Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-21-Speech-1-077"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021021.6.1-077"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the subject of the report is ostensibly the effect of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. One looks in vain to the report, however, for a serious discussion of this legally and politically quite crucial issue. I shall content myself with making two points. First of all, why do we need an EU Charter at all when we have the European Convention on Human Rights, endorsed by all the EU Member States? The answer is, because the EU as such has not endorsed the Convention. By making a simple treaty change, the EU should, however, endorse the treaty as a matter of course, and that is something also recommended in the report. When that happens, however, there will be an inevitable clash between the Court of Human Rights and the EC Court of Justice. The report’s talk of smooth cooperation is sheer nonsense, legally speaking. Secondly, the crucial part of the Charter’s agenda is about promoting the EU’s permanent expansion. The Charter is purely and simply a building block for an EU federal state. Both citizenship and a constitution are part and parcel of a federal state. As is apparent from, for example, paragraphs 7, P, X and N, the citizens of the European Union are being subjected to the EU’s federal authorities. This all constitutes destructive and outrageous interference in matters of national law, and the fact that a veil is being disgracefully drawn over this is reason enough for voting against the report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples