Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-28-Speech-3-091"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011128.5.3-091"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Madam President, it is a matter of regret and perhaps even of shame that it took the events of 11 September to push European governments into tackling effectively a problem which has plagued our continent for over a generation. In 1997 in Amsterdam, and again in 1999 in Tampere in Finland, the Heads of State and Government committed themselves to tackling terrorism. Our review of progress early this year showed that they had done nothing about it, which was why we as a Parliament brought forward a report calling on them to take action. The events of 11 September have fortunately brought such action and I look forward to travelling to Washington shortly to talk about common action between the European Union and the United States of America.
I would like to thank the political groups in this House for their cooperation in drawing up this report, particularly the Members from Spain. In my report, I broadly welcome the Commission proposals for a Council framework decision on combating terrorism and for a European arrest warrant. The amendments which I put forward seek to restrict the list of crimes defined as terrorist crimes and covered by the European arrest warrant to the most serious cross-border criminal offences, and if I may quote Amendment No 16, it specifies those crimes "which aim to destroy the fundamental freedoms, democracy, respect for human rights, civil liberties and the rule of law on which our societies are based". We seek too to insert safeguards for civil liberties by basing action clearly on international human rights documents, by reinforcing the principle of
by taking account of time spent in detention awaiting trial and by allowing Member States refusal to extradite when there are manifestly sound reasons for doing so, including in those cases where a person found guilty could face a penalty of death. Moreover, we seek to provide aids to victims of terrorism and their families.
I shall ask the House to accept one amendment, which was submitted after the deadline and which takes account of the most recent developments in Council. One Member State is threatening to block progress towards a European arrest warrant. There is a method – not one which I recommend – but one which may be needed
in order to press ahead, and that is to invoke Article 40 of the Treaty allowing reinforced cooperation between a certain number of Member States. Terrorism is a supranational challenge and calls for a supranational response. We cannot allow the blockage of one Member State to prevent common action in fighting it.
When we met in this Chamber, on 12 September, we had a debate in which I remember Mr Poettering and many others said that we were all Americans. Since then, we have discovered that we must first be Europeans. We acknowledge that recognition of judicial judgements and judicial standards requires trust in each other's systems, but not blind trust, and for that reason I have put forward an amendment calling for urgent measures to improve judicial systems in our Member States, to encourage benchmarking, to encourage exchange of best practice. The process of creating an area of freedom, security and justice is similar to that of creating the single market, but it is more urgent and, moreover, we are dealing not with the freedom of movement of goods, services or capital, but with the freedom of people.
The Greens and other political groups are saying, don't go ahead until you are sure that everybody's judicial standards are perfect. Majority opinion, however, on the Committee recognises that the scope of the challenge we face and the historical imperative are such that we must press ahead with these measures with prudence, and with vigilance, but also with determination.
We must ensure effective action against terrorists and yet we must not deny legitimate political expression of grievances. I was surprised to read in El País this morning an interpretation of one amendment, which I support, that it would outlaw Herri Batasuna. I do not interpret the amendment in this way, nor would such an amendment be necessary to target those involved in supporting terrorist acts. Other provisions in what we are proposing do that. I would say to colleagues, and particularly to our Spanish colleagues, that in our determination to tackle terrorism, we must acknowledge that terrorists sometimes express political grievances, and that these require a political response.
Council is discussing the proposals put forward by the Commission; Parliament, which desperately needs powers of codecision, may be reconsulted on this matter. We are determined to assist governments in their work and yet maintain the delicate balance between the security needs of our citizens and preservation of their democratic freedoms. In this, cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs has received quite a boost. Whatever it was that we planned at Amsterdam, the paradox is that events are what drives Europe forward: just as Mr Haider's election led us to adopt effective legislation against racism and xenophobia, so it may be that Mr bin Laden has done much for European Union integration.
May I say, finally, what a pleasure it is to see you as a fellow Liberal Democrat in the Chair in this session. I wish you a successful debate."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples