Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-13-Speech-4-155"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-02-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Human rights in Zimbabwe2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030213.9.4-155"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-02-13-Speech-4-1562
lpv:speaker	lp:Nelly Maes2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; G/EFA (2002-01-08--2004-07-19)3 unknown; België Spirit (2002-01-08--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Slovak Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, let me say, for the sake of precision, that I am not one of the authors of the joint resolution, I am an author of one resolution. The resolution we submitted was intended to vigorously denounce the human rights situation in Zimbabwe and specifically to emphasise the risk to which an unfair trial, exposes Mr Tsvangirai, the man who, under normal circumstances, would have been president of his country if the elections had not been tampered with. Nonetheless, I cannot use my remaining seconds to denounce the human rights situation even further, because our Parliament prefers to repeat everything again and to place the emphasis on tightening sanctions again, while all the Member States of the European Union, including Britain, keep on invoking Article 3, paragraph 3 of which states that exceptions should be made for international meetings that have to be accommodated. In the way it applies this article and paragraph 3, the European Union has once again decided that Mugabe should come to Paris for the summit next week to speak on the human rights situation that is on the agenda there. How in God’s name can we get out of this ambiguous situation? This matter is once again dividing us, even though together we want to condemn the sanctions. We cannot, however, have a situation where we in the European Parliament systematically want more sanctions than any of the Member States to which we belong, if the whole Council, which is again, incidentally, absent, does not intervene and does not opt for an unambiguous solution. My group resolutely argues in favour of maintaining the dialogue, and of promulgating sanctions that can be imposed, but not of invoking sanctions that rule out any dialogue. We have just heard how things are in Venezuela, where there is no dialogue. They are asking for a dialogue there; in this case a dialogue is actually necessary! There are many paragraphs in our resolution that we would like to see approved. It follows, though, that you should not expect heroism from countries whose economies are so strongly intermeshed with that of Zimbabwe, which is bigger than that of our own European Member States, who do not even have the courage to get together to ask a UN representative to investigate the human rights situation in situ in Zimbabwe. We will therefore be voting against several of these paragraphs, and we will also not be able to approve the resolution in its entirety, but we will be continuing to fight the same fight in favour of human rights and against this pernicious regime."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph