Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-24-Speech-4-164"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021024.9.4-164"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, as rapporteur for Iran, I support the joint motion for a resolution. Dialogue with Iran is important, but our main concern, as the European Parliament, is for a human rights dialogue. As parliamentary representatives, we are free from diplomatic constraints when it comes to demanding this universal principle, which is why we say loud and clear to any country concerned that we reject the death penalty in general.
As far as the rise in the number of death sentences carried out in Iran compared with previous years is concerned, I should like to state here how I evaluate the situation. Conservative forces within both formal and informal structures are obviously using death sentences carried out or corporal punishment inflicted to intimidate both the people and the liberal forces in parliament and other societal institutions. It has nothing to do with Islam or the Koran. Because internal pressure is increasing, so is repression.
That is why we must stick to the demonstrable facts in all our criticism and check every allegation, irrespective of its source. That is why I am against overloading the resolution with allegations which, in the final analysis, we cannot prove, thereby undermining our own credibility.
People have been sentenced to be stoned to death. We have proof that two of these sentences were carried out in the first half of 2001, but not for 25 September 2002. Let us therefore make use of Iran's readiness to discuss all human rights issues, including individual cases, without preliminary conditions, as expressed in talks with the EU-Iran Human Rights Exploratory Experts mission
at the beginning of the month.
I still worry that the Council has drawn the short straw by officially refraining from tabling the annual human rights resolution on Iran at the United Nations. It is not the Presidency that deserves to be criticised here, but the usual suspects who feel their plans may be upset.
What we do say is that it is good that they want to talk; let us hold a comprehensive dialogue and, if we see improvements, only then should we refrain from tabling new resolutions in due course. There can be no upfront concessions at the expense of human rights. Given the situation, we should clearly remind the structures in question in Iran – and in my view the Council and Commission as well – of one thing. A negotiated agreement will only come about with Parliament's assent and the issues to which we shall be paying particular attention are those I have just addressed."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples