Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-05-Speech-3-208"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010905.5.3-208"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"We have voted against the report from the Temporary Committee on the ECHELON interception system. The report has a positive aspect, but all too many negative ones. The positive aspect is the Committee’s confirmation that ECHELON exists. Among the negative aspects, the following three points, in particular, must be emphasised:
1. In spite of the Committee’s conclusion that ECHELON does in fact exist, no precise political consequences of this have been successfully formulated. In our view, that is the least that could have been expected of a politically elected assembly.
2. The committee has chosen to focus upon the illegal interception of communications from private businesses and completely plays down the serious infringement of the right to privacy as formulated in, for example, the European Convention on Human Rights. What is more, the Committee draws no political conclusions in this area other than that the obligation under the Human Rights Convention to safeguard citizens’ fundamental rights is also of benefit to individual citizens, who are urged to use encryption to protect themselves against the illegal interception of communications.
3. The Committee observes that one Member State is participating in the ECHELON cooperation on the illegal interception of communications. On this issue too, however, it does not draw any political conclusions at all. On the contrary, it encourages speeding up the development of European cooperation on intelligence matters – a form of cooperation in which the ECHELON country, Great Britain, is free to participate if it so wishes.
We are disappointed in the outcome of the Committee’s work. The European Parliament has not complied with its responsibility to strengthen human rights. The fight for human rights is seemingly strongest when solemn speeches have to be made. When it comes to practical action, citizens’ rights are subordinated to the interests of private enterprise."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples