Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-18-Speech-3-146"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021218.7.3-146"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the readmission agreements that the Council is proposing stem more from a strategy for combating illegal immigration than from genuine cooperation. Allow me to stress two points.
As far as the procedure is concerned, the lack of information given to Parliament raises the issue of the role and powers of parliamentarians: it is our democratic credibility that is at stake. We complain about the rate of abstention, about the fact that Europe is an unknown entity to the citizens, we want to convince citizens of the need for the Union, but, as long as their representatives are scorned and are not consulted, we cannot make the Europe of the citizen that we want to build credible.
With regard to the readmission clauses, the Union reaffirmed its commitment to the Geneva and Dublin Conventions at the Tampere Summit. It is therefore unacceptable that these readmission agreements can make it possible to send back third country nationals when there is no guarantee that human rights and democratic freedoms will be respected in their country of origin. What criteria are applied in order to verify that a country to which a national is being returned is safe?
The European Union is basing its policy on respect for fundamental rights. This applies, in particular, to the measures which regulate the movement of individuals, and especially to the measures relating to voluntary or forced return. How does the Commission intend to verify that these rights are respected in case of return, particularly when it is a question of mass returns? These issues are real issues. Today, Afghans may be returned to Afghanistan despite the fact that there is no guarantee of their safety and of peace in the region. The closure of Sangatte has provided no solution to the problem of accepting refugees; Kurds and Iraqis continue to arrive every day.
Are the readmission agreements compatible with the obligations under international law, do they respect the principle of ‘non-refoulement’, on which the right to seek asylum depends? What common control mechanisms does the Commission intend to put in place with the countries with which these agreements are negotiated? We should like to have been reassured that these fundamental rights are being respected. In spite of the quality of the work of our rapporteur, we have no guarantee regarding these questions that are fundamental for our freedoms and our rights.
The readmission clauses provide a response to the concerns regarding the interests of the countries of the Union instead of assisting the development of third countries. They are harmful to any Community immigration and asylum policy; we are therefore unable to support them."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples