Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-10-13-Speech-3-128"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041013.6.3-128"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, any future development of the area of freedom, security and justice must take account, amongst other considerations, of the eruption of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism in Europe, which struck the Union in the heart of Madrid. It is a threat we have to face in addition to the threat from the nationalist terrorism of ETA, which is weaker than ever, it is true, but which still has the capacity to kill.
Islamic fundamentalist terrorism shares both ETA’s objective of destroying democracy and the fanaticism with which ETA takes action against its victims, who are always innocent, but they differ in terms of their strategy, their organisation, the way they act and the support they receive. So, in order to combat both, we must create this area of freedom, security and justice with a shared objective: to defeat them, arresting and bringing to justice the instigators and authors of these crimes and by matching our tactics, and also our strategy, to the size, the context and the structure of each terrorist organisation.
Recent history has shown us that we are capable of acting together after an attack, but on the other hand we are incapable of mobilising all the instruments of the Rule of Law in order to prevent them. I will give you an example: the Council has adopted a series of framework decisions which have yet to be transposed into the national legislations of certain countries and, therefore, apart from the fine expressions of solidarity from their Heads of State and Government, they are not operational. What are they waiting for? What has got to happen? How many more trains have to be blown to bits before they understand that the fight against terror is our responsibility, that it is a tragedy for those who are victims of it, but that the policy for preventing it and destroying it must be European?
I wonder, ladies and gentlemen, whether the time has come, if such a case arises, for a State to be penalised for endangering the security of its neighbours by not applying common rules in the fight against terrorism. I know it is the third pillar, but it depends on political will. This situation can change. I would insist that it only requires political will. Should we penalise a State which does not comply with the Stability Pact but not a State which jeopardises the lives of its neighbours by not applying Community legislation? This is the tragic paradox.
Ladies and gentlemen, it would be very useful if the new Commission could produce and present to Parliament an assessment report on the way framework decisions have been transposed into national legislations and on the added value they have provided.
Mr President, I am coming to an end, but please allow me to address Mr Vitorino very briefly: I know that, from our desks, we sometimes forget that the ultimate beneficiaries of political action are real citizens. I know you are not guilty of this, and I would like to say that, as a result of your tenacity, your work and your intelligence, many European citizens, many of my neighbours, have felt freer."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples