Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-23-Speech-3-233"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021023.5.3-233"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I hear what the minister says; I accept that the guidelines are better than nothing and I congratulate the Danish presidency on at least achieving them. But the legal advice given to the EU institutions was that a contracting party to the Rome Statute that concludes bilateral agreements outside the tight scope of Article 98 acts against the object and purpose of the Statute. Is it not true that the guidelines are really too weak to shut the door to impunity arrangements?
I heard the minister refer to a common position. I would like to know whether the guidelines legally constitute a common position. Whether they do or not, will the Council at least seek to strengthen these rather vague guidelines of 30 September which allow loopholes contravening the Statute? That would give us a strengthened common position delivering additional safeguards. These should include: oversight of national pledges by the ICC; guarantees that the US will investigate and prosecute its own nationals accused of committing ICC crimes; a requirement on the US to update federal laws to ensure that its courts exercise jurisdiction over all ICC crimes – which is not the case at the moment; agreement to confine the scope to military personnel or closely allied civilian personnel – and not, for instance, mercenaries; inclusion of a sunset clause and the submission of the agreements for scrutiny by the relevant national parliaments."@en1
|
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples