Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-29-Speech-4-147"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011129.2.4-147"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The Commission proposals designed to harmonise the definition of terrorism, to define a minimum platform of penalties and to put in place a European arrest warrant to replace the old system of extradition leaves us feeling very unsatisfied. Indeed, these are old federalist projects which are being dusted off under the pretext of the attacks of 11 September but which, in reality, do not contribute any particularly crucial practical element to the fight against terrorism.
The first proposal, relating to the definition of terrorism and the sanctions used to combat it, has been much trumpeted, as if the lack of a harmonised definition in the countries of the European Union, at present, constituted a dreadful weakness which terrorists would exploit. It does nothing of the kind. The definitions and penalties may vary from one State to another, but there is no State which leaves terrorists at liberty. Everyone is agreed on the matter, even if the names vary. The proposed text therefore satisfies the federalists’ obsession with standardisation but is not going to change very much on the ground.
The same applies to the second proposal, relating to the European arrest warrant. At present, extradition is, without any doubt, a fairly long procedure, but one which protects individual rights. The European arrest warrant might be faster, but it is not even reliable, because precautions have to be taken all the same. We ask, in particular, that the judicial authority of the executing Member State not be restricted to the role of formally recording the extradition request but, rather, that safeguards be established to guarantee the protection of freedoms. This clause is all the more necessary in view of the fact that, given the pace at which new countries are acceding to the European Union, we no longer know which countries will be members of the European Union in ten or twenty years’ time.
The procedure should be still more restrictive when the executing Member State is asked to hand over one of its own nationals to another country. We think that, in such cases, the normal procedure should be extradition in its traditional form, and not the European arrest warrant."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples