Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-13-Speech-4-134"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030213.7.4-134"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, over the past years, democratic conditions in most of the countries of Central Asia have deteriorated. However, the Commission understands why the focus of Parliament’s attention in this debate is on Kazakhstan.
Once considered one of the ‘hopefuls’ in the region, the past two years have seen a crackdown on political opposition and critical media. Especially hard hit were those who had the courage to criticise corruption at the highest level, involving the President and his family. The Commission agrees that the court cases on corruption charges against Mr Ablyazov and Mr Zhakianov, the two leaders of the opposition movement Democratic Choice for Kazakhstan, had every appearance of being politically motivated. The Commission has furthermore viewed with great concern the campaign of intimidation that has been going on against a great number of critical media in Kazakhstan. This has included the firebombing of offices, the vandalising of transmitter equipment with a machine gun, a decapitated dog nailed to a newspaper office door and physical attacks against individual journalists. The perpetrators of these crimes have never been apprehended, and many cases have simply been closed. A number of newspapers, furthermore, have been subject to judicial proceedings, endless tax and safety inspector visits and heavy fines, in a number of cases resulting in closure.
The Commission also agrees that the recent court case against Mr Duvanov on rape charges was marred by grave irregularities. We therefore strongly believe that the trial should be reviewed.
It is against this background that President Nazarbaev’s recent statements that Kazakhstan will seek its own pace of democratisation – to be achieved by 2030 – and that western standards should not be automatically applied to Kazakhstan, are to be met with due caution. President Prodi underlined our deep concern over Kazakhstan’s recent democratic record during the President’s visit to Brussels on 29 November 2002.
On the other hand, it is important to take a number of positive developments in Kazakhstan into consideration as well. Prisons have been transferred from the Ministry of the Interior to the Ministry of Justice, and we hope that pre-trial detention facilities will soon follow. A law on the humanisation of prison conditions has been passed and a serious effort seems to be being made to implement prison reform. Kazakhstan, as well as other countries in Central Asia, has also established the post of Human Rights Ombudsman, although much remains to be done in terms of strengthening their mandates and facilities. A 'Standing Council' for further democratisation and development in civil society was approved by Presidential Decree on 29 December 2002. It is to be hoped that its recommendations, for example those on the Law on Political Parties, will be followed up.
The Commission notes that Parliament’s resolution focuses on Kazakhstan only. The Commission believes, however, that the matter of human rights in Kazakhstan is to be viewed in its regional context. It cannot be denied that there has been a crackdown on non-governmental media and opposition in Kazakhstan. But the Commission does not believe that the state of democracy and human rights in Kazakhstan – nor, for that matter, in Kyrgyzstan or Tajikistan – is beyond repair. We believe that the EU can continue to have an impact on democratic conditions in these countries through critical but constructive dialogue under the Partnership and Cooperation Agreements.
We have deeper concerns regarding Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, on which Parliament’s resolution remains silent. Uzbekistan has no independent press, whereas Turkmenistan has no press at all worthy of the name. Opposition parties do not exist in these two countries. Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan have been under the close scrutiny of human rights watchdogs for some time now because of the deterioration in democratic conditions. This scrutiny has certainly been justified. But let us not forget that in Uzbekistan, and certainly in Turkmenistan, for years there has been no democracy at all left to deteriorate. In these countries, any opposition activist, critical journalist or simply any Muslim practising his belief, risks ending up in a torture chamber, a penal colony or on death row on charges of terrorism, religious extremism or an attempt on the life of the President.
Opposition and civil society in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and, to an extent, Tajikistan, are under pressure, but this has, at least so far, not made them less resilient or vocal. Through constructive dialogue and targeted support, the EU can still make a difference in these countries."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples