Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-13-Speech-1-120"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030113.6.1-120"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the weaknesses of this report do not lie in the fact that it condemns breaches of human rights where they exist but, in my opinion, in the way in which it has been drafted and in the methodology used to present these condemnations. In choosing to give, in the explanatory statement, a lengthy and detailed description of possible breaches of fundamental rights by some Member States, this report has led to claims and accusations against these Member States that cannot be refuted and have not even been submitted to a democratic vote because they are not included in the text of the motion for a resolution. These claims are therefore unfair, because they do not allow for any response, even though they clearly have no validity in plenary since they are not included in the motion for a resolution.
Furthermore, with regard to the sources the report has used, and without wishing in any way to call into question the credibility of many NGOs, I must point out that a report drawn up by the European Parliament ought to distance itself from and even reject the conclusions of each of these organisations, and avoid including, sometimes inaccurately, aspects of these studies. For example, regarding Portugal, it is claimed that discrimination exists on the grounds of sexual orientation, on the basis of the conclusions and observations of one NGO, which I shall not name as it appears in the text, and the rapporteur states that the Portuguese Penal Code contains legislation that discriminates in this field, an assertion that I reject on the grounds of a simple reading of the law. In fact, the Portuguese Penal Code makes no distinction in the field of sexual orientation with regard to the age of consent.
Mr President, I believe that the European Parliament must responsibly assume its powers for safeguarding human rights and should never confine itself to simply transcribing the opinions of third parties. This will clearly always be the case until we have a legally applicable Charter of Fundamental Rights; only then will things be done differently. We all want to ban breaches, but there are no political breaches of rights – there are legal breaches or practical breaches and these either exist or they do not. No amount of political flexibility, no interpretative criteria will enable us to uncover breaches of rights where these are not considered to be breaches under the law. Nor, on the other hand, can we allow any breach of rights to be justified by political criteria. This is why I shall not be voting in favour of this report: the fundamental balance that is needed for delivering an opinion on such sensitive matters is absent from this text and it has therefore failed to win my support."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples