Brussels, 19/12/2006 (Agence Europe) - The Council's annual report on human rights and democracy gave Finnish foreign minister Paula Lehtomäki (speaking on behalf of the Finnish Presidency) the opportunity to stress to the European Parliament in Strasbourg last week the European Union's commitment to universal respect for fundamental freedoms and the role the promotion of these freedoms can have in combating terrorism (a point which, curiously, was not really picked up in the debate which followed). In its work, the Council had tried to increase the dialogue between experts and working groups, and also between the institutions (not enough, some said: we will do better next time, the Council assured in conclusion), and noted principles which should be at the heart of all the EU does: - opposition to capital punishment; - condemnation of the use of child soldiers; - promotion of freedom of speech and women's rights; - consolation of the victims of violations. The fundamental rights agency is a new and important instrument in this action, which, Ms Lehtomäki stressed, cut across all of the Union's policies.
This may be called “mainstreaming” or “integration - a definition I like”, said Benita Ferrero-Waldner for the Commission, making clear that this integration was not an aim in itself but a means of achieving certain objectives. Ms Ferrero-Waldner welcomed the fact that human rights had been integrated into the 2007-2013 financial perspective, and that the human rights clause included in agreements with third countries allowed “new forms of dialogue”. This, she went on in response to a question, was valid for China too, the inclusion of the clause allowing intensification of the dialogue on this issue, “which has been going on for eleven years”. It was now necessary, she said, to concentrate on certain specific points, dealt with in two Commission communications, the “roadmap” on gender equality and the new strategy on children's rights. At United Nations level, the EU would have to stress more the need for an effective Human Rights Council, and for some problems to be dealt with in greater depth (she hoped in particular that the special session on Darfur would bring results).
During the debate, a number of MEPs voiced their worry over specific cases of violation. Gerardo Galeote Quecedo (EPP-ED, Spain) lamented the fate of Havana's “damas de blanco”, who were unable to come to receive the Sakharov Prize awarded them by the Parliament. A Parliamentary delegation is due to travel to Cuba to present them with the prize (We will try to help the delegation to carry out this trip, said Ms Ferrero-Waldner). Kathy Sinnot (IND/DEM, Ireland) attacked the situation of women in China, who, because of the “one child per family” policy are denied the right to choose (and she spoke of the systematic killing of Down's Syndrome children, which reportedly takes place in China. Eoin Ryan (UEN, Ireland) criticised the EU's and the world's lack of action at the massive violation of human rights in Darfur.
All argued for a coherent EU policy on human rights: not one where there were double standards when important trading partners were involved, warned Spanish MEP Raul Romeva i Rueda for the Greens. British MEP Elizabeth Lynne, for the ALDE group, called for a more active attitude on cluster bombs, which are not used solely for defence. From the same group, Cypriot MEP Marios Matsakis exclaimed, What about human rights in the British colonies? No one speaks about that! And he didn't get an answer. Polish MEP Jan Masiel (League of Families) complained about the treatment granted, in his opinion, to believers: “Some countries are more religious than others. Atheism seems to be given greater respect that belief”, he said. (lg)