Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-22-Speech-4-012"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-04-22"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Outcome of the trial against Leyla Zana and others in Ankara2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040422.1.4-012"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-04-22-Speech-4-0132
lpv:speaker	lp:Joost Lagendijk2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; GroenLinks (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 chair; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 member; G/EFA (2002-01-08--2004-07-19)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; ECON (2002-02-26--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of south-east Europe (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, sadly the outcome of yesterday's verdict came as no surprise. Those who have been involved in this matter over the past months and years have been able to see with their own eyes that this trial was a farce. The judges and especially the public prosecutor had absolutely no interest in properly reinvestigating the old evidence from 1994. And in this trial the defence once again had no opportunity to call new witnesses who wanted to put forward contrary evidence. This was a copy of a bad trial, and the result of a bad trial is a bad verdict. But one thing should be quite clear: this says less about the government's attitude to reform than about the stubborn resistance of conservatives. These judges, yesterday's judges, wanted to show who is boss. Their answer is clear: we are the bosses, not the European Parliament or the European Commission in Brussels, and not the Government in Ankara either: we are the ones who decide what will happen in this case. I think that the only way the Government can limit the damage it has undoubtedly suffered in connection with its request to start negotiations in December is to show that this is an exception to the rule. That rule must remain the same: reforms on paper must be put into practice. Two examples. There has already been mention of the plans – and I emphasise the word 'plans' – to abolish State Security Courts. I should like to call on the Government to make haste in this matter, not to drag things out, and to ensure that these courts are actually abolished by December. The second example, highly symbolic of course in this context, is the use of the Kurdish language, which we should remember was where this whole issue started. On paper, once again on paper, the use of this language is permitted, but in practice there are still numerous administrative hurdles. So it is very important that by the end of the year the Kurdish language can actually be used in the education system and in the media. Finally, for those who have concluded solely on the basis of this matter that negotiations should not start, I would like to remind you of what Ms Zana herself said. In a letter to the European Parliament she said: I would rather be in prison in a country that is negotiating with the European Union than free in a country on which Europe has turned its back."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph