Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-10-24-Speech-3-501"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
dcterms:Is Part Of
lpv:document identification number
lpv:translated text
"Madam President, freedom, security and justice are three words we keep hearing in the EU. They are the three components of the Hague Programme that, in combination and individually, were invoked to serve all the Member States of the Union. The principle of mutual recognition and enforcement of court judgments, which eight years ago, in 1999, was described by the European Council in Tampere as the cornerstone of judicial cooperation, is making no progress. The few steps needed to implement this principle are being taken very slowly. Mr Varvitsiotis has correctly identified and dealt with the root cause of the problem: the individual, nationalist positions held by various states. The Council Framework Decision on the recognition and enforcement of judgments in criminal matters involving deprivation of liberty issued in other EU Member States is the subject of Mr Varvitsiotis’ report. The decision proves how slow and sporadic the action has been in creating an area of freedom, security and justice because this decision is only one of many measures that should have already been taken, and because it took such a long time to prepare. In any case, we welcome the completion of the deliberation procedure and the adoption of a common position on the issue of recognising court judgments in criminal matters. Mr Varvitsiotis deserves praise for his contribution to the favourable outcome of the proposal, which we have adopted and shall be voting in favour of. The recognition and supervision of suspended sentences, alternative sanctions and conditional sentences, the subject of Mrs Esteves’ report, is certainly another step among the many that must be taken to implement the principle of mutual recognition and enforcement of court judgments. The Franco-German proposal seeks to reintegrate sentenced persons into society. It proposes to allow them to serve, in their Member State of residence, suspended sentences, alternative sanctions and conditional sentences imposed by the courts of other Member States. The rapporteur has done excellent work and I congratulate her. However, I believe the definition given for ‘lawful and ordinary residence’ is incorrect. Furthermore, the use of the word ‘unacceptable’ for violation of human rights is unnecessary, because there are no acceptable violations. I understand, however, that there is a problem in the translation of these two terms, and I therefore call on Mrs Esteves to make the necessary verbal amendments so that the text can be rendered correctly in all languages."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:


The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph