Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-12-12-Speech-3-053"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011212.2.3-053"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, let me tell you very briefly, in reply to a question put during the debate, that the American President wrote a letter to the Belgian Prime Minister and to the President of the European Commission pointing to a number of areas in which the United States of America considered that there was a need to deepen cooperative relations with the European Union in the fight against terrorism. Prime Minister Verhofstadt and President Prodi replied to that letter on 28 November. That is the first point I want to clarify. There is no private or special correspondence between the President of the European Commission and the American President. There was an exchange of letters between the American President and the European Union, represented by both the President-in-Office of the Council and the President of the Commission.
On the substantive questions, let me tell you quite frankly that the truth is that we had already taken decisions on most of the aspects referred to by President Bush, during the Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting of 20 September; these decisions were in fact supported by the Heads of State and Government at the European Council in Brussels on 21 September.
Looking to the future, I believe that there are some difficult areas in the context of cooperation with the United States; we must not conceal that fact. Incidentally I have always said this and I said it again to Mr Colin Powell, the American Secretary of State, at the Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting last week. Of course we supported and still support the agreement signed between Europol and the American police agencies on cooperation in the fight against terrorism. The agreement does not cover possible exchanges of personal data because we realise that this is a sensitive area in which the Europeans and Americans apply different standards. So this area will have to be approached separately as a specific task, which we will indeed do as soon as possible.
Secondly, there is one rather important area of cooperation, namely judicial assistance; as soon as Eurojust is established definitively, we will have an important tool in our hands for mutual judicial assistance with third countries. Here again, however, we will have to clarify the rules on exchanges of personal data within the framework of mutual judicial assistance involving third countries.
Thirdly, on the subject of extradition, I agree with what Mr Watson said about the internal imbalance of the US Patriot Act as regards the legal status of US citizens vis-à-vis other citizens, including Europeans. That is no doubt an area we will have to look at together with our American friends. I also had occasion to say that Europe has not taken any exceptional measures to combat terrorism. We have not derogated from the Charter of Fundamental Rights; we have not introduced any exceptional measures to combat terrorism, so I do not think it is fair to criticise Europe for being in the process of adopting measures it is not in fact adopting. All the measures that have been taken to combat terrorism and that are now in force are measures based on the existing legislative framework or are measures, such as the European arrest warrant or the framework decision on terrorism, which were planned well before 11 September. Furthermore, in the case of the European arrest warrant, there is no doubt at all: we were asked to introduce it by the Heads of State and Government in October 1999 to replace extradition. All those who keep on trying to interpret these measures as emergency measures are wrong: no, Europe did not react to the terrorist threat by departing from its fundamental principles or taking emergency measures. It reacted by taking measures that were no doubt introduced in an exceptional climate, but that are measures we had been asked to take and that had been planned a long time ago.
Moreover, on the question of extradition, let me repeat to the European Parliament that the Commission has always said that we have never changed our position on the death penalty and that we have said quite plainly that our position in this dialogue did not allow for any possibility of extradition to Member States that apply the death penalty. Having said that, I will certainly read the resolution the European Parliament is about to adopt very closely and reflect carefully on the implications of your recommendation. I do not agree with Mr Di Lello, for, in my view, if there are guarantees that the death penalty will not be applied that is sufficient to guarantee respect for the fundamental values. This needs to be said very plainly.
Finally, Mr President, I want to tell you that I hope the Laeken European Council will enable us to give fresh impetus to the major task of establishing the area of freedom, security and justice, in the field of asylum and immigration as in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation, by accepting the gradual and pragmatic approach we are taking. I have no illusions, however. When it comes to turning Europe into an area of freedom, security and justice, we are looking at the very heart of European political cooperation. We know, from our 50 years of experience, that this political integration is never easy. That said, we shall persevere because I believe that our citizens expect us to find a political response to the needs of European integration. That is why I am so excited to be taking part, at your side, in this project for an area of freedom, security and justice."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples