Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-05-Speech-4-125"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-07-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Death penalty in the world2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010705.6.4-125"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-07-05-Speech-4-1262
lpv:speaker	lp:Olivier Dupuis2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the EU-Romania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2000-01-17--2002-01-14)3 member; PETI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 member; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees for relations with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Lista Emma Bonino (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; TGI (1999-07-20--2001-10-02)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, let me make one comment first of all. Our resolution mentions 87 countries which still have the death penalty. I do not think that figure – which is provided by Amnesty International – is accurate. There are actually 71 countries which continue to apply the death penalty, and I think the difference is important given that there are 180 countries in the international community and that means the majority of abolitionist countries is much bigger than Amnesty International’s figures suggest. Furthermore, I do not think we need to regard Amnesty International either as a bible for a whole series of issues, or indeed as a representative of civil society, which is not at all the case. It is an association which does a certain job and which, in my opinion, also deserves a critical look from us from time to time, if not more frequently. Secondly – as Monica Frassoni said, along with Mr van den Berg and Mr Manisco – I think the problem is to come to the United Nations Assembly General with a resolution on the moratorium. The problem is not to abolish death. I think there are sometimes temptations in that direction. Our problem is to abolish the death penalty because we believe there is a way to render justice without recourse to it. The problem therefore consists of obtaining a moratorium, an entirely secular initiative, designed to lead other governments to consider the arguments against the death penalty and conclude, in a wise, secular way, that it is no longer necessary. Consequently I believe our work over the next few weeks will be important to enable the Belgian Presidency to present a resolution on a moratorium in New York."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph