Strasbourg, 03/10/2001 (Agence Europe) - On Wednesday, the European Parliament accepted the European Commission's urgent request, also made by the Council that morning, concerning the draft regulation on specific measures to be taken against certain persons or entities with a view to combating international terrorism. To put it clearly, this means freezing assets that may fund terrorism (see yesterday's EUROPE, p.6). Thus, approving the recommendation made by British Liberal Democrat Graham Watson, Chair of the EP Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, the plenary decided to vote on the substance of the issue on Thursday at midday. Until Tuesday at 18h00, MEPs had had the possibility to present amendments. Giuseppe di Lello (elected member of the Partito della rifondazione comunista, member of the EUL Group), said in plenary that "serious perplexity" had been expressed on this procedure during the meeting of the Committee on Freedoms, and that there had been 3 votes against and 3 abstentions.
In a press release, Mr Watson above all said it would be necessary to introduce a "sunset clause" in order to be able to review application of the regulation. He expressed surprise not only that the proposed list does not include any of the groups known to be responsible for terrorist acts in Europe but also that the regulation does not provide for compensation for companies whose assets are frozen, only to be found innocent at a later date. Furthermore, he regretted that the EU Treaty does not, for measures of such significance, comprise a legal base other than Article 308. He called on the European Council of Laeken to seriously examine "the need for the legal powers for the EU to address this kind of supranational threat".
Speaking during a press conference, the president of the Liberal Group, Pat Cox, welcomed the initiative of the European Commission, which, he said, was able in this state of emergency to be "bold". He also, however, insisted on the need to be "cautious". Speaking along the same lines as Mr Watson, Mr Cox noted that this mainly means that a regulation of such scope could not be applied during an indefinite period but should be accompanied by a "sunset clause". The Irish MEP said that a procedure of such "dramatic urgency" had never before been necessary and that one should not only "seize the moment" but also foresee how to follow it up. What form should it take? Mr Cox said he did not know whether this could be specified in the regulation or whether it could be set out in a "clear declaration of intent". In answer to a question, he made it clear that, during a meeting with those working with Commissioner Patten, he had had the impression there was "sympathetic hearing". Mr Cox also expressed surprise at noting that the list of organisations concerned annexed to the regulation does not contain names of organisations linked to terrorist acts within the European Union. He said terrorists acting "within" the Union must be treated in the same way as those "between the Union and the outer world". He recognised that the regulation in question is clearly linked to the attacks on 11 September. To the question of knowing whether one should include related organisations on this list, for example ETA or the IRA, Pat Cox replied "yes but". He would be in favour if proof were irrefutable, but without calling for such an extension at present. He simply noted that the question must be raised. Finally, like Mr Watson, the president of the Liberal Group felt that a "big lesson" to be learnt from events is that the European Council of Laeken, in its debate on the future of Europe, should also tackle the need to reform the Justice/Home Affairs chapter of the Treaty. There is no doubt that such matters must come under the first pillar, decreed Mr Cox, who also said he hoped that, pending revision of the Treaty, one would "creatively" exploit what the Treaty already allows (the "bridges" between pillars, for example).