Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-20-Speech-4-076"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-09-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:VOTE (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010920.9.4-076"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-09-20-Speech-4-0772
lpv:speaker	lp:Georges Berthu2
lpv:spokenAs	member; NA (2001-01-31--2004-07-19)3 member; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with Canada (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Mouvement pour la France (2000-11-23--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"We voted in favour of the Marinho report supporting the initiative by France, Sweden and Belgium for the adoption by the Council of a framework decision, which would greatly facilitate judicial cooperation in Europe. This would in fact involve accepting the automatic mutual recognition of judicial decisions freezing certain assets or evidence in the context of inquiries concerning certain defined offences. This approach provides a useful means of stepping up cooperation while respecting the legal systems in the various Member States. We would even be in favour of a more clear-cut approach. Under the text proposed, the new mutual recognition procedure would apply to freezing orders in the context of very precise and specifically listed offences, that is to say drug trafficking, fraud affecting the European Communities’ financial interests, laundering of the proceeds of crime, counterfeiting of the euro, corruption and trafficking in human beings. However, other important offences are missing from this list. These need to be curbed as a matter of urgency, as in the case of terrorism, which we have denounced once again over the last few days. That is why the Members from the Movement for France support Amendment No 5, which provides for a broader definition of the offences targeted, that is all offences punishable by means of a custodial sentence or custodial security measure with a maximum duration of at least six months. If there were a need to go beyond the freezing of assets or evidence, we should study in greater depth an improved right of safeguard system, which can be used effectively but also rapidly by the Member State receiving the application."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph