Brussels, 04/07/2012 (Agence Europe) - Contrary to calls by the Conservatives to postpone the vote pending the opinion of the Court of Justice of the EU on its compatibility with Community law and the Charter of fundamental rights, an overwhelming majority of MEPs at the European Parliament definitively buried the highly controversial international anti-counterfeiting trade agreement (ACTA) on Wednesday 4 July, rejecting it by 478 votes against, 39 votes in favour and 165 abstentions, in line with the recommendation of rapporteur David Martin (S&D, UK).
Conservatives' last stand. In a final attempt to save the agreement, the shadow rapporteur for the EPP Group, which is in favour of the agreement, Sweden's Christofer Fjellner, argued beforehand for the vote to be postponed, in order to give the Court of Justice time to return its opinion. This request was rejected by a large majority of MEPs. “ACTA only exists due to the EPP's life support machine. No transplant, no surgery will allow us to save ACTA, it is time to let it rest in peace for the rest of our lives”, commented David Martin, pointing out that the ACTA agreement had previously been rejected by five parliamentary committees - the committee on international trade, which is competent to the substance, plus the committees on legal affairs, civil liberties, industry and development, which were all asked for their opinion. At a final debate on Tuesday, Martin pointed out the major shortcomings of the agreement, the absence of a clear definition of “commercial scale” and the implicit demands to be made of internet service providers to act as web police.
Hello democracy, goodbye ACTA. The MEPs of the Left -S&D and GUE/NGL, the Greens and the majority of the Liberals, who voted in favour of rejecting the text, also immediately welcomed a victory for democracy. The words “Hello democracy, goodbye ACTA” could be read on placards brandished or T-shirts worn in the hemicycle by MEPs belonging to the Greens/EFA Group, after the vote. “This is a victory for the citizens' lobby over that of a few industrial lobbies”, said French Green Sandrine Bélier. This was echoed by the Socialists and Democrats, at the extreme Left, and among the Liberals. “We have not just voted against ACTA, we have voted for European democracy”, said Françoise Castex (S&D, France). “For the first time, the European Parliament has used the powers conferred upon it by the Treaty of Lisbon to reject an international trade agreement. The Commission and Council are now aware that they have to reckon with the Parliament, which represents and defends the citizens”, added the leader of the S&D Group, Austria's Hannes Swoboda. Outside the Parliament, the president of the European Socialist Party, Bulgarian Prime Minister Sergeu Stanishev, hailed “a victory for mobilisation, transparency and democracy”. For her part, the leader of the GUE/NGL, Gabi Zimmer of Germany, also described a “great day for participative democracy”. “The citizens have placed their hopes in the hands of the MEPs to defend their interests against the Commission and the interests of big business, we have defended them in this vote. It has never been so clear that the internet is a vital element of the functioning of European democracy”, her colleague and compatriot Helmut Scholz added. On behalf of the ADLE Group, Dutch member Marietje Schaake also paid tribute to a “victory for European democracy and freedom on the internet”. “From this business, a genuine citizens' network has emerged, and this is a space of individual liberty which cannot be restricted”, her Italian colleague, Niccolo Rinaldi, added. As for the president of the Parliament, Germany's Martin Schulz, he said that this vote “was not a vote against the protection of intellectual property, but it shows the existence of European public opinion which transcends national borders”.
Constructive opposition. The main target of the criticism of those opposed to ACTA, Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht, rather grudgingly recognised his defeat, “[welcoming] the debate of the European citizens on the importance of fighting counterfeiting and protecting intellectual property”. Reiterating ACTA's importance in protecting intellectual property rights and the competitiveness of the EU, the De Gucht stressed that he was not withdrawing his request for the opinion of the EU Court of Justice on the text's compatibility with Community law and the Charter of fundamental rights. Once it has the Court's opinion in hand, the Commission will draw conclusions from it and consult the other signatories of ACTA with a view to adopting a new approach on protecting intellectual property rights internationally. At the Parliament, the opponents are ready to work for a new approach to include civil society, with the aim of “finding the right balance between remuneration and protection for creation and innovation on the one hand, sharing knowledge and public liberty on the other”, French Green Yannick Jadot summed up.
ACTA, which was negotiated outside a WTO framework between 2007 and 2010 by the world's largest industrialised economies - Australia, Canada, South Korea, the United States, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the EU - plus Morocco, aims to protect intellectual property from classical counterfeiting (clothing, medicines) and digital (illegal downloads), on the basis of harmonised standards. (EH/transl.fl)