Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-14-Speech-2-131"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000314.8.2-131"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the question we have heard several times in the course of this debate is this: what exactly is the point of this Charter of Human Rights, when there is already one, and even several universal conventions on human rights and a European Convention on Human Rights, and human rights are included in the constitutions of all the Member States, those of the candidate countries and, generally, in the constitutions of all countries, even those who do not respect human rights?
It certainly is not useful, as has been claimed previously, in terms of improving or strengthening human rights within the construction of Europe. No, and we should pay tribute to Mrs Berès for having just now clearly given direction to a debate which marks a key turning point in the history of the construction of Europe, the transition from an economic and commercial Europe to a political and institutional Europe.
Of course, the Charter of Human Rights is the first step in this direction, but, as with everything which characterises the construction of Europe, the approach is indirect, concealed, tortuous and, I might even say, ‘Jesuitical’. The question of a constitution and its contents is not asked, but instead the question of a charter of human rights which is obviously the precursor for a constitution, it being understood that the precursor will eventually give rise to a constitution proper and then, possible, to a State. The interesting thing about this approach – and here again I must pay tribute to Mrs Berès for her clear-sightedness and honesty, even if, as she knows, I totally disagree with her conclusions – is that it tends to determine what will be the principles of the European communities, or of the community of human beings living within the European Union.
When Mrs Berès speaks of the rights being applied not only to citizens but also to visiting and resident aliens, she is tackling a matter which, I feel, is probably going to be developed in the texts already submitted and to be submitted in future to this House, to wit, what will be the basis of the rights which will govern the European Union? Is it to be citizenship in the way that we traditionally understand it, with rights which characterise in a specific way the people belonging to a given community? Or is it to be rights extended to parties other than citizens proper, with a shift, or at least the start of a shift, from democracy based on citizenship towards democracy based on the equal treatment of individuals resident, whether long-term residents or visitors, on European Union territories.
I feel that this is a problem which as yet we can only see the premises of, but, in my view, it is absolutely essential to see the premises in order to be able subsequently to follow the thread."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples