Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-25-Speech-3-144"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-09-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:International Criminal Court2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020925.6.3-144"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-09-25-Speech-3-1452
lpv:speaker	lp:Jannis Sakellariou2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries and the Gulf (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America and Mexico (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; BUDG (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Treaty on the International Criminal Court is an indispensable instrument to assert international law. The founding of this Criminal Court is a European Union project and at the same time it symbolises our system of values. That is why this House regards the Treaty as an integral part of the Copenhagen political criteria. The principle behind this Treaty is plain and simple. Anyone who has committed genocide or war crimes, anyone who is guilty of crimes against humanity should not go unpunished. That is why it is completely incomprehensible that the demand should be made that not all criminals should go before the court, but that some of them, regardless of the seriousness of their crime and solely on the basis of owning a particular document, should be excluded from its jurisdiction. This demand made by the Bush administration would stand in total contradiction to the aim and purpose of the International Criminal Court. It is not only absurd but also unacceptable, and for two reasons. It is firstly unacceptable because exempting all of the nationals of a State would mean that the jurisdiction could only be selective and would therefore take the principle of the universality of justice to absurd lengths. Secondly it is unacceptable because it views all of the nationals of one particular State as potential war criminals. I oppose this generalised anti-Americanism in the strongest possible terms. Some States – so far 12 in number – have succumbed to the huge pressure exerted on them by the United States of America and signed a bilateral agreement with the USA. I deeply regret this and think that it will have consequences for our relations with these States. In any case, tomorrow, in a joint motion tabled by four groups – and it is also exceptional, Madam President, that a joint motion should be tabled in this Parliament – the European Parliament will adopt a very clear position on this."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph