Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-25-Speech-3-143"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020925.6.3-143"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Mr Møller, Commissioner Patten, ladies and gentlemen, I should first like to make two preliminary remarks: firstly, I should like to thank my friend and colleague Arie Oostlander very much for agreeing the motion with the other groups so that tomorrow we will hopefully be able to adopt a broad common position.
Secondly, we have got into a bit of a muddle with the timetable here and my group's bureau has been meeting since 5.30 p.m. It is advisable for the group chairman to be in attendance, so I would crave your indulgence if I leave immediately after my speech, something that I have never done before.
Why did the international community set up this International Criminal Court? It was set up because the Rome Statute of the Court states that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished. That is precisely our group's position. Our values are human dignity, freedom, democracy and the rule of law and no one has the right, except in self-defence, to kill another person or wound their dignity. This dignity is for everyone, for Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, people of no religious persuasion, people from large and small countries, for all the people on this earth. No individual and no country has the right to escape punishment for crimes which concern the international community as a whole. No one, no person and no State, is above the law. That is why we want the International Criminal Court to be effective and capable of acting, and I very much welcome the clear statements made by both President Møller and Commissioner Patten. We expect all EU Member State governments and parliaments to do all they can to ensure that this International Court is able to work properly and effectively. We call in particular on the accession countries not to enter into any agreements before we have agreed on a common position within the European Union, and I hope very much that on 30 September you will succeed in drafting such a common position. I very much regret the fact that Romania, an accession country, has concluded an agreement without first awaiting the European Union's position. It has not acted in solidarity with the European Union.
In conclusion allow me to say this: despite the fact that the motion naturally contains a certain amount of criticism of the United States, this is no reason for us now to adopt an anti-American attitude. This is more an example of a case where our opinions differ, and we should discuss this without by so doing ceasing to be partners and friends of the Americans. In a partnership it is usual for differences of opinion to be expressed and in any case we Europeans should act more in unison. We have more reason to ask ourselves questions than to criticise the Americans. This means that here too European unity is actually already part of the answer."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples