Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-16-Speech-4-170"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991216.7.4-170"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, human rights, freedom and the democratic functioning of a state are fundamental and unquestionable values. Therefore, we do not accept any limitation of these values by criteria of national sovereignty or respect for geo-strategic balances. The establishment of international criminal courts, the refusal to allow crimes against humanity to lapse and the refusal to submit human rights policies to a state’s commercial interests are principles and objectives that we consider to be fundamental.
The fact that the possibility of a judicial trial is being used for political objectives deserves our concern and justifies particular attention in terms of the situation in Nicaragua. We feel, therefore, that the European Parliament must continue to follow this process and that if this suspicion is confirmed, by us or by reputable and credible human rights organisations, we will have to use the full weight of our force to end this situation.
Having said this, and in accordance with the principles for which we are fighting, we must be rigorous and cautious before casting doubts on what is a judicial decision by a sovereign state. On the other hand, our interference would not be justified by the way in which the system of politicians supporting their own interests and holding incompatible political posts is put into practice in Nicaragua.
We cannot intervene on the basis of the popularity polls of the various Presidential candidates and in relation to the main electoral issues under discussion in a sovereign state on which Nicaragua’s voters will soon pass judgement and on which they, and only they, have the right to do so. With regard to this, we would like to know what your reaction would be if we proposed a resolution requiring an ex-Prime Minister of a Member State to declare his income with regard to commissions received for arms deals, on the basis of opinion polls and bypassing the institutions of that country.
It would make more sense to pass this kind of resolution on a Member State of the European Union than on a third country, but even in that case, it would constitute an attack on the functioning of that state’s institutions and on the ability of its citizens to resolve the problem internally. This is why we appeal to the EPP to postpone this vote until our next part-session and that if, in the meantime, the political nature of Mr Jarquín’s sentence is confirmed, we shall act properly."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples