BETA

18 Amendments of Marie-Christine VERGIAT related to 2012/2062(INI)

Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. whereas the current economic crisis, its perceived effects on the strength ofhow European citizens view the European project and changes in the global balance of powerbetween States have demonstrated the insufficiency of lofty proclamations on human rights issues if they are not matched by a principled human rights policy implemented through agile and concrete measures and underpinned by an obligation to respect thethat is grounded in sacrosanct principles, implemented with the same rigour in regard to partner State governments around the world and underpinned by coherence and consistency ofin the internal and external dimensions of all EU policies;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas economic and social rights have formed an integral part of human rights since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948; whereas it is imperative therefore that the EU help implement these in the least developed and developing countries with which it signs international agreements, including trade agreements;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas technological change, increasing levels of education throughout many regions of the world, the advent of certain developing countries as regional powers, the creation of new multilateral forums such as the G-20 and the emergence of an interconnected global civil society all point to the need to strengthen the current instruments under international law and in the context of global governance in order to ensure respect for human rights, put an end to impunity for human rights violations and improve the prospects for democracysupport, without interfering, democratic developments across the world;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes that the Special Representative of the European Union ought to have a cross-sectoral remit and the means to implement a cohesive policy that aims to integrate human rights into all the European Union’s policies, and warns against any attempt to use the creation of this post as a way of separating human rights policy from general external policy strategies;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the need for coherence and consistency across all policy areas as an essential condition for an effective and credible human rights strategy and considers it regrettable that there is no specific reference to these principles in the EU Strategic Framework; reminds the Commission of its repeated commitments, as set out in its 2001 communication and its 2010 Communication on an Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme (COM(2010)0171), to take practical steps to ensure greater coherence and consistency between its external and internal policies; recalls that the full involvement of Parliament and greater coordination in this area were agreed in 2001; reminds the Member States and the EU institutions that respect for fundamental rights begins at home and must not be taken for granted, but must be continually assessed and improved, so that the EU can be heard as a credible voice on human rights in the world;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the pivotal role of the human rights country strategies, which were a long-standing request from Parliament, and the fact that they have been developed as an inclusive process encompassing EU delegations, heads of mission and the COHOM; deems it essential to organise broad consultation, especially with local civil society organisations, human rights defenders and other social and environmental stakeholders and stresses that they must be protected by implementing measures to this end; considers that country- specific identification of priorities, realistic objectives and forms of political leverage is essential to more effective EU action and measurable achievements;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Takes due note of the reference in the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy to the development of criteria for the application of the human rights and democracy clause and, points out that although democracy and human rights clauses have figured in political framework agreements with third countries since 1995 and in agreements concluded with more than 120 countries, these clauses have on the whole been ignored; remains convinced that this clause, aswhich ought in reality to be a legally binding commitment by the EU and partner countries, needs to be complemented by an operational enforcement mechanism so that it can be given concrete shape; believes that the following are required: ex ante monitoring mechanisms before a framework agreement is concluded and essential to its conclusion, and ex post monitoring mechanisms with tangible consequences, including suspension of the agreement, for violation of these clauses;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Recommends that the High Representative base this mechanism on recognition of the potential risk of a partner countryconsequences of breaching international human rights standards, by including specific features of a genuine ‘early warning’ system in the clause, and on the establishment of a graduated framework based on consultation, steps and consequences, similar to the one provided for in the Cotonou Agreement; notes that such a system, based on dialogue, would help to identify and address a deteriorating environment and repeated and/or systematic human rights violations in breach of international law, and make it possible to discuss corrective measures within a binding framework; calls, therefore, for the review also to assess the role, mandate and objectives of human rights dialogues and consultation, which should be differently thought out and designed;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Highlights the Council’s 2009 decision to extend the human rights and democracy clause to all agreements and to provide for a linkage between these agreements and free trade agreements by including a ‘passerelle clause’ where necessary; notes that this extension of the coverage of the human rights clause necessarily requires a clear mechanism for its implementation at the institutional and political levels; reiterates its long-standing position on the systematic inclusion of a human rights and democracy clause in all agreements, with both industrialised and developing countries, including sectoral agreements and agreements on trade and investment; considers it essential that all partner countries, in particular like-minded countries and strategic partners with which the EU is negotiating agreements, subscribe to this binding commitment and that the EU establish the consequences of any violations noted thereto;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Emphasises that introducing these clauses into free trade agreements concluded by the EU with third countries has not only been a failure insofar as they have almost never been taken into account, but also because in some cases the free trade agreements themselves have resulted in basic economic and social rights being violated, the people concerned being impoverished and resources being monopolised by transnational corporations; believes therefore that new forms of cooperation need to be implemented so that economic and social development in third countries may be in line with the needs of the people;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that the EU iscan only fully addressing its obligations under the Lisbon Treaty and the Charter by preparing human rights impact assessments prior to the launch of negotiations on all bilateral or multilateral agreements with third countries; notes that this systematic practice is the only way to ensure consistency between primary law, EU external action and the third party’s own obligations under international conventions, including the Iinternational Covenantagreements on Ccivil and Political Rights (ICCPR), political, economic, cultural and social rights; calls for these impact assessments to encompass the full range of human rights, understood as an indivisible whole; notes that they must be conducted in an independent, transparent and participatory manner, involving potentially affected communities; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to develop a robust methodology which enshrines the principles of equality and non- discrimination so as to avoid any negative impact on certain populations and which provides for mutually agreed preventive or remedial measures in the event of any negative impact, before negotiations are finalised;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Draws particular attention to the need to carry out impact assessments of those projects whose implementation carries a serious risk of violating the Charter’s provisions, such as projects relating to the judiciary, border control agencies and police and security forces in countries governed by repressive regimes; considers the exchange of personal data with such regimes unacceptable and even more so the extradition of people to such countries;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Stresses that these events have demonstrated wilful blindness on the part of the EU to the realities of Arab Spring societies, including the situation of young people in those countries, which suggests the need to create exchange programmes, to ease visa conditions for students or open up more European programmes to Arab Spring youth, and for civil-society- based reflection on the causes and consequences of the lack of awareness in relation toof problems, particularly economic and social, in these societies; points out that such reflection could be enhanced by the establishment of a Euro-Arab Youth Convention;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Insists thatTakes note of the implementation by the High Representative and the Commission implement with convictionof the renewed European Neighbourhood Policy by applying with equal attention the ‘more for more’ and ‘less for less’ principles; believes that countries clearly assessed as not making progress on deep democracy should see the Union’s support reduced, in line with the aims of this policy, particularly so when they infringe certain of the core principles; is concerned about the perpetuation of past attitudes whereby excessive political reward is given for steps taken by partner governments which do not contribute to the direct achievement of the objectives;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Considers that the EU must not forget its responsibility in the economic, social and political situation leading to the popular uprisings in the ‘Arab Spring’ countries and must assist the institutions in these countries in carrying out checks on their foreign debts, particularly European debts, in order to identify the illegal portion of these debts which did not benefit the population and to implement all mechanisms allowing them to be written off quickly; is concerned that the partners’ discussions are continuing along the same lines as previously, in particular as regards retaining provisions on liberalisation of the agriculture or public services sectors in current negotiations, as is the case with Tunisia for instance;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Welcomes the initiative of introducing a rights-based approach to development policy, notes that such an approach must be based on the indivisibility of human rights, and firmly believes that human beings and their welfare, rather than governments, should be at the heart of cooperation objectives; emphasises that policy coherence for development must be understood in this context as contributing to the full realisation of human rights objectives, so that different EU policies do not undermine one another in this respect;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Considers that the procedure for awarding the Sakharov Prize needs to be reviewed, notably by including a vote in plenary in the part-session, to make it more transparent and enhance its legitimacy; insists on the importance of following up all prize winners, in particular to ensure their protection when they are at odds with the authorities in their own countries;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
31. Calls for concrete application of Article 36 TEU in order to ensure that Parliament’s views are duly taken into considerationaccount and recommends stronger dialogue in this regard when it comes to the follow- up of resolutions and recommends stronger dialogue in this regard;
2012/09/28
Committee: AFET