Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-09-16-Speech-4-098"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19990916.6.4-098"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The increased Community action in areas of justice and home affairs is a major cause for concern for European citizens. It is a direct attempt to fortify strongholds and to tighten control and monitoring mechanisms with a view to exercising command over the citizens and to monitoring their activities effectively as opposed to promoting citizens’ rights.
Of particular concern is the sphere of immigration and asylum where there is a growing trend towards the creation of a fortress-Europe. We should show more concern over the attempts both to divert from and replace the Geneva Convention, which is the main source of international law governing refugees, and to implement a “temporary protection regime”. We should also be particularly concerned about deliberations to amend the Dublin Asylum Convention, to enforce stricter legislation on the procedure for processing asylum applications and to implement “effectively” the removal procedures for those whose residency applications have been rejected.
The increase in the wave of refugees cannot be dealt with by enforcing repressive measures, but by implementing an international policy which will reduce tensions and will contribute to peaceful political settlement of all differences, and will not resort, as in Kosovo, to criminal military intervention measures. It must be dealt with by conducting an international economic and commercial policy which will support economic development of third countries and will contribute to the welfare of the population.
The proposals regarding the widening of police and judicial powers of intervention in criminal cases, as well as the various proposals concerning the creation of a special European judicial area, constitute the cloak under which Europol can strengthen and widen its operational powers and under which repressive national principles can be formulated, thereby seriously jeopardising fundamental democratic rights and freedoms. Widening activities in the exchange of information, filing and processing this information
either within the framework of Europol or directly among Member States, will not only increase the dangers of uncontrolled use of those files but will also legitimise all activities relating to surveillance and placing on file under the pretext of crime prevention.
In this connection, the creation of “European Public Order” based on the Schengen principles would inevitably constitute an undemocratic arsenal which, at any given moment, could be used against political and trade unionist action, to prevent working people from reacting to any unpopular policies of the EU and of the Member States. When the underlying philosophy of the proposals in question centres around the meaning of “law-abiding citizens” and the need to “make those who ‘threaten the freedom and security of the individual and of society’ accountable for their actions”, we cannot but detect a certain re-emergence of those principles which, in countries like ours, once formed the basis of anti-democratic laws and restrictions and the basis for the penalisation of all political and trade unionist activities. It is obvious that under the cloak of the fight against organised crime and certain other types of unlawful punishable behaviour, we are attempting not only to control developments at policy level in the long-term, but also to introduce tougher enforcement procedures for law and order. It is no coincidence that, for matters concerning justice and home affairs, the issues of public order and security fall outside the already limited competence of the European Court of Justice. Similar difficulties exist for parliamentary control which means that action by the police and secret services and public security standards will remain all the more uncontrolled. Increasing co-operation in civil and criminal cases demands total respect for traditions of international civil and criminal law, total respect for democratic rights, and the safeguarding of traditional principles of fundamental and procedural law.
It is evident that not only must we disagree with but we must also condemn such developments. For their sake, working people should not only show opposition to the plans being advocated, but should also expose the hypocrisy of the EU and of the Member States and fight to avert such dangers to the development of their freedoms."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples