Next, I would like to speak of the Union’s external border controls. As this also concerns the country holding the Presidency, we have obviously given consideration to this matter before. The Union’s external border controls must be developed so that it becomes better balanced and more standardised, in compliance with the Schengen measures. With the next phase of enlargement, the external borders of the Union will once again alter, and the importance of viable surveillance will grow both as far as the security of the public and freedom of movement are concerned. It is most important to focus on action to prevent illegal immigration without jeopardising any further the institution of asylum, for example.
The Treaty of Amsterdam provides new opportunities for planning a policy of repatriation. In my opinion, we must take full advantage of these new opportunities. At Tampere, we could come to an agreement that Community and other agreements should consistently contain clauses relating to repatriation. In certain cases, the Union should aim to initiate negotiations leading to multilateral agreements on repatriation. The Treaty of Amsterdam also calls for provisions to be drafted among the Member States of the Community on the subject of repatriation. The Union must also actively support those who are willing to return to their land of origin. In this connection, we must investigate the means available to us. I shall give just one example: the use of development aid could be one way of easing the repatriation process.
The Union’s immigration and asylum policy must form a properly integrated part of our current, more standardised foreign relations policy. We must turn our attention to the conditions prevailing in the most significant countries migrants and those seeking asylum are departing from, conditions that induce or even force them to leave their homeland. The Union could try to influence the situation by means of various arrangements for co-operation in the areas of foreign and security policy, development co-operation, economic co-operation and migration policy. The Union must also show greater capacity for responding to different crisis situations. A report by a top-level working party in the Council, which discussed this issue in full, will be distributed, with its various annexes according to country, to Parliament in the next few days.
Now I will turn to the issue of tackling cross-border crime. The creation of an area of security, where justice prevails, will only be possible if those who abuse its freedoms are brought to justice. We have to remove the technical, administrative and legislative barriers that hamper co-operation among the authorities. One real development, which I think could well be raised at Tampere, would be to come to an agreement making it possible to make use of international investigatory teams. The police authorities should be given powers to act in cross-border co-operation with the relevant national authorities to resolve any given case.
Europol is an important tool in this sort of co-operation. It must be given the resources it needs to commence operations, and, furthermore, the necessary political support. After that, more thorough consideration must be given to the expansion of its operation. At Tampere Europol’s field of operation should first be expanded to cover crime relating to money laundering. Secondly, the European Council could charge the Council with embarking on the drafting of legislation that would oblige Member States to respond to requests from Europol for investigation and assistance. The extension of powers for Europol I hope for must be reinforced by means of legal and political monitoring of the operation. These must be equally balanced.
I also hope that the time is ripe to identify the existence of those types of crime for which more harmonised criminal legislation among the Member States would result in more effective intervention on our part. I do not wish to appear too ambitious in these matters. I know that it would take any amount of hard work, but I shall list those matters that are of most importance. At the European Council meeting in Tampere, we could identify, for example, the following areas as taking priority: the trade in women and children, child pornography, money laundering, making counterfeit euro notes, and safeguarding new, cross-border technology. These are the recommendations of the country holding the Presidency.
I would like to thank you for the honour I have today of speaking to you on the subject of the agenda and the preparatory work relating to the forthcoming Extraordinary European Council meeting. At the European Council meeting in Tampere, we wish to take the next big step towards a Union that will provide for the people who live within its borders an area of freedom, security and justice. This is a logical and inevitable step in the Union’s development. We have built a single market in which people, goods, services and capital may circulate freely. We are in the process of adopting a common currency, which will add to the benefit of us all. Next, we must guarantee each and every person living in the Union area the genuine right to freedom of movement and, at the same time, the right to security everywhere in the Union area. In this respect the Union must, in compliance with the Treaty of Amsterdam, eventually become one united area in which people and business players can enjoy to the full the rights that are theirs. At Tampere, we must agree future policy guidelines for co-operation, commit to certain jointly agreed concrete action, and ensure that restrictions imposed by the Pillars do not constitute a barrier to the effective action we wish to see.
In fighting crime, we must strive for its prevention. We have to prevent opportunities for crime and we must make it harder and less tempting to commit crime. The aim is obviously to reduce in particular the risk of young people committing crime. In this way, we safeguard our future.
We must pay special attention to the status of the victims of crime and those suspected or accused of crime. I want to emphasise that it is necessary to work in each of these areas. At Tampere, we should be able to reach a decision on the drafting of a programme of co-operation at Union level to help the victims of crime. The rights of victims should be protected in such a way as to guarantee them equal status irrespective of Member State, nationality or language. At Tampere, our Heads of State and Government could also ask the Commission for a proposal on a system which would guarantee, inter alia
adequate interpretation facilities and legal aid for those suspected or accused of crimes in different Member States. I hope that you will not think I am taking up too much time on these issues; I admit I am a former Minister for Justice, although here and now I appear in my capacity as Foreign Minister.
Next, I wish to speak of a European judicial area. When we discuss the development of co-operation relating to matters of law and internal matters, the main emphasis is perhaps too readily placed on action in connection with security. However, it is at least as important to consider how we may improve the situation with respect to human rights in the European Union.
The creation of the single market and the adoption of the euro have increased dealings among people in many ways. The consequences of this new internationalism are plainly visible. There are more and more marriages between people of different countries and, similarly, people work and study abroad, buy and sell goods and services abroad, and invest or borrow money in countries other than their own. This has become a part of normal everyday life.
Owing to the different legal, administrative and technical barriers that exist, it is, however, still unduly difficult to make full use of one’s rights. We know that the barriers are in certain respects very much due to the differences that exist in national legal systems. We also know that in this Union area there are northern, southern and common law systems of jurisdiction, so I do not by any means underestimate the difficulties. We are still a long way from being a single European area, although we speak of issues that directly concern the everyday existence of human beings. The creation of a European judicial area will be, however, one of the most important challenges for the Union in the next few years. Our citizens must be able to put their trust in the workability of legal and administrative systems and the adequacy of legal protection, irrespective of whereabouts in the Union they are travelling or are resident. The aim must be to safeguard the fair treatment of our citizens, promote the establishment at national level of less complex institutions for resolving disputes, and ensure basic legal protection.
Firstly, people must, without undue difficulty, be able to discover what factors mainly affect their legal status. They must also have adequate scope for making their rights a practical reality. This is a matter for both the legal and the administrative authorities. Procedures must not be too slow, complicated or expensive. People should be able to take full advantage of existing information technology. Heads of State and Government could give their support to a scheme whereby the Union starts to discover how access to legal aid in the various Member States might be made easier and could promote the establishment at national level of less complex institutions for resolving disputes.
I think Member States should adopt a constructive stance in recognising decisions and judgements made by the authorities in other Member States. All of us involved in politics know very well how difficult this sometimes is, and the sort of publicity it leads to. We must be able to recognise court judgements and decisions made by the authorities throughout the Union area. This would save people from unnecessary bureaucracy and excessive costs, and would show that we have confidence in the legal systems of others. I would like to remind you all that we have already made significant progress in certain areas (for example, the amendments to the Treaty of Brussels and the Lugano Convention). Government leaders at Tampere could thus commit to a situation that is now making consistent progress.
Neither should we fear the harmonisation of civil and criminal law, or at least investigating the possibility of it. The Treaty of Amsterdam opens up new opportunities in this area for both procedural and substantive law. We could have common minimum provisions for certain matters concerning, for example, the admissibility of evidence, legal aid and other aspects of court procedure in cases that transcend borders. Then, dare I say it, we could also investigate in what areas of the law of property, contract law and even family law we could make progress in. This would increase legal security. I know that the law is only an extension of culture. There are obviously enormous cultural differences within the area, but nothing should prevent us from exploring possibilities for making people’s everyday existence easier.
I have spoken very clearly in favour of closer co-operation and the harmonisation of legislation. I would like to state just as emphatically that this must not lead to a situation in which we would be bartering away the hallmarks of our various cultures. On the contrary, as I said, a legal system is part of a culture; it reflects each country’s own particular culture. In a certain way, we must appreciate and respect that. Nevertheless, I would also like to remind everyone that we have agreed certain common principles, which we can bring to all our Member States.
At Tampere, we shall also decide upon the implementation of the decisions taken on the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The discussion of the contents of the Charter of Fundamental Rights will, however, take place elsewhere, that is to say by the preparatory body established in respect of the Charter, and in which the European Parliament too will have an important role to play.
Up till now, the greatest successes of the Union have been based on the adoption of the Community method. It last showed its strength in the creation of the single market. It may also be feasible to use it now. Legislation in Member States must be brought closer in a spirit of impartiality, and harmonised; we have to create common minimum provisions and apply the principle of mutual recognition. Above all, I believe that we can achieve a good deal of co-operation by removing the technical, administrative and legal barriers that prejudice it. In mentioning this latter area, my comment might sound lightweight, but in practice, it is just that barrier that we have to overcome. I myself sincerely believe that if we were to ask the citizens of the Member States what they wished to see, it would be that they expect the Union to become more effective and determined in their resolve to reinforce their rights and strengthen their security.
An immediate project to reinforce human rights also constitutes an enforcement of Article 13 of the Treaty on European Union. That Article obliges the Community to commence action to counter discrimination. I shall expect initiatives from the Commission regarding the implementation of this aim, which should be achieved as quickly as possible.
Chancellor Schröder and the Finnish Prime Minister, Mr Lipponen, sent a jointly signed letter to their colleagues in March, since which time we have been collecting ideas from Member States drafted in their capital cities on the meeting’s agenda, its aims and its main areas of focus. The Minister for Justice and the Minister for Home Affairs whom you have heard speak here, begin their talks on the same subject tomorrow in Turku.
We shall make a final decision on the Tampere agenda only when the viewpoints of other bodies have also been heard, which the Prime Minister will hear when he makes his tour of capitals at the end of the month. In preparatory work for the meeting, we are also making use of, inter alia
the results of the work of a top-level working party on asylum and immigration and the viewpoints of the European Parliament. We are also working in co-operation with the UN. The UNHCR and numerous NGOs have made an important contribution.
I believe that you would like to know what my view is of the participation on the part of the European Parliament. The European Parliament has now had a significant impact on the outcome of the Tampere agenda. The Finnish Minister for Justice and Minister for Home Affairs attended the Inter-Parliamentary Conference organised for 24 and 25 March this year by the European Parliament on the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice. They also debated the issue with the Committee on Parliamentary Affairs at the beginning of September. I can assure you now that our discussions today will play an important part too. I shall convey your views to the Minister for Justice and the Minister for Home Affairs who can then take account of them in their own talks. The meeting at Tampere we shall organise ourselves in compliance with the conventions established for European Councils. The meeting will start with a speech by the President of the European Parliament.
Many NGOs and the media have long held the view that, whenever we speak of matters of law or internal affairs, we in the Union remain rather secretive. We now have to rid ourselves of this image. We are taking decisions that will directly impact on the lives of our citizens. Then it is a matter of democracy that decisions are taken openly and even if their subject matter is fiercely debated, everyone should be aware of it. I am quite ready to discuss this issue here. I promise to listen closely to you and reply to your questions to the best of my ability. I believe that we shall reach consensus on most issues.
Increasing internal security will require a more obviously standardised and consistent policy than exists at present, and that is also true of the Union’s external relations. The methods used in legal and home affairs policy as well as foreign and security policy, in the same way as with commercial and development co-operation policy, must be made more uniform so that our citizens may be assured of a secure environment in these respects also.
I would also like to remind everyone that the Union will be growing in the near future. We must keep it very clear in our minds that this geographical area we call the Union will be expanding over the following years. Co-operation in the area of internal affairs and legal matters must be developed with the applicant countries so that together we can achieve the goals we have set for Union policy. External relations have to be examined as a whole, with the neighbouring regions to the north, east and south having an equal share in the policy.
Before I go into the details of the Tampere agenda, may I be so bold, although I am at a sitting of the European Parliament, as to remind everyone that, happily, we are not alone in Europe. For purposes of co-operation, we can also rely on the Council of Europe and the OSCE, which have meritorious traditions and can offer much expertise in this matter. I hope we can bear them too in mind in developing the co-operation I have referred to.
It is my intention today to inform you of the agenda and preparatory work relating to the European Council meeting in Tampere. Before anything else, I would like to outline some of the main aims of the Presidency before the meeting takes place. At the same time, I hope your ideas will inspire me in further preparation for the meeting, since we still have that opportunity.
Firstly then, the Tampere agenda: the European Council meeting in Tampere will focus on three main issues, namely immigration and asylum policy, tackling cross-border crime, and a European judicial area.
Clearer goals than those that existed earlier for justice and home affairs were created with the Treaty of Amsterdam. The decision-making procedures available to us and the legislative instruments to be used are now more effective and the Community institutions are in a stronger position. The position of the Presidency is that the new instruments now have to be made full use of. The European Council at Vienna last December furnished us with an excellent plan of action which sets out our work timetable for the near future. There is no need, then, to draft a new plan of action at Tampere. We are hoping that the Tampere meeting will produce policies and commitments, the necessity for which our citizens in the various countries can also understand."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples