Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-04-19-Speech-4-417-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120419.18.4-417-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, there are quite a few of us in this assembly who believe that human rights are fundamental values, not only for the European Union and its citizens but also for humanity as a whole.
The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, was born of the horrors of the Second World War to protect citizens, including when States and their governments get out of control. The countries of Western Europe were particularly affected. They have long been pioneers in this issue.
Yet, for several years, particularly since the attacks of 11 September 2001, respect for human rights in these countries has been in retreat. The verdicts of the European Court of Human Rights are there to show this. A growing number of Member States are convicted there on an increasingly regular basis.
The EU’s adhesion to the ECHR is now a symbol and we can clearly see that a number of Member States see Article 6 of the treaty as nothing more than a piece of paper. There are debates on what falls under European law and what falls under national laws and there is the issue of compatibility between the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and the ECHR, with some Member States seeking to reintroduce the reservations that they put into the Charter in the debates on accession to the ECHR, even though all Member States are parties to the Convention. What then is the problem?
There are those who say that, if the European Union were to join, this must not call into question the powers of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Having met the current judges many times, I cannot see what the problem is. The CJEU has included fundamental rights in its case law since 1970. The integration of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Treaty and membership of the ECHR will make it easier for it to enforce respect for the fundamental rights.
Others worry about the powers of the ECHR beyond the territory of the European Union. That, however, is its nature and I would go so far as to say that these issues should be raised when Article 6 is integrated. In reality, the problem is that some Member States are trying to call into question the very content of the ECHR and the role of the European Court, and to do so they will try anything.
On these benches, there are some of us who defend a universal, indivisible concept of human rights. We reject double standards where human rights are involved. We believe that, to be credible in the struggles that it hopes to undertake at the international level to promote human rights, the European Union and its Member States must start by getting their own houses in order.
Yes, EU accession to the ECHR is a symbol and all of the current prevarication is symptomatic of the drift of some Member States in this area. These Member States who forever shirk the duties as regards human rights. It is not the Court that has changed, despite what I have heard, it is the respect for human rights by the Member States.
We have been talking for almost two years about quick accession. It is now time to act."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples