Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-12-Speech-3-183"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20030312.5.3-183"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, the fight against terrorism is necessary, but not all means are permitted. That is a very simple basic principle. You cannot play games with democratic legitimacy and the credibility of politics. If under the guise of the fight against terrorism the European Union were to permit excessive violation of citizens’ rights, we would be sliding towards the breakdown of the rule of law. If, as the previous speaker appears to be advocating, we lean too far in our sympathies for the airlines' difficulties, then we shall also be seriously off beam. This is the way things would go if Parliament were to acquiesce in the agreement between the Commission and the United States. That according to Commissioner Bolkestein it should now all of a sudden not be allowed to be called an agreement does not make things any better. After all, the European Commission has overstepped the mark in this dossier and that is especially disappointing of Commissioner Bolkestein, who this very week has very cheerfully announced his candidacy as member of the European Commission for a second term – remarkable. The European Commission, as I said, has overstepped the mark. In the first place it has failed to keep to its own plan to test its own action in advance against Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. In addition, as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission is under an obligation to uphold existing European legislation, in respect of data protection in this case. As earlier speakers have already explained in detail I shall not repeat it everything is inconsistent with everything else. Instead of performing its duties properly, the Commission has acted like a mayor in time of war, yielding to American pressure – also known as blackmail – in order, supposedly, to prevent something worse happening. This action lacks any legal foundation, is completely non-transparent and uncontrollable. If the Commission had demonstrated greater political courage and had brought in Parliament in good time, a decent debate could have taken place regarding the scope within the fight against terrorism and the limits of data transfer. The Commission must therefore retrace its steps and take action to defer the agreement's entry into force. If the agreements are properly tested against the European rules, a proper agreement can be concluded rather than this half-baked effort that jeopardises legal security. I am therefore especially pleased that in the resolution we shall be voting on tomorrow we shall also be opening up the route to the European Court, because it is not the first time that the Commission has tried to sidetrack Parliament."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph