Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-02-23-Speech-3-060"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050223.6.3-060"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, between 14 March and 22 April, the UN Commission on Human Rights will be holding its 61st annual meeting in Geneva. We can only hope that the Commission will be guided by strict ethical and objective criteria alone and will no longer be influenced by considerations more akin to cynical
than to the defence of human rights.
This was, unfortunately, all too often the case, and it was clear to everyone how the United Nations in general and the UNCHR in particular applied double standards. That was the case during the Cold War and I fear that this is still true of the UNCHR to some extent today.
Last year, for example, during its 60th session, the UN Human Rights Commission rejected the resolutions on Zimbabwe, which the European Union helped to submit, as well as the resolution on China. With regard to those countries, the UN went as far as to adopt what is referred to as a no action motion.
Could it be that in some cases – I am mainly thinking of China – the concern over human rights on the part of the UN bureaucrats decreases proportionately as the economic interest of the countries in question increases? We hardly dare to imagine, but certainly in the case of China, it is striking how there are those who, time after time, apply double moral standards.
China is the world leader when it comes to death sentences and executions, yet that does not appear to stop various EU Member States from pushing aside major ethical principles and keeping quiet about human rights when the Chinese leaders come to visit Europe. Of course, major deals are yet to be clinched – Airbus springs to mind – and it is, of course, considered more expedient to keep quiet about that troublesome Dalai Lama or those awkward Taiwanese.
Those double moral standards are also being applied to Turkey, as speakers from different groups in this House have pointed out on different occasions over the months whenever this became topical. Accession negotiations with Turkey had to begin, by hook or by crook, and despite the persistent reports about countless cases of torture, about taking away the freedom of opinion and assembly, about the state’s policy of denial of the Armenian genocide, about the permanent occupation of Northern Cyprus, it was inconsistent with the truth that Turkey meets the Copenhagen criteria.
These are only two examples to illustrate that in this world
still takes precedence over the major democratic and ethical principles to which no more than lip service is being paid. Neither the UN, nor our own EU, are credible disciples or moral philosophers in this respect."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples