Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-09-26-Speech-3-197"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070926.17.3-197"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
". −
Mr President, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, in December 2005 the European Parliament’s resolution requesting the formation of a Temporary Committee on the transportation and illegal detention of prisoners reaffirmed, and I quote: ‘its determination in the fight against terrorism but stresses that this fight cannot be won by sacrificing the very principles that terrorism seeks to destroy, notably that the protection of fundamental rights must never be compromised’.
It is generally known that the issues in question, which involve competence for airport control, inspection and intelligence services, essentially fall under the responsibility and control of the Member States. It is true that Sitcen conducts periodic analyses using information provided by the Member States but it has no operational jurisdiction over so-called ‘intelligence’ activities. It should be noted that the EU Member States were also faced with the complexity which, in this respect, typifies the system of sorting and processing requests for overflight, landing and on-the-ground inspection authorisations. This is a new challenge for everyone. For our part, the Portuguese Government has not only carried out this sometimes difficult and very slow process of data collection, but has also set up a working group to assess the numerous procedures and propose improvements, the importance of which was duly recognised by the final report adopted by this Parliament in February.
I must point out that we regarded the work carried out by the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe as particularly important and we took due note of the reports produced by Mr Marty. The questionnaire and recommendations developed by the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe under Article 52 of the European Convention on Human Rights also allowed, both in Portugal and I believe in other Member States, an unprecedented assessment of the national legal frameworks, guarantees and control mechanisms as a whole, including the analysis of procedures for sorting, verifying and inspecting requests for authorisation for aircraft overflights and landings on national territory.
In the case of Portugal, they have certainly led to institutional, technical and operational improvements. As regards the recommendations made by the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe on control guarantees, the predominant understanding of its members was that the initiatives in hand should not lead to unnecessary legislative duplication or the assignment of new powers to the Council of Europe.
On the other hand, it seems to be agreed that there is room for more effective application and more scrupulous monitoring of the existing mechanisms. I believe that if these investigations were conducted with more rigour and composure, their conclusions would be more effective. Despite rigour always being recommended and without confusing facts with allegations, but trying to observe some restraint in the language used for the importance of the values in question and the good name of the European democracies, the truth is that all these initiatives have scope and meaning. They must therefore be pursued, particularly at a time when it has become essential to analyse, in a serious and straightforward manner, the new dilemmas posed by the terrorist threats, for example the dilemma of security versus freedom. Furthermore, there is an increasing need for a response from international law to the difficult issues raised by the fight against an unprecedented threat.
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, consolidating the area of freedom, security and justice, based on the Hague Programme and respective action plan, is one of the main priorities of the 18-month joint programme of the German, Portuguese and Slovenian Presidencies. The fight against terrorism is, in this respect, one of the main challenges for which the three Presidencies have defined the objective of intensifying cooperation in this area through continued implementation of the EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy. As you know, Mr Gilles de Kerchove was recently appointed as the new EU Anti-Terrorism Coordinator, and like his predecessors he will be available to give this House all the information it requires.
I must also take this opportunity to stress that the issue of respect for human rights in the fight against terrorism has been specifically raised in the transatlantic dialogue, notably at the last summit between the European Union and the United States in April, when the conclusions of the European Council of 11 December 2006 were raised.
Portugal, while holding the presidency of the Council, has clearly stated its commitment to continuing and expanding this dialogue, which it regards as key to both sides.
Previous Council presidencies had the opportunity, in this House, to express their agreement with this sentiment. I cannot start my speech without underlining that the current presidency shares this same determination and resolution. I would reiterate that the fight against terrorism cannot compromise our values and principles on the protection of fundamental rights. This is, in our opinion, a crucial issue. In the fight against terrorism, we will only be victorious if we remain free: free from fear and any abuse or manipulation in the name of fear. Our most powerful weapon and our most effective protection are our values and principles on the protection of our fundamental rights.
Although the Council as such does not have the competence to express an opinion, there will not be a single Member State of the European Union that does not recognise the importance of the efforts made and initiatives taken to get to the truth. We should remember that we are talking about fundamental principles on which our European democracy rests. Discovering the truth will allow the climate of suspicion to be eliminated. It is therefore essential that the investigations in this area shed light on the issue and do not lead to further confusion. The previous presidencies that had the opportunity to come before this House, the Secretary-General and High Representative and the EU Anti-Terrorism Coordinator did not fail to cooperate with the European Parliament’s Temporary Committee in this respect.
I therefore believe that it would be totally unfair to suggest any lack of commitment on the part of the Council or the Foreign Affairs Ministers. In fact, I must highlight the numerous initiatives, both parliamentary and legal, that the various European countries took following these reports.
It was therefore absolutely appropriate to act in the spirit of the principle of subsidiarity. As you know, in many of the areas investigated by the Committee, the European Union does not itself have any power to act. I am thinking in particular in this respect of the supervision of intelligence services. This is a fact which the previous Council presidencies and the High Representative, Mr Solana, pointed out to this Parliament and its Committee. It may of course be regretted that this is the case, but the fact is that the current Treaties limit the Council’s scope of action in these areas.
However, for our part, I can assure you that the Portuguese Presidency will not fail to cooperate actively and constructively. I would remind you of the full and transparent cooperation offered by the Portuguese Government, both during the investigations made by this Parliament’s Temporary Committee, which completed its work in February of this year, and in relation to the initiatives of the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe under Article 52 of the European Convention on Human Rights in relation to the alleged CIA flights and illegal detention centres in Europe.
As is generally known, although the Council has not taken a position as such on the reports by Mr Fava and Mr Marty, respectively under the aegis of this Parliament and the Council of Europe, this does not mean that it is ignoring them. In fact, the Council has actively and positively defended human rights and international law in the European Union’s foreign policy.
We have consistently argued that the protection of the fundamental values of international law requires a serious and in-depth dialogue on human rights in the context of the fight against terrorism. In this respect, the EU has stressed that human rights, the rights of refugees and international humanitarian law must be respected and preserved. The Council will continue to monitor closely the developments occurring in respect of human rights in the fight against terrorism and will take appropriate measures to ensure their protection. The EU also continues to be firmly committed to the total ban on torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment.
Our actions are governed by this objective and we will always raise with third countries the concern that this problem causes. The EU and its Member States have clearly indicated that the existence of any secret detention centres where detainees are kept in a legal vacuum is not consistent with international humanitarian law. The EU Guidelines on Torture clearly stipulate that Member States must ban secret places of detention ensuring that all persons deprived of their liberty are held in officially recognised places of detention and that their whereabouts are known. The EU Guidelines on Torture also state that no one can be forcibly returned to a country where he or she risks being subjected to torture or ill-treatment."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples