Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-19-Speech-4-250"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech⁶
dcterms:Date	"2006-01-19"^^xsd:date⁶
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Kambodža: poliitiline repressioon⁶
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language⁶
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060119.31.4-250"⁶
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-01-19-Speech-4-251⁶
lpv:speaker	lp:Ari Vatanen⁶
lpv:spoken text	". Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@en⁴
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; SEDE (2004-10-28--2007-01-14)²² member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² substitute; Delegation for relations with the United States (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)²² unknown; Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² member; AFET (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)²² substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)²² substitute; TRAN (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)²²
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@cs¹ "Hr. formand, jeg kan blot tilslutte mig kommentaren fra det ærede medlem, hr. Smith. Vi drøfter det samme spørgsmål igen og igen uden at opnå resultater. Er det, fordi Cambodja ligger så langt væk? Menneskelige lidelser er altid de samme for det enkelte individ, uanset hvor de forekommer. Jeg ønsker at minde om Human Rights Watchs udtalelser om Cambodja i 2005. Organisationen udtalte, at den politiske opposition blev effektivt elimineret med anholdelser eller trusler om anholdelser af parlamentsmedlemmer fra oppositionspartierne, og at krænkelserne af menneskerettighederne fortsatte. Det fremgik endvidere tydeligt af de politiske retssager, at regeringen fortsat kontrollerede og blandede sig i Domstolens arbejde. Det er den sørgelige situation i Cambodja. Jeg vil minde om situationen i 1997, hvor den eneste politiske modstander, Sam Rainsy - der paradoksalt nok beskyttes af Europa-Parlamentets frihedspas - holdt tale i hovedstaden, og hvor flere håndgranater eksploderede i menneskemængden lige foran ham, og mindst 16 personer døde. Det er det, der sker, når en oppositionsleder holder en tale i hovedstaden i Cambodja. Vi kan ikke fortsat bare se til. Vi skal handle. Som hr. Smith udtalte, er tilbageholdelsen af økonomiske midler til Cambodja en af de bedste sanktionsmuligheder, så længe kriterierne for demokrati og menneskerettigheder ikke opfyldes. Forbud imod indrejsevisum for tjenestemænd vil også være meget effektivt, idet landets elite ofte rejser til Europas hovedstæder for at shoppe osv. Men den frie handel skal opretholdes. Handelssanktioner vil blot forøge fattigdommen og befolkningens lidelser. Parlamentets sympati ligger hos de personer i Cambodja, der kæmper for demokrati og menneskerettigheder."@da² ". Herr Präsident, ich kann die Äußerungen meines ehrenwerten Kollegen Smith nur bekräftigen. Wir behandeln dieselbe Sache immer und immer wieder, ohne reales Ergebnis. Liegt das daran, dass Kambodscha zu weit entfernt liegt? Menschliches Leid, wo immer es auftritt, ist stets dasselbe, wenn es um den einzelnen Menschen geht. Ich sollte eine Erklärung der Human Rights Watch über Kambodscha aus dem Jahr 2005 zitieren: ‚Die politische Opposition war mit der Inhaftierung oder der angedrohten Inhaftierung oppositioneller Parlamentarier effektiv zerschlagen, und die Menschenrechtsverletzer blieben weiterhin straffrei. Politische Prozesse zeugten von der fortgesetzten Kontrolle, Einmischung und Einschüchterung im Verhältnis der Regierung zu den Gerichten.’ So düster sieht die Lage in Kambodscha aus. Ich sollte Sie daran erinnern, dass 1997 der einzige Oppositionspolitiker, Sam Rainsy – der paradoxerweise durch die Freiheitspass-Initiative dieses Hauses geschützt ist –, in der Hauptstadt eine Rede hielt, als mehrere Granaten in der Menge vor ihm einschlugen und mindestens 16 Menschen ums Leben kamen. Das passiert, wenn ein Oppositionsführer in der Hauptstadt des Landes eine Rede hält. Wir können nicht weiterhin nur Lippenbekenntnisse abgeben; wir müssen an die Stelle von Worten unser Geld setzen. Wie Herr Smith sagte, würde unsere wirksamste Bestrafung darin bestehen, Kambodscha kein Geld mehr zu geben, solange es nicht die Kriterien der Demokratie und der Menschenrechte einhält. Auch ein Verbot der Ausstellung von Einreisevisa für Beamte wäre sehr wirksam, denn die Elite des Landes kommt in die Hauptstädte Europas, um einzukaufen und so weiter. Dagegen muss der freie Handel aufrechterhalten werden. Handelssanktionen verstärken nur die Armut und das Elend der Menschen. Dieses Hohe Haus ist an der Seite der Menschen in Kambodscha, die für Demokratie und Menschenrechte kämpfen."@de⁹ ". Κύριε Πρόεδρε, μόνο να συμφωνήσω μπορώ με τη δήλωση στην οποία προέβη ο αξιότιμος συνάδελφος κ. Smith. Πράγματι, φαίνεται ότι εξετάζουμε ξανά και ξανά το ίδιο θέμα, χωρίς πραγματικό αποτέλεσμα. Αυτό άραγε συμβαίνει επειδή η Καμπότζη είναι υπερβολικά μακριά; Ο ανθρώπινος πόνος, ανεξάρτητα με το πού συναντάται, είναι πάντοτε ο ίδιος σε ατομικό επίπεδο. Θα παραθέσω όσα ανέφερε το Παρατηρητήριο Ανθρωπίνων Δικαιωμάτων σχετικά με την Καμπότζη το 2005: «Οι πολιτικοί αντίπαλοι εξουδετερώθηκαν αποτελεσματικά με συλλήψεις ή απειλές σύλληψης των βουλευτών της αντιπολίτευσης και με τη συνεχιζόμενη ατιμωρησία όσων παραβιάζουν τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα. Οι πολιτικές δίκες καταδεικνύουν τον συνεχιζόμενο έλεγχο εκ μέρους της κυβέρνησης, τις επεμβάσεις στο έργο των δικαστηρίων και τον εκφοβισμό τους». Αυτή είναι η ζοφερή κατάσταση που επικρατεί στην Καμπότζη. Θα σας υπενθυμίσω ότι το 1997 ο μόνος πολιτικός αντίπαλος, ο Sam Rainsy –ο οποίος, παραδόξως, προστατεύεται από την Πρωτοβουλία Ελεύθερου Διαβατηρίου αυτού του Κοινοβουλίου– πραγματοποιούσε ομιλία στην πρωτεύουσα όταν αρκετές χειροβομβίδες εκτοξεύθηκαν ανάμεσα στο πλήθος που βρισκόταν μπροστά του και τουλάχιστον 16 άνθρωποι σκοτώθηκαν. Αυτά συμβαίνουν όταν ένας ηγέτης της αντιπολίτευσης πραγματοποιεί ομιλία στην πρωτεύουσα αυτής της χώρας. Δεν μπορούμε να μένουμε απλώς στα λόγια, πρέπει να κάνουμε τα λόγια πράξεις. Όπως είπε ο κ. Smith, μία από τις αποτελεσματικότερες κυρώσεις θα ήταν να σταματήσουμε να χρηματοδοτούμε την Καμπότζη όσο δεν πληρούνται τα κριτήρια της δημοκρατίας και των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων. Επίσης, μια απαγόρευση της ταξιδιωτικής θεώρησης των αξιωματούχων θα ήταν πολύ αποτελεσματική, διότι η ελίτ αυτής της χώρας πηγαίνει στις ευρωπαϊκές πρωτεύουσες για ψώνια, κλπ. Αντιθέτως ωστόσο, το ελεύθερο εμπόριο πρέπει να διατηρηθεί. Οι εμπορικές κυρώσεις θα αυξήσουν απλώς τη φτώχεια και τη μιζέρια του λαού. Η συμπαράσταση αυτού του Κοινοβουλίου εκφράζεται προς όσους στην Καμπότζη αγωνίζονται για τη δημοκρατία και τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα."@el¹⁰ ". Señor Presidente, solo puedo hacerme eco de la declaración realizada por el señor Smith. Parece que volvamos una y otra vez sobre el mismo tema, sin resultados reales. ¿Se debe quizá a que Camboya está demasiado lejos? El sufrimiento humano, independientemente de donde ocurra, siempre es el mismo cuando se refiere a las personas. He de citar lo que Human Rights Watch dijo sobre Camboya en 2005: «La oposición política se desmanteló efectivamente con la detención o amenaza de detener a parlamentarios de la oposición y la impunidad de los autores de los abusos continuados contra los derechos humanos. Juicios políticos demostraron el control constante, la interferencia e intimidación en la labor de los tribunales por parte del Gobierno.» Esta es la situación sombría en Camboya. Quiero recordar que en 1997 el único político de la oposición, Sam Rainsy –quien, paradójicamente, está protegido por la Iniciativa del Pasaporte a la Libertad de esta Cámara– daba un discurso en la capital cuando varias granadas fueron lanzadas contra la multitud que estaba delante de él y donde murieron al menos 16 personas. Esto es lo que ocurre cuando un líder de la oposición hace un discurso en la capital de ese país. No podemos continuar dando apoyo solo de boquilla; hemos de obrar de acuerdo con nuestras opiniones. Tal como ha dicho el señor Smith, una de las sanciones más efectivas sería dejar de dar dinero a Camboya mientras no se cumplan los criterios rectores de la democracia y de los derechos humanos. Asimismo, sería muy eficaz prohibir los visados de viaje a los funcionarios, ya que la elite de este país va a las capitales de Europa para ir de compras, etc. No obstante, por el contrario, hay que mantener el libre comercio. Las sanciones comerciales no harían más que aumentar la pobreza y la miseria de la gente. La Cámara se solidariza con los ciudadanos de Camboya que luchan por la democracia y los derechos humanos."@es²⁰ "Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@et⁵ "Arvoisa puhemies, voin vain toistaa jäsen Smithin esittämän näkemyksen. Me todellakin tunnumme jauhavan samaa aihetta uudestaan ja uudestaan ilman todellisia tuloksia. Johtuuko se siitä, että Kambodža on niin kaukana? Inhimillinen kärsimys on paikasta riippumatta yksilön kannalta kuitenkin aina sama. Lainaan Human Rights Watchin lausunnossa Kambodžan tilanteesta vuonna 2005 todettiin, että maan poliittinen oppositio hajotettiin tehokkaasti pidättämällä tai uhkaamalla pidättää opposition edustajia, eikä ihmisoikeusloukkauksiin syyllistyneitä edelleenkään rankaistu. Sen mukaan poliittissävytteiset oikeudenkäynnit olivat osoitus hallituksen yhä harjoittamasta tuomioistuinten valvonnasta, asioihin puuttumisesta ja pelottelusta. Näin karu on Kambodžan tilanne. Haluan muistuttaa, että vuonna 1997 maan ainoa oppositiopoliitikko Sam Rainsy – joka paradoksaalisesti nauttii parlamenttimme myöntämän vapauspassialoitteen suojaa – piti puhetta pääkaupungissa, kun useita kranaatteja ammuttiin väkijoukkoon hänen silmiensä edessä ja ainakin 16 ihmistä kuoli. Näin käy oppositiojohtajalle, joka pitää puheen tuon maan pääkaupungissa. Me emme voi jatkaa tyhjien lupausten antamista, vaan meidän on ryhdyttävä sanoista tekoihin. Kuten jäsen Smith sanoi, yksi tehokkaimmista rangaistuksista olisi lopettaa rahan antaminen Kambodžalle niin kauan kuin demokratian ja ihmisoikeuksien vaatimuksia ei täytetä. Toinen tehokas keino olisi viranomaisille asetettava viisumikielto, koska maan eliitti käy Euroopan pääkaupungeissa muun muassa ostosmatkoilla. Sitä vastoin vapaan kaupankäynnin on saatava jatkua. Kauppapakotteet ainoastaan lisäävät köyhyyttä ja pahentavat kansan kurjuutta. Parlamentin sympatiat ovat demokratian ja ihmisoikeuksien puolesta taistelevien kambodžalaisten puolella."@fi⁷ ". Monsieur le Président, je ne peux que me faire l’écho de ce qu’a dit l’honorable député M. Smith. Il semble en effet que nous ressassions sans cesse le même sujet, sans réel résultat. Est-ce parce que le Cambodge est trop éloigné? La souffrance humaine, où qu’elle se passe, est toujours la même quand elle touche les personnes. Je voudrais citer ce que Human Rights Watch a dit en 2005 à propos du Cambodge: «L’opposition politique a été effectivement démantelée avec l’arrestation ou la menace d’arrestation de parlementaires de l’opposition, tandis que ceux qui bafouent les droits de l’homme ont continué à vivre dans l’impunité. Les procès politiques ont démontré le contrôle, l’ingérence et l’intimidation du gouvernement dans le travail des tribunaux.» Telle est la morne situation au Cambodge. Je vous rappelle qu’en 1997, le seul et unique homme politique de l’opposition, Sam Rainsy - qui, paradoxalement, est protégé par l’initiative Passeport-Liberté de cette Assemblée - donnait un discours dans la capitale quand plusieurs grenades furent lancées dans la foule devant lui, tuant au moins 16 personnes. Voilà ce qui arrive quand un chef de l’opposition fait un discours dans la capitale de ce pays. Nous ne pouvons continuer à nous contenter de paroles; nous devons les accompagner d’actions concrètes. Comme l’a dit M. Smith, un des meilleurs moyens de les pénaliser serait d’arrêter de donner de l’argent au Cambodge tant que les critères de démocratie et de droits de l’homme ne seront pas atteints. Une interdiction de visa de voyage qui frapperait les représentants officiels serait également très efficace, parce que l’élite de ce pays vient dans les capitales d’Europe pour faire son shopping, etc. Le libre-échange doit par contre être maintenu. Les sanctions commerciales ne feraient qu’accroître la pauvreté et la misère de la population. La sympathie de cette Assemblée va à ceux qui, au Cambodge, luttent pour la démocratie et les droits de l’homme."@fr⁸ "Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@hu¹¹ "Signor Presidente, non posso che associarmi alle parole pronunciate dall’onorevole Smith. Sembra proprio che non facciamo altro che discutere sempre dello stesso argomento, senza ottenere alcun risultato concreto. Forse perché la Cambogia è così lontana? Viste dalla prospettiva del singolo individuo, le sofferenze umane sono sempre uguali, a prescindere dal luogo in cui avvengono. Vorrei citare le osservazioni fatte da nel 2005 sulla Cambogia: “L’opposizione politica è stata effettivamente smantellata a seguito degli arresti o delle minacce di arresto dei parlamentari dell’opposizione, mentre gli autori delle violazioni dei diritti umani continuano a godere dell’impunità. I processi politici hanno rivelato che il governo esercita tuttora controlli, ingerenze e intimidazioni nei confronti del potere giudiziario”. Questa è la tetra situazione in cui si trova la Cambogia. Mi permetto di ricordarvi che nel 1997, durante un comizio nella capitale cambogiana dell’unico politico dell’opposizione, Sam Rainsy, che, paradossalmente, è protetto dall’iniziativa Passaporto per la libertà, promossa dal Parlamento europeo, furono lanciate diverse granate tra la folla che lo stava ascoltando e almeno 16 persone rimasero uccise. Questo è ciò che succede quando un capo dell’opposizione tiene un discorso nella capitale di quel paese. Non possiamo continuare a limitarci ai bei discorsi; dobbiamo far seguire alle parole i fatti. Come ha osservato l’onorevole Smith, una delle sanzioni più efficaci potrebbe essere quella di sospendere gli aiuti finanziari alla Cambogia fintantoché non saranno soddisfatti i criteri della democrazia e dei diritti umani. Un’altra misura molto efficace potrebbe essere un divieto di rilascio dei visti ai funzionari statali, visto che l’ di quel paese viene nelle capitali europee, ad esempio, per fare acquisti. Per contro, è necessario proseguire i rapporti commerciali. L’adozione di sanzioni commerciali avrebbe il solo risultato di accrescere la povertà e la sofferenza della gente. La solidarietà del Parlamento europeo va a coloro che stanno lottando in Cambogia per la democrazia e per i diritti umani."@it¹² "Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@lt¹⁴ "Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@lv¹³ "Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@mt¹⁵ ". Mijnheer de Voorzitter, ik kan mij alleen maar aansluiten bij de woorden van mijn geachte collega, mijnheer Smith. Het lijkt er inderdaad op dat wij steeds weer dezelfde onderwerpen bespreken, zonder dat het enig resultaat oplevert. Komt dit misschien omdat Cambodja te ver van ons bed ligt? Menselijk lijden is echter altijd even erg als het om individuen gaat, ongeacht waar ze zich bevinden. Ik citeer wat Human Rights Watch in 2005 over Cambodja zei: “De politieke oppositie werd effectief ontmanteld door de (dreiging van) arrestatie van de oppositieleden in het parlement, en de straffeloosheid van daders van mensenrechtenschendingen duurde voort. Politieke processen tonen aan dat de regering nog steeds de rechterlijke instanties controleert en intimideert en zich nog steeds bemoeit met hun werkzaamheden.” Dat is de sombere toestand in Cambodja. Mag ik u eraan herinneren dat in 1997, tijdens een toespraak in de hoofdstad van de enige politicus van de oppositie, Sam Rainsy – die paradoxaal genoeg bescherming geniet via het "Freedom Passport"-initiatief van dit Parlement –, een aantal granaten werd afgevuurd op de luisterende menigte en ten minste zestien mensen werden gedood. Dat is het resultaat wanneer een oppositieleider een toespraak houdt in de hoofdstad van dit land. We kunnen niet langer alleen maar lippendienst bewijzen; we moeten de daad bij het woord voegen. De heer Smith zei het net al: het intrekken van de financiële steun aan Cambodja zolang aan de criteria inzake democratie en mensenrechten niet is voldaan, zou één van de doeltreffendste sancties zijn. Ook een verbod op inreisvisa voor overheidsambtenaren zou erg doeltreffend kunnen zijn, aangezien de elite van het land graag in de Europese hoofdsteden komt winkelen en dergelijke. De vrije handel daarentegen moet wel gehandhaafd worden, want handelssancties zullen de armoede en de ellende onder de bevolking alleen maar doen toenemen. Onze sympathie in dit Parlement gaat uit naar die mensen in Cambodja die vechten voor democratie en mensenrechten."@nl³ "Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@pl¹⁶ "Senhor Presidente, só posso fazer minhas as afirmações do senhor deputado Smith. Parece que voltamos constantemente ao mesmo assunto, sem resultados reais. É por o Camboja se situar muito longe? O sofrimento humano, independentemente do lugar onde se dá, é sempre igual ao nível das pessoas. Gostaria de citar aquilo que a disse sobre o Camboja em 2005: “A oposição política foi efectivamente desmantelada com a detenção ou ameaça de detenção de parlamentares da oposição e com a impunidade dos que de forma continuada perpetraram abusos dos direitos humanos. Os julgamentos políticos demonstraram o controlo, a interferência e a intimidação actualmente exercidos pelo Governo sobre o funcionamento dos tribunais”. É esta a situação negra que se vive no Camboja. Gostaria de recordar que, em 1997, o único político da oposição, Sam Rainsy – que, paradoxalmente, está sob protecção da Iniciativa Passaporte da Liberdade, desta Assembleia – estava a proferir um discurso na capital, quando várias granadas foram lançadas para a multidão que se encontrava diante dele, tendo morrido pelo menos 16 pessoas. É o que acontece quando um líder da oposição faz um discurso na capital daquele país. Não podemos continuar a limitar-nos a falar; temos de mobilizar o nosso dinheiro em correspondência com as nossas palavras. Tal como disse o senhor deputado Smith, uma das sanções mais eficazes seria a suspensão da atribuição de fundos ao Camboja, enquanto os critérios de democracia e de direitos humanos não forem satisfeitos. Do mesmo modo, uma proibição de emissão de vistos a funcionários também seria muito eficaz, porque a elite desse país vem às capitais europeias para fazer compras, etc. Em contrapartida, porém, o comércio livre tem de manter-se. As sanções comerciais só irão aumentar a pobreza e a miséria do povo. A solidariedade desta Assembleia vai para as pessoas que, no Camboja, lutam pela democracia e pelos direitos humanos."@pt¹⁷ "Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@sk¹⁸ "Mr President, I can only echo the statement made by the honourable Member, Mr Smith. We do seem to be going over the same subject again and again, with no real result. Is it because Cambodia is too far away? Human suffering, regardless of where it happens, is always the same when it comes to the individual. I should cite what Human Rights Watch said about Cambodia in 2005: ‘The political opposition was effectively dismantled with the arrest or threat of arrest of opposition parliamentarians and the impunity of perpetrators of human rights abuses continued. Political trials demonstrated the Government’s ongoing control, interference and intimidation in the work of the courts.’ That is the bleak situation in Cambodia. I should remind you that in 1997 the only opposition politician, Sam Rainsy – who, paradoxically, is protected by this House’s Freedom-Passport Initiative – was giving a speech in the capital when several grenades were launched into the crowd in front of him and at least 16 people died. That is what happens when an opposition leader makes a speech in the capital of that country. We cannot continue just paying lip service; we must put our money where our mouth is. As Mr Smith said, one of the most effective penalties would be to stop giving money to Cambodia as long as the criteria of democracy and human rights are not fulfilled. Also, a travel visa ban on officials would be very effective, because the elite of that country come to the capitals of Europe to shop and so forth. In contrast, however, free trade has to be retained. Trade sanctions will only increase the poverty and misery of the people. The sympathy of this House is with those people in Cambodia who are fighting for democracy and human rights."@sl¹⁹ ". Herr talman! Jag kan bara upprepa det uttalande som gjorts av vår värderade ledamot Alyn Smith. Det förefaller som om vi behandlar samma fråga om och om igen, utan något verkligt resultat. Beror det på att Kambodja ligger alltför långt bort? Mänskligt lidande, oberoende av var det pågår, är alltid samma sak för individen. Jag kan citera det som människorättsorganisationen Human Rights Watch sa om Kambodja 2005: ”Den politiska oppositionen avvecklades effektivt när oppositionsparlamentariker arresterades eller hotades med arrest medan de som kränkte de mänskliga rättigheterna fortfarande fick gå ostraffade. De politiska rättegångarna visade att regeringen fortsatte att kontrollera, störa och hota domstolarnas arbete.” Detta är den trista situationen i Kambodja. Jag vill påminna er om att år 1997 höll den ende oppositionspolitikern, Sam Rainsy – som paradoxalt nog skyddas av Europaparlamentets initiativ om frihetspass – ett tal i huvudstaden, och då kastades flera granater in i folkmassan framför honom, och minst 16 människor omkom. Det är vad som sker när en oppositionsledare håller ett tal i sin huvudstad. Vi får inte fortsätta med att bara komma med tomma ord. Vi måste se till att använda pengarna på rätt sätt. Som Alyn Smith sa skulle en av de effektivaste straffåtgärderna vara att upphöra med att ge pengar till Kambodja så länge som kriterierna för demokrati och mänskliga rättigheter inte uppfylls. Att inte bevilja inresevisum åt tjänstemän kunde också vara mycket effektivt, eftersom eliten i landet kommer till Europas huvudstäder för att handla etc. Däremot bör den fria handeln bibehållas. Handelssanktioner skulle bara öka fattigdomen och eländet för människorna. Parlamentets sympati gäller de människor i Kambodja som kämpar för demokrati och mänskliga rättigheter."@sv²¹
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(ΕΝ)"¹⁰ "Ari Vatanen,"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,11,16,10,13,4} "Human Rights Watch"^17,12 "on behalf of the PPE-DE Group"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4} "élite"¹² "εξ ονόματος της Ομάδας PPE-DE"¹⁰