Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-09-26-Speech-3-042"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20070926.2.3-042"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, in proposing legal channels of immigration, an idea that is essentially motivated by Europe’s economic needs, which are for the most part insensitive to the real needs of those who live in the southern parts of the Union, you are in fact deciding not so much on the number of migrants coming to Europe but rather on those among them who may enter our territory legally. What about the others, however? For them there only remains the nightmare voyage. Prevented from leaving their country of birth, intercepted at sea, unofficial channels, detention, rescue or drowning – and I would like to hear you say and say again that rescuing people at sea is a universal and fundamental duty, witness the case of the seven Tunisian fishermen, and that it is the very minimum that we should expect – and then possibly forced repatriation, endless wandering in hostile transit countries, plus serious violations of human rights and so on. As the Commissioner responsible for justice, freedom and security, ensuring respect for human rights ought to be your main concern – as it is ours – and your powers in this area are very great indeed, in fact as we all know they are immense. When Chechen nationals are refused asylum in Slovakia, and are expelled back to Russia via Ukraine, how can you guarantee that they will not be victims of maltreatment? What has been the outcome of the initial agreements on readmission that the EU has negotiated in this area? How can we guarantee that there will be no repression when we unceremoniously return people in this way? When Frontex patrols intercept boats full of migrants at sea how do you ensure that those on board are effectively able to apply for asylum and that the patrols in question will treat minors in a proper manner, and with their best interests in mind, as required under international law? In closing may I just ask you to explain clearly why you do not have a proactive policy requiring Member States to ratify the International Convention on the rights of migrant workers and their families?"@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