27 Amendments of Marian-Jean MARINESCU related to 2012/2033(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union is founded on commitment to the rule of law and human rights, not only in its internal policies, but also in its externally dimension;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 22
Citation 22
– having regard to the letter of 29 November 2005 from the EU Presidency to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, requesting any ‘clarification the US can give about these reports [alleged detention or transportation of terrorists suspects in or through some EU Member States] in the hope that this will allay parliamentary and public concerns’,
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas EU-US relations are based on a strong partnership and cooperation in many fields, on the basis of common shared values of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights; whereas the EU and the United States have strengthened their engagement in the fight against terrorism since the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, notably with the Joint Declaration on Counter Terrorism of 3 June 2010, but whereas it has became apparent that there is a divergence between declared commitments and practices, and between EU and US policies in the fight against terrorism;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 31 a (new)
Citation 31 a (new)
- having regard to the conclusions of the national inquiries already conducted in some Member States,
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that counter-terrorism strategies can only be fully effective if they are conducted in compliance with human rights obligations and implemented through a due process;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Council admitted on 15 September 2006 that ‘the existence of secret detention facilities where detained persons are kept in a legal vacuum is not in conformity with international humanitarian law and international criminal law’, but given the lack of solid judicial evidence has so far failed to recognise and condemn the involvement of Member States in the CIA programme, even though the use of European airspace and territory by the CIA has been acknowledged by political and judicial authorities of some Member States;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas research by the UN, the Council of Europe and civil society has brought to light new concrete information on the possible location of secret CIA detention sites in Europe, rendition flights through European airspace, and persons transported or detained, although no solid judicial evidence has been produced;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates its call, required by international law and notably Article 12 of the CAT, for all states faced with credible allegations to end impunity andmake every effort in order to bring the necessary clarifications and, if justified by the evidence, to conduct thorough investigations and inquiries into all alleged acts of extraordinary rendition, secret prisons, torture and other serious human rights violations, so as to eliminate all doubts or to determine responsibility and ensure accountability, including bringing individuals to justice where there is evidence of criminal liability;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the 2011 Council of Europe report states that the data obtained from the Polish agencies in 2009 and 2010 ‘provide definite proof’ that seven CIA-associated aircraft landed in Poland; whereas a ‘black site’ was identified in Romania by journalists on the basis of information provided by former CIA employees in the Romanian national registry office for classified information1 ; whereas former Libyan dissidents have started legal proceedings against the UK for the direct involvement of MI6 in their own and their 1 family members‘ rendition, secret detention and torture; ‘Inside Romania’s secret CIA prison’, The Independent, 9.12.2011.
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges NATO andCalls on the United States and NATO authorities to conduct their own investigations, collaborate fully with EU and Member State parliamentary or judicial inquiries on these issues1, disclose information on extraordinary rendition programmes, and clarifyreconfirm that all NATO agreements and NATO-EU and other transatlantic arrangements comply with fundamental rights; ______________ 1 See inter alia European Parliament resolution of 9 June 2011 on Guantánamo: imminent death penalty decision (P7_TA(2011)0271).
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the 2011 Council of Europe report states that the data obtained from the Polish agencies in 2009 and 2010 ‘provide definite proof’ that seven CIA-associated aircraft landed in Poland; whereas a possible ‘black site’ was identifipointed to have been located in Romania by journalists on the basis of information provided by former CIA employees in the Romanian national registry office for classified information (*)1 , although not confirmed by authorities or by the inquiry already conducted by the Romanian Parliament; whereas former Libyan dissidents have started legal proceedings against the UK for the direct involvement of MI6 in their own and their family members‘ rendition, secret detention and torture;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the relevant authorities to end the habit of routinelynot invokinge state secrecy in relation to international intelligence cooperation to block accountability and redress, and insists that only genuine national security reasons can justify secrecy, which is in any case overridden by non-derogable fundamental rights obligations such as the absolute prohibition on torture;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Reaffirms that the international fight against terrorism and bilateral or multilateral international cooperation in this area, including in the framework of NATO or between intelligence and security services, must only be carried out with full respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and with appropriate democratic and judicial oversight; calls on EU Member States, the Commission, the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the Council to ensure that these principles are applied in their foreign relations, and insists that they should make a thorough assessment of their counterparts‘ records on human rights before entering into any agreement, notably on intelligence cooperation and information-sharing;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that some Member States have so far not properly fulfilled their positive obligation under international law to investigate seriousalleged human rights violations connected with the CIA programme and to afford full redress to victims;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that the failure of some Member States to assume their responsibility to conduct inquiries that are fully compatible with their international obligations may undermines mutual trust in fundamental rights protection, and thus becomes the responsibility of the EU as a whole;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the United States, given the cardinal role of the transatlantic partnership and the United States‘ leadership in this area, to fully investigate and secure accountability for any abuses that it has practiced, end the war paradigm which has in practice led to legal black holes, end military trials, fully apply criminal law to terrorist suspects and restore review of detention and habeas corpus, due process, freedom from torture and non- discrimination between foreign and United States citizens;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates that the failure of some Member States and the EU to reveal the truth about European involvement in the CIA programme contravenes the principle of sincere and loyal cooperation enshrined in Article 4(3) of the TEU;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses concerns regarding the obstacles encountered by national investigations into some Member States‘ involvement in the CIA programme, as documented in detail by the 2011 Council of Europe report on abuse of state secrecy and national security;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges those Member States to establish the truth concerning their involvement in the CIA programme and mehat have not met their obligation to investigate alleged human rights violations by conducting independent and effective inquiries,to establish the truth concerning their involvement in the CIA programme taking into account all the new evidencelements that has come to lightve emerged;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Acknowledges the results of the investigation of the Romanian Parliament in 2008, which did not reveal any involvement of the Romanian authorities in the CIA programme;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Acknowledges that Member States investigations have to be based on solid judicial evidence and on the respect of national judicial systems and EU law, not just on media and public opinion speculation;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission, in the light of the institutional deficiencies revealed in the context of the CIA programme, to adopt within a year a communication reviewing the mechanism set out in Article 7 TEU; considers that this reform should be aimed at strengthening the EU's capacity to prevent and redress human rights violations at EU level when Member States are unable to meet their obligations at national level, and should provide for the strengthening of Parliament's role and a greater degree of independence as regards the conditions for its activationmeasures aimed at strengthening the EU's capacity to prevent and redress human rights violations at EU level and to provide for the strengthening of Parliament's role;