Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-31-Speech-3-081"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060531.12.3-081"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the Council’s position is, and remains, unambiguous. All the international humanitarian standards and standards relating to human rights must be observed wherever in the world the fight against terrorism is conducted. There must be no areas in which the laws do not apply. On that we are agreed.
In the Council, our common understanding is that Guantánamo remains a cause for serious concern. We declare our support for combating terrorism effectively, deploying all the legal means available to us. Terrorism is a threat to our order of values, built on the rule of law. We must, however, also be sure that, in fighting terrorism, we do not damage or call into question our procedures and institutions based on the rule of law. No one should occupy a space in which the law does not apply, and standards relating to human rights and humanitarian law must be observed in the fight against terrorism too.
We in the EU have on many occasions discussed the subject of Guantánamo with the US administration. This dialogue with the United States is being continued. The legal advisers of the USA’s state department and of the EU’s equivalent services are discussing better ways of protecting human rights in the fight against terrorism, as the common search to improve the protection of human rights is important. We must also analyse whether there are any such things as perfect legal bases and whether – and, if so, in which area – there is a need to take action.
For a country such as the United States, which declares its support for freedom, the rule of law and proper court proceedings, Guantánamo is an anomaly. In our view, the US Government should therefore take measures to close down the camp as quickly as possible.
I should also like to add that the latest reports, according to which a considerable number of Guantánamo prisoners were less than 18 years old – children within the meaning of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child – when they were taken prisoner are naturally cause for particular concern and need to be carefully examined. Back under the British Presidency, the Council approached the United States and asked it to grant representatives of what are known as UN special procedures - including the Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak – unrestricted access to Guantánamo.
Unfortunately, it was not possible for the UN representatives to visit Guantánamo under the normal conditions for special procedures. That is to say, they received no assurance of being able to speak with prisoners unsupervised. This same line was also taken by the United States when Members of the European Parliament visited Guantánamo on 22 May. We continue to insist, as I say, on access for the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Torture.
However, the Council is also particularly concerned to defend or, as the case may be, further to strengthen the cohesion of the Euro-Atlantic Community in the context of combating terrorism. The Euro-Atlantic Community is one of the most successful partnerships the world has ever known. This community of values must also prove its worth specifically in the face of the challenge from international terrorism. That is why it was the concern both of the Austrian Presidency and of the Council to initiate the dialogue between experts in international law, to present the debate in objective terms and to strive for common positions corresponding to our system of values. We must be aware that, following the criminal terrorist attacks of September 2001, the United States saw itself forced, under extraordinary conditions, to react to the new challenges of global terrorism. Some of the measures taken were criticised by Europeans or regarded as being completely incompatible with our common system of values. Since then, the Americans have been seen to think again, and they have made a number of improvements to their original stance. In our view, the constructive dialogue with the United States, designed as it is to achieve certain goals, should help fix the future fight against terrorism more securely within the framework of the rule of law."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples