Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-11-23-Speech-1-102"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091123.18.1-102"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I can agree with the previous speakers in so far as I think that it would only be sensible for the Council to present its proposals concerning Europol to the European Parliament once again, on the basis of the Treaty of Lisbon.
It is right and necessary for the judicial and police cooperation in Europe to be discussed and codecided by Parliament. Only in this way can Europol’s work enjoy sufficient legitimacy. The European Parliament’s joint and decisive rejection of the provisions proposed by the Council, pertaining to Europol’s work, is a clear signal that amendments to the legal basis now have to be applied.
What is more, there is every reason to do so. For far too long, the implementation of European internal and security policy has been a task reserved exclusively for the executive, carried out behind closed doors. Not least in the context of the anti-terrorism measures taken following the attacks on 11 September 2001, numerous rafts of security legislation were approved, whose necessity, effectiveness and suitability was, in many cases, not thoroughly assessed, or even discussed. The political remoteness of the third pillar of the European Union has made it possible for the governments to impose highly controversial restrictions on the fundamental rights of the citizens.
This has produced a very dangerous imbalance in one area in particular. While there is now closer cooperation between the security forces throughout the world, there is no international consensus on minimum standards in relation to fundamental rights and legal protection. This gulf between government powers and civil rights is becoming increasingly pronounced, especially with regard to the exchange of personal data between the EU and third countries,. European security agencies such as Europol, Eurojust and Frontex, as well as information systems such as Schengen, Eurodac or the customs and visa database, are being used to store an increasing volume of personal data, and the linking and analysis of this data, for various purposes, is progressing rapidly. Even within Europe, it is becoming less clear who is allowed to collect, possess, analyse or pass on what data, and the conditions under which they may do so. Thus, the issue of legal protection is frequently sidelined, in the light of the principles which govern the current system.
However, what would happen if all this data was passed on only to third countries? We are not merely talking about countries such as Norway or Switzerland, but also the United States, Russia, and even Morocco or China. I wonder who would guarantee that this data was protected from abuse and arbitrary actions on the part of states to the same extent as has hitherto been the case. This Parliament actually has the right and the duty to use the new legal basis provided by the treaty to initiate a process whereby the fundamental rights of European citizens will have to be respected, without any limitations, including in the context of international cooperation in the fight against crime and terrorism. Common minimum standards must be put in place, specifically with regard to the protection of personal data, before we, as the European Union, sign any further agreements on the exchange of data with third countries.
This applies to the information obtained by Europol, as well as SWIFT banking data and flight passenger data, which are exchanged with the US authorities. Clear data protection standards, a comprehensive proportionality assessment and effective legal protection for citizens are key prerequisites for any further measures.
I am pleased that we have managed to reach this level of consensus across the political spectrum regarding the legislation on Europol, and I view this as a good sign for the forthcoming discussion on the comprehensive protection of fundamental rights in Europe. That is precisely what EU citizens now expect from us."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples