Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-05-14-Speech-3-102"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030514.4.3-102"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I too would like first to thank the Council for distributing this document and for facilitating this debate. Thank you very much for being here today.
I have strongly defended the European search and arrest warrant in this House. In doing so I have argued strongly that international cooperation, not the restriction of rights and freedoms is what will make us better able to deal with new security problems. I therefore think that in principle increased cooperation with the United States is a positive development.
Nevertheless, Mr President, I feel compelled to raise a number of questions here and now. My questions concern the contents of this agreement with a country whose judicial system remains significantly different from ours.
My first question relates to the fact that there is a guarantee that a person who is extradited cannot be condemned to death. I understand this; it has been made very clear. I would however like to know how we can guarantee that judicial cooperation and the handing over of evidence does not amount to collaborating to ensure someone is executed. I would welcome further clarification on this matter.
I will now outline my second question. The European search and arrest warrant will not come into force for a few months. It provides for the International Criminal Court to prevail. When, in the future, Member States are bound by this arrangement, how will it be possible to guarantee that a summons issued by the International Criminal Court takes precedence over a request for extradition issued by the United States? There are indeed measures that protect against the
and extraordinary laws. Clearly, we are not going to hand a person over to the United States if he or she could be tried under laws of that kind. This leads me however to pose another question, relating to politics rather than to the contents of the proposal. There is evidence that at least twelve European citizens are being ‘detained’, if I may put it like that, in Guantanamo Bay. Has the Council taken any action to guarantee the right of European citizens to proper consular protection abroad, as provided for further to the Maastricht Treaty? Has the Council instructed the Commission to take such action? Or are we to admit that there are different classes of citizens? Has anything been done to ensure the United States allows the detainees to appear before a judge?
Lastly, Mr President, is it politically acceptable to sign an agreement strengthening judicial cooperation with a state that is keeping nationals of our countries in such conditions? I firmly believe it is not. How will we be able to call for justice from third countries in future when we find ourselves in a similar situation?"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Patriot Act"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples