Brussels, 24/02/2005 (Agence Europe) - On Thursday the Council decided to kick-start discussions on the framework decision for harmonising definitions and sanctions on racism but this did not include a ban on Nazi or racist symbols. Ministers considered that discussions on this text, suspended mid-2003, were already too complex and did not need any further complications. British, Hungarian and Danish ministers specifically spoke against including these symbols in this text. Robert Castelli was the only figure to have overtly complicated discussions again when he spoke for a ban on these symbols.
The ban on these symbols had already been requested by German MEPs, who were outraged by British Price Harry sporting a swastika on his arm last January. There was no question on this matter in previous discussions on the text. The Luxembourg presidency took up the suggestion by proposing a ban on racist and Nazi symbols. On Thursday it decided to withdraw the proposal in an effort to avoid making the discussions more complicated. Work on the framework decision will kick off again at an experts' level, before it being back on the next Justice and Home Affairs Council agenda on 14 April. The new Member States highlighted the fact that they needed time to decide on the text, as they had not been members of the EU when it was previously discussed at the Council. Luxembourg wants the text adopted during its presidency in the first 6 months of the year. This is not going to be easy. During a press conference, the acting president of the JHA Council, Luxembourg minister Luc Frieden declared that either they adopt the text or they do nothing. He explained that the presidency did not want the debates to go on for years. He said that the text only needed fine-tuning in a few areas. The presidency hopes that Member States will not reopen the debate on the contents of the text but he did want to give new Member States the time to speak on the matter. Two demands that are not easily reconciled.
Discussions were suspended in mid-2003 due to fierce opposition from Italy to the text, denounced by Mr Castelli as a political weapon in the hands of his enemies but also due to the deep divisions of principle between Member States. Hard-line supporters of the freedom of expression, include the United Kingdom and Scandinavian countries, while France, Belgium and Spain just want to sanction certain wording, such as holocaust denial. Diplomats underline that these principles are so anchored in each country due to different traditions, that none of them would be ready to introduce it into their own legal cultures on the issue. The question is one of deciding how the different traditions can be respected while adopting a common text. If discussions are reopened, Member States could discuss Article 8 in the 2003 version. The first paragraph does not call for racist declarations or holocaust denial to be sanctioned if they are not expressed in a way that could incite hatred against an individual or group of people. France may have something to add on this point.
During the discussion, Italian minister Roberto Castelli insisted on the Council examining the alternative proposal presented in 2003. This proposal got no support at the time. Diplomats said that completely liquidated the text. Roberto Castelli was visibly prepared to block discussions. When the other Member States agreed to halt discussions on symbols, he informed the press that he wanted to reopen the debate on the text but only if “nothing in the text encroaches on free speech and that the question of symbols is taken into consideration, which is very important”. During preparations for the Council, the Italian delegation was against these symbols being included in the text, indicated one European source. Diplomats indicated that during discussions at Thursday's Council, Castelli did not indicate whether he would make inclusion of these symbols a condition for reopening the discussions.
In February 2003 when discussions on the framework decision were in full swing, Antonio Vitorino, at the time Commissioner for justice and home affairs, declared that the was not at all satisfied by progress in the Council discussions, which was significantly watering down the proposal submitted in 2001 and amended the text to a level below that of the “common action of 1996” on the same subject. However, it is on the basis of this “unsatisfactory” text that discussions will be based. European sources indicated that during Thursday's discussion, the current Commissioner, Franco Frattini, pointed out that the Commission's proposal was more ambitious but added that he may support the current text. He informed the press that it was important for the text to respect subsidiarity and allow room for manoeuvre in each Member State. Diplomats say that if it is adopted, the text will, above all, be a text of principle, without any real practical importance.