Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-06-16-Speech-3-568"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100616.35.3-568"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we called for this oral question and a parliamentary resolution to make the Commission aware of the vital importance of fostering a common judicial culture throughout Europe as part of the Stockholm Programme.
I would like to say at the outset that this is important but also that, with a view to the communication that the Commission will have to produce on future pilot projects, as already discussed, we would like to clarify some points. First of all, we would like the parliamentary consultations to start soon so that we do not get to the initial phase, when we begin to draw up an idea for these future projects, too late when the projects have already been more or less fully formulated.
I say this because we have some basic observations to make. National judges and prosecutors in individual states are now crucial pawns in the construction of Europe because, by interpreting national rights in a European light, they can lay the ground for settling disputes and regulating the daily lives of citizens. By doing so, they engender a sense of European citizenship; they engender a European sensibility in everyone who inhabits these lands. This comes about because the people are made to feel the tangible benefits of introducing European elements and hence Community law, above all, into all State laws so that our citizens can live better lives. This offers real advantages for overcoming problems that would otherwise remain unresolved.
By saying this, my aim is to turn the whole system slightly on its head. For example, we do not agree that these projects should be along the lines of Erasmus projects because the number of judges and prosecutors involved in Erasmus-style projects would be very low. This could not be otherwise due to the high costs of physical mobility in this field and the numbers would not therefore be very significant within the judiciary as a whole.
The most important question concerns the term ‘familiarisation courses’, which we introduced in our paper. Judges are not schoolchildren sitting behind their desks waiting to be taught a lesson. They are mature and highly professional people with little time to spare and who cannot therefore easily move around. Despite this, they hold a valuable store of knowledge and should be stimulated to pit their knowledge against the new problems of European law and European culture. This will create fertile ground for exchanges, virtual rather than physical, using technologies, the Internet and the various opportunities such exchanges can create. Their starting point should be not so much a general approach but rather the individual cases, the individual problems that judges and prosecutors have to deal with. The cases and problems are new and must stimulate the professional growth of these legal operators, providing them with the stimulus they need to make an effective contribution, based on autobiographical reflection on their experience and what they have learned, to respond to the challenges represented by Europe in positive terms.
As you see, Mr President, Commissioner, we intend to break with the tradition of the courses that have been held so far and that we feel are not really fit for purpose. We would like to know how much and what funds are available and express our doubts over the idea – as we stated in our communication – of a Central European institution to oversee this process because we are in favour of a bottom-up movement and against centralisation.
This is a new approach. What we wish to point out, however, is that unless we shape a European mentality among judges and prosecutors, who will, in this way, offer their services to justice and the citizens who call for it, we will not make Europe. This is therefore not only an important charter for European justice; it is an important charter for the development of European unity as a whole."@en1
|
lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples