Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-23-Speech-3-235"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021023.5.3-235"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I have to say that the answer by the President-in-Office of the Council shows signs of there being considerable elasticity of interpretation but, as we say in Denmark, it requires a very firm character to sell elastic by the metre. It can be stretched in all directions, and I do not think that the President-in-Office is tackling the fundamental issue of whether we have an American strategy that urges other countries to enter into bilateral agreements whereby such countries undertake not to hand over American citizens. This is in line with the fact that the United States has persistently and continually refused to ratify the International Criminal Court Treaty. It strikes me as self-evident that the Council has a credibility problem when, on the one hand, it states that it fully supports the setting up of the International Criminal Court and regards its establishment as a building block of international legal cooperation and, on the other hand, turns a blind eye to, and accepts, America’s blackmailing of third countries. The President-in-Office said that a solution had been found to the blackmailing of Romania. The only practical questions I want to put are the following: what is the gist of this solution, and is it a solution that the Council finds acceptable? If the answer to the latter question is yes, there is still a credibility problem."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples