Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-12-Speech-3-020"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-04-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:IGC2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000412.2.3-020"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-04-12-Speech-3-0212
lpv:speaker	lp:José Ribeiro E Castro2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; BUDG (1999-11-22--2000-05-22)3 member; UEN (1999-11-17--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; EMPL (1999-12-02--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China (1999-12-09--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Partido Popular (1999-11-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this report should not have been admitted. It is generally anti what Europe really represents and anti most of what Europe has achieved. Paragraph 15 of the motion for a resolution is a symptom of this aggressiveness towards Europe. We are all attached to fundamental rights and the rule of law, starting here in this House. So how can we agree when the fundamental right of recourse to the courts is being threatened? This is not a question of internal affairs, but external affairs of great importance. We are Members of this House and we represent our electors. Anything which discriminates in our legal and political conditions, between our political parties and groups in terms of freedom and equality affects our right of representation and ultimately the rights and very freedom of our electors. These are the elements particularly under threat in this report which wants to interfere with and discriminate between the statutes of the political parties. The very essence of Europe is under threat. The fundamental right of recourse to the courts cannot be altered by anyone and nor can the rule of law. Paragraph 15 ruins the whole text by defiling a very serious issue. The temptation for those in power to act arbitrarily which this paragraph encourages is a clear illustration of the position taken in the rest of the report, and a terrible omen. We therefore move the inadmissibility of this report which, in addition to having a dubious legal basis, was not properly prepared and does not enjoy the broad consensus which Europe must have. This is evident in both the injudiciousness of this regrettable paragraph and the fact that 222, I repeat 222, amendments were tabled on this report. Is there any better proof that this report is totally inappropriate? We therefore propose, in order to defend Europe and the rule of law, the immediate rejection of this report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph