Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-14-Speech-2-020"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20060214.4.2-020"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, once again over the past year the EU has been accused of failing in its commitment to human rights by refusing to effectively use human rights clauses in trade and cooperation agreements. An important precedent was set in Uzbekistan following the Andijan massacre, but the fact that the reaction took four months is a sad commentary on the lack of seriousness given to the clauses in the past. Despite huge human rights concerns and EU influence in the Middle East, human rights clauses have never been invoked in relations with Egypt, Israel or Tunisia, in the latter case despite strong EU statements last year on curbs on freedom of expression and the blocking of NGO funding. With the ACP countries, I acknowledge that so-called Article 96 consultations have taken place with 15 countries over the last eight years, in 11 cases leading to appropriate measures. However, the EU maintains close relations with Angola, Ethiopia and Rwanda despite condemning abuses there and without any real pressure or action to follow up those condemnations. In Eritrea there has been little response to the démarche so far: forced military conscription, arbitrary detention, harassment of refugees and the use of torture continue. How do we ensure the success of consultations on the human rights clauses? It needs commitment on the side of the third country. Too much today this seems dependent on how far there is dependence on EU funding. It needs coordination between donors, for example as took place after the coup in the Central African Republic in 2003. It needs identification of the violations and the steps that need to be taken to rectify them, as in the case of Guinea-Bissau, when free and fair elections were held within the timescale set; and it needs the maintenance of close political dialogue, something that can be blocked and – as was seen today – was sadly lacking in the case of Iran. We agree with the Commissioner that political reasons too often block action by Member States. I do not think she is arrogant; I think she is noble when she upholds the EU’s unswerving commitment to ending the death penalty. I find it breathtaking that the UK Independence Party this morning said that we could turn a blind eye to human rights violations with China simply because we trade effectively with it. I congratulate the Commissioner and the rapporteur."@en1
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

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