Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-15-Speech-3-162"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000315.4.3-162"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, as my colleague Chris Patten has clearly said, it is my responsibility to set out the Commission’s position on the other two reports being discussed this afternoon. These are the Haarder and Ludford reports.
Furthermore, the Presidency’s conclusions define the four pillars which will form the future basis of the joint European policy on asylum and immigration. These pillars are: partnership with the countries of origin, a common European asylum system, fair treatment for third country nationals and more efficient management of migratory flows.
I must particularly stress the need for the European Union to have a comprehensive approach to immigration which covers political aspects, human rights and development questions in the countries and regions of origin and transit. The latter involve the fight against poverty, improvement of living conditions and job opportunities, prevention of conflicts, consolidation of democratic states and respect for human rights, including those of minorities.
I wish to confirm the importance which the Union and its Member States attach to absolute respect for the right to ask for asylum on the basis of a full and comprehensive application of the Geneva Convention. I must also underline the intention to develop a vigorous policy on the integration of third country nationals legally resident on EU Member State territory. Finally, although these measures are needed to guarantee social peace in our Member States, we must recognise that the fight against illegal immigration must be strengthened and the protection of the rights of the victims of the criminal networks organising such immigration must be guaranteed. Particular attention must be paid to the situation of women’s and children’s rights.
I therefore share the rapporteur’s and Parliament’s concerns. The Commission asks you to note that, in response to your concerns, our concerns and the requirements of the Tampere mandate, we intend during this year to submit all the main instruments of the asylum policy to Parliament and the Council. These consist of the joint procedures, the revision of the Dublin Convention and the final Eurodac instrument. However, at the same time, the Commission intends, in the autumn, to submit to Parliament a communication on immigration policy in the European Union. We must review the 1994 communication and update the approach to the questions of immigration policy in the Union in light of the Tampere conclusions.
As for the inadequacies of the legal services which have been underlined during this debate, the Commission does not intend to tackle some of these albeit very interesting theoretical and practical questions, such as the career structure of national judges or the duration of trials in several Member States. This is because we should respect the principle of subsidiarity and recognise that the basic options must be the decision of each Member State.
The Commission would underline in this respect that a green paper on legal aid represents a worthwhile contribution, both to the requirement to define common rules on the protection of defendants, such as the guarantee of assistance from interpreters and translators in cross-border trials, and to the establishment of a wider programme of mutual recognition of legal decisions.
As for civil justice, the communitisation of several civil justice instruments is an efficient way of ensuring the effective legal consideration of human rights. The Commission has already proposed communitising all existing conventions not currently in force, particularly the one on the service of documents and the Brussels II Convention and the convention on bankruptcies. We have also proposed making the very important Brussels Convention of 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters into a regulation. All these instruments are currently being examined by the Council. Even the United Kingdom and Ireland have decided to join the Member States on this and Denmark, which does not have the same capacity to participate in work on civil legal cooperation, is also seeking solutions which are currently being examined.
Finally, with regard to children’s and women’s rights, although these matters specifically come under the competence of Member States, I can remind the House that the Commission and I have undertaken to submit a package of measures on these questions by the end of the year. These measures will aim to go beyond the joint action of February 1997. They will consist of definitions, charges and penalties in the fight against the trade in human beings for the purposes of sexual exploitation and measures against the sexual exploitation of children.
Firstly, the Commission shares the European Parliament’s view that the new legal context, following the adoption of the Amsterdam Treaty, gives the Union increased competence and responsibility for human rights.
In this respect the Commission congratulates the European Council’s initiative to prepare an EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. This will give greater visibility to these rights and also, I hope, greater legal security if, as desired by both Parliament and the Commission, this Charter becomes a legally binding instrument under the supervision of the courts.
In this context and as the personal representative of the Commission President to the convention responsible for preparing this Charter, I must defend the view that the Charter should be extended to third country nationals legally resident on the territory of Member States.
The Commission is also pleased to note that its views are basically in agreement with those of the European Parliament on the nature and content of this Charter. This was also the case in yesterday’s debate on the Duff and Voggenhuber report and it is also true with regard to the conclusions of the report by Mr Haarder whom I warmly congratulate.
The Commission shares the concern for action, and not just words, in ensuring the coherence of the rules on human rights applied by the national courts and by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg or the Court of Justice of the European Communities.
In this respect there is no doubt that the signature of the European Convention on Human Rights by the European Union would allow the hierarchy of the courts’ decisions to be clarified and would allow external supervision of Community law, as is already the case with the legal systems of the Member States. The signature of this Convention is certainly compatible with the preparation of a binding Charter of Fundamental Rights.
With regard to the content of the Haarder report, I will particularly concentrate on the aspects which come directly within my area of competence within the Commission.
The conclusions of the Tampere European Council provide a very clear political framework for the EU’s policy on respecting and promoting migrants’ rights in the broad sense of the term. The Heads of State and Government underlined that the joint policies on immigration and asylum to be developed on the basis of the Amsterdam Treaty should be founded on principles which are clear to the people and which offer guarantees to those seeking protection in the European Union or requesting access to its territory."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples