Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-10-22-Speech-1-196-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20121022.24.1-196-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I am grateful for the opportunity to take part in this debate on the Magnitsky case on behalf of the Vice-President/High Representative. The European Parliament’s recommendation to the Council on establishing common visa restrictions for Russian officials involved in the Sergei Magnitsky case is a significant initiative.
Particularly as this is a multifaceted case with a strong undercurrent of corruption, anti-corruption efforts are being woven into Russia’s modernisation efforts, on which we are working together with them. Solving this case would send a strong signal to partners and investors that Russia is serious in its anti-corruption efforts.
Thirdly, it is in the interest of the EU to have at its borders a stable, democratic, economically-viable Russia with a well-grounded rule of law. Steps like Russia’s recent accession to the WTO are important in integrating Russia into global rules-based systems. This is a step in the right direction to gaining global confidence in this marketplace. Cases such as Magnitsky’s, unfortunately, do exactly the opposite.
What is needed now is concrete action on the part of the Russian Government: a clear decision to properly and thoroughly investigate the Magnitsky case, bringing those responsible to justice. As has been said, we take very careful note of the recommendation Parliament addressed to the Council on restrictive measures on Russian officials involved in the Sergei Magnitsky case. It sends a clear and strong message. Acting on this recommendation would require unanimity from all the Member States. As those responsible for the overall relationship between the European Union and Russia, we must carefully balance our actions towards our neighbour. Restrictive measures by the EU are a very sensitive instrument. Such measures should only be considered in very specific situations and in accordance with existing EU guidelines.
Furthermore, restrictive measures should be used as part of an integrated and comprehensive policy approach involving political dialogue, complementary efforts and other instruments. Let me assure you that the Magnitsky case will remain on the bilateral agenda in our contacts with Russia. Sanctions should be used only as a last resort, otherwise we risk them becoming the only instrument in many of our relationships whenever such crimes are committed.
In conclusion, let me reiterate once again, on behalf of High Representative/Vice-President Ashton, that we will continue to pursue the Magnitsky case with the Russian Federation at every opportunity.
Parliament has been vocal and consistent about this case in recent years, from the European Parliament resolution of 16 December 2010 to a number of hearings and debates and the recommendation the House will vote on tomorrow. All these initiatives testify to the great importance the European Parliament and the European public at large attach to the Magnitsky case. These initiatives lend much weight to our common efforts to prompt the authorities in Moscow to investigate the case swiftly and thoroughly. They give further legitimacy to the EU’s continuous pressure on the Russian Federation to bring the Magnitsky case to a thorough conclusion.
For our part, the Vice-President/High Representative has consistently called on Russia to ensure a proper investigation. We are raising this with the Russian authorities at all levels. Indeed, the Magnitsky case is consistently part of the agenda for our twice-yearly human rights consultations. Moreover, it is regularly brought up at ministerial level as well as at our summits.
Last month, Vice-President/High Representative Ashton addressed the Magnitsky case in this House. During the debate on the political use of justice she noted with great concern that the continuous lack of progress on the Magnitsky case was part of a general trend of worrisome legislative and judicial developments in activities in the Russian Federation. This trend is of serious concern to the European Union. The speech and the debate that followed were reported by the Russian press.
In April of this year, President Van Rompuy, in a very significant political gesture, wrote a letter to the then President, Medvedev, specifically on the Magnitsky case. President Van Rompuy made three important points in this letter. First, he urged the Russian Government to bring the case to a comprehensive conclusion. Second, he called on Russia to close the posthumous prosecution of Mr Magnitsky. Third, he called for an end to the intimidation of Mr Magnitsky’s mother and widow.
The European External Action Service keeps reminding the Russian side that a response to the letter remains outstanding. All these points, as well as the outstanding response to President Van Rompuy’s letter, were also reiterated most recently by Commissioner Malmström at the Permanent Partnership Council on Freedom, Security and Justice which took place on 2 October in Nicosia.
We have taken this matter very seriously and will continue to do so, for three very good reasons. First, because of the nature of the case itself. It is a case of a Russian citizen and a lawyer, a young father being arrested and mistreated by law enforcement officers for standing up against suspected fraud and abuse by government officials. As such it is a case of grave abuse of the law and of human rights.
The European Union is founded on the core values of human dignity, freedom, the rule of law and respect for human rights, and we are committed to defending these. The Magnitsky case has become one of the emblematic cases in this respect, not only for the Russian people but also for the EU.
The second reason why we continue to be active in the Magnitsky case is that we believe that Russia itself should have a great interest in solving it. The case has come to symbolise the state of the judiciary and the rule of law in the Russian Federation. Business people consider this a litmus test for the stability, predictability and safety of Russia as a destination for investment."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples