Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-07-Speech-5-041"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-07-07"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Combating serious environmental crime2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000707.3.5-041"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-07-07-Speech-5-0422
lpv:speaker	lp:Jonas Sjöstedt2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (1999-09-14--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Vänsterpartiet (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 substitute; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we in the United Left welcome this initiative from Denmark concerning the penalties which should result from environmental crime. Clearly, there are quite a lot of Member States which have problems imposing effective penalties for this type of crime. In my own country, Sweden, a great many reports of environmental crimes are now being made. It is remarkable, however, how small a proportion of the reports subsequently lead to guilty verdicts. When one looks at the consequences of these judgements, it has to be said that they are fairly light in many cases. I do not think that this is in any way unique to Sweden. These problems certainly exist in a number of Member States, and there are certainly many different reasons for this. One reason may be a lack of knowledge and of resources for investigating environmental crimes through the legal system. At the same time, there is also still an outmoded view that environmental crimes are not as serious as other crimes and that environmental laws are not as binding as other laws. If that is the case, then that is, of course, quite unacceptable. Major financial interests are often at stake. At present, it pays to commit environmental crimes because the risk of having a penalty imposed is so small. What is perhaps most remarkable about this is that there are so few countries which can sue legal persons and hold companies liable. Altering this state of affairs is perhaps the most important change which can be made. Obviously, this is, in the first place, a responsibility of the Member States, and there should be international cooperation in this area. Coordination as a result of this initiative is, of course, also necessary. In addition to the fact that coordination reinforces the work done by the Member States, I would emphasise three other reasons for engaging in this. The first is that many environmental crimes have international consequences, something which many people have emphasised in the course of the debate. The second reason is that, if this Danish initiative is implemented, it will facilitate pan-European environmental cooperation in the Council of Europe and perhaps enable this convention to be complied with. The third reason is that we all know that environmental law is that area of EC law which is least complied with. An initiative like this might also lead to EC law being better observed in the environmental area which is absolutely necessary if we consider how certain directives are followed."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph