Index 
Texts adopted
Thursday, 10 October 2013 - Strasbourg
Participation of Jordan in Union programmes ***
 European Border Surveillance System (EUROSUR) ***I
 Portable batteries and accumulators containing cadmium ***I
 Alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA
 Strengthening cross-border law-enforcement cooperation in the EU
 Caste-based discrimination
 Annual report on the activities of the Committee on Petitions 2012
 Recent cases of violence and persecution against Christians, notably in Maaloula (Syria) and Peshawar (Pakistan) and the case of Pastor Saeed Abedini (Iran)
 Clashes in Sudan and subsequent media censorship
 Recent violence in Iraq

Participation of Jordan in Union programmes ***
PDF 199kWORD 20k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 October 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of a Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an Association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, of the other part, on a Framework Agreement between the European Union and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan on the general principles for the participation of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in Union programmes (12138/2012 – C7-0008/2013 – 2012/0108(NLE))
P7_TA(2013)0415A7-0305/2013

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (12138/2012),

–  having regard to the draft Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an Association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, of the other part, on a Framework Agreement between the European Union and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan on the general principles for the participation of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in Union programmes (12135/2012),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 217 in conjunction with point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 218(6) and the first subparagraph of Article 218(8) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7–0008/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0305/2013),

1.  Consents to conclusion of the Protocol;

2.  Stresses the importance of continuing to promote close cooperation and dialogue with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan within the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy and of furthering political and economic dialogue between the Union and Jordan;

3.  Recalls that, according to estimates by the Jordanian authorities, more than 500 000 refugees from Syria have sought refuge in Jordan and that the Syrian crisis is having a severe impact on Jordan’s economy and on Jordan’s budget on account of the financial resources required to provide humanitarian assistance to the refugees; regrets, however, that the Jordanian border has been closed to Palestinian refugees from Syria since August 2012;

4.  Stresses, therefore, the importance of providing adequate financial, technical and humanitarian support to Jordan;

5.  Greatly appreciates the commitment shown by H.M. King Abdullah II of Jordan in promoting a very wide-ranging process of reforms for the benefit of Jordan and its people; stresses the importance of achieving sustainable results through these reforms, especially in terms of social justice;

6.  Welcomes and supports, in addition, the proactive and constructive role of Jordan, as a mediator, in the efforts aimed at finding lasting solutions to various conflicts in the Middle East;

7.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.


European Border Surveillance System (EUROSUR) ***I
PDF 200kWORD 36k
Resolution
Text
Annex
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 October 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Establishing the European Border Surveillance System (EUROSUR) (COM(2011)0873 – C7-0506/2011 – 2011/0427(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0416A7-0232/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0873),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 77(2)(d) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0506/2011),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the reasoned opinion submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Swedish Parliament, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 14 June 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0232/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Approves its statement annexed to this resolution;

3.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

4.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 October 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Border Surveillance System (Eurosur)

P7_TC1-COD(2011)0427


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013.)

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Statement by the European Parliament

The European Parliament stresses that the EU institutions should endeavour to use appropriate and neutral terminology in legislative texts when addressing the issue of third-country nationals whose presence on the territory of the Member States has not been authorised by the Member States' authorities or is no longer authorised. In such cases, EU institutions should avoid using the word "illegal" when it is possible to find alternative wording, and in all cases, when referring to persons, "irregular migrants" should be used.


Portable batteries and accumulators containing cadmium ***I
PDF 196kWORD 21k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 October 2013 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2006/66/EC on batteries and accumulators and waste batteries and accumulators as regards the placing on the market of portable batteries and accumulators containing cadmium intended for use in cordless power tools (COM(2012)0136 – C7-0087/2012 – 2012/0066(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0417A7-0131/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2012)0136),

–  having regard to Article 294(2), Article 192(1) and Article 114(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7–0087/2012),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the use of delegated acts and on the proposed legal basis,

–  having regard to Article 294(3) and Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 24 May 2012(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 14 June 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rules 55 and 37 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0131/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 October 2013 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2013/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2006/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on batteries and accumulators and waste batteries and accumulators as regards the placing on the market of portable batteries and accumulators containing cadmium intended for use in cordless power tools, and of button cells with low mercury content, and repealing Commission Decision 2009/603/EC

P7_TC1-COD(2012)0066


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2013/56/EU.)

(1) OJ C 229, 31.7.2012, p. 140.


Alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA
PDF 148kWORD 31k
European Parliament resolution of 10 October 2013 on alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA (2013/2702(RSP))
P7_TA(2013)0418RC-B7-0378/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruling of 13 December 2012 which condemns the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) for the ‘extreme seriousness’ of its violations of the European Convention on Human Rights (Articles 3, 5, 8 and 13) during the extraordinary rendition of Khaled El-Masri,

–  having regard to the following cases pending before the ECtHR: Al Nashiri v Poland, Abu Zubaydah v Lithuania, Abu Zubaydah v Poland and Nasr and Ghali v Italy; having regard to the application filed by Mr Al Nashiri against Romania in August 2012 and to the application filed by the Human Rights Monitoring Institute (HRMI) and the Open Society Justice Initiative against Lithuania in December 2012 for violation of their right to information and right to an effective remedy,

–  having regard to the Italian Supreme Court ruling of September 2012 upholding the conviction of 23 US nationals in connection with the 2003 abduction of Abu Omar, including the former CIA Milan station chief, Robert Seldon Lady, who was sentenced to nine years in prison,

–  having regard to the Milan Appeal Court decision of February 2013 sentencing three other CIA agents(1) previously considered to be covered by diplomatic immunity to six to seven years in prison; having regard to the same court’s decision also to sentence Nicolò Pollari, the former head of the Italian Military Intelligence and Security Service (SISMI), to 10 years in prison, the former SISMI deputy head, Marco Mancini, to 9 years, and three SISMI agents to 6 years each,

–  having regard to the Italian President’s decision of 5 April 2013 to pardon US Colonel Joseph Romano, who had been convicted in Italy for his responsibility in the abduction of Abu Omar in that country;

–  having regard to its resolution of 11 September 2012 on ‘alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA: follow-up of the European Parliament TDIP Committee report’(2),

–  having regard to the documents forwarded to the rapporteur by the Commission, including non-country-specific letters sent in March 2013 to all the Member States, to which only a few Member States (Finland, Hungary, Spain and Lithuania) replied,

–  having regard to its resolutions on Guantánamo, the most recent being that of 23 May 2013 on ‘Guantánamo: hunger strike by prisoners’(3),

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2012 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union (2010-2011)(4),

–  having regard to the flight data received from Eurocontrol up to September 2012,

–  having regard to the request sent by the rapporteur in April 2013 to the Agency for Aerial Navigation Safety in Africa and Madagascar (ASECNA) for cooperation on disclosure of flight data, and to the positive reply received in June 2013,

–  having regard to the Council conclusions on fundamental rights and the rule of law and on the Commission’s 2012 report on the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Luxembourg, 6-7 June 2013),

–  having regard to the ‘Stockholm Programme – An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens (2010-2014)’,

–  having regard to the numerous media reports and acts of investigative journalism, in particular – but not limited to – the investigative work broadcast on Romania’s Antena 1 television channel in April 2013,

–  having regard to the research and investigations carried out notably by Interights, Redress and Reprieve, and to the reports produced since the adoption of its aforementioned resolution of 11 September 2012, by independent researchers, civil society organisations and national and international non–governmental organisations, in particular the Open Society Justice Initiative’s report on ‘Globalising Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition’ (February 2013), the independent bipartisan study conducted in the US by the Constitution Project’s Task Force on Detainee Treatment (April 2013), the Rendition Flights Database published by the British academic website The Rendition Project (May 2013), the Amnesty International report ‘Unlock the truth: Poland’s involvement in CIA secret detention’ (June 2013), and the letter sent by Human Rights Watch to the Lithuanian authorities (June 2013),

–  having regard to questions raised by its Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and its Committee on Foreign Affairs (O-000079/2013 – B7–0215/2013 and O-000080/2013 – B7–0216/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas respect for fundamental rights is an essential element in successful counter-terrorism policies;

B.  whereas Parliament has condemned the US-led CIA rendition and secret detention programmes involving multiple human rights violations, including unlawful and arbitrary detention, torture and other ill-treatment, violations of the non-refoulement principle, and enforced disappearance through the use of European airspace and territory by the CIA; whereas Parliament has repeatedly called for full investigations into the collaboration of national governments and agencies with the CIA programmes;

C.  whereas Parliament undertook to continue fulfilling the mandate given to it by the Temporary Committee, pursuant to Articles 2, 6 and 7 of the Treaty on European Union, and instructed its relevant committees to address Parliament in plenary on the matter a year after the adoption of the aforementioned resolution of 11 September 2012, as it considered it essential to assess the extent to which the recommendations adopted by Parliament had been implemented;

D.  whereas accountability for renditions is essential in order to protect and promote human rights effectively in the EU’s internal and external policies, and to ensure legitimate and effective security policies based on the rule of law; whereas the EU institutions have recently engaged in a debate on how the EU can better protect and promote fundamental rights and the rule of law;

E.  whereas there have been no substantive replies from the Council or the Commission to Parliament’s recommendations;

F.  whereas the Lithuanian authorities have reiterated their commitment to reopening the criminal investigation into Lithuania’s involvement in the CIA programme if new elements emerge, but still have not done so; whereas in their observations to the ECtHR in the case of Abu Zubaydah, the Lithuanian authorities demonstrated critical shortcomings in their investigations and a failure to grasp the meaning of the new information; whereas Lithuania holds the presidency of the Council of the European Union in the second half of 2013; whereas a complaint was submitted on 13 September 2013 to the Lithuanian Prosecutor General, calling for an investigation into allegations that Mustafa al-Hawsawi, who is currently facing trial by military commission at Guantánamo Bay, had been illegally transferred to, and secretly detained and tortured in, Lithuania as part of a CIA-led programme;

G.  whereas the in-depth investigative work broadcast on the Antena 1 television channel in April 2013 provided further indications of Romania’s central role in the prison network; whereas former national security advisor Ioan Talpeş stated that Romania provided logistical support for the CIA; whereas a former Romanian senator admitted the limitations of the previous parliamentary inquiry and called for prosecutors to initiate judicial proceedings;

H.  whereas a request was filed with Polish prosecutors on 11 June 2013 for a third man, Yemenite Walid Mohammed Bin Attash, to be officially recognised as a victim after he was illegally arrested in Pakistan in 2003, kept in a secret prison in Poland from June to September 2003 and subsequently moved to Guantánamo, where he remains; whereas Polish prosecutors have extended until October 2013 an ongoing criminal investigation;

I.  whereas the British authorities are raising procedural obstacles to the civil claim brought in the UK by Libyan Abdel Hakim Belhadj, allegedly rendered to torture in Libya by the CIA with British assistance, and have expressed their intention to seek to have evidence heard in secret proceedings;

J.  whereas in December 2012 Italy issued an international arrest warrant against Robert Seldon Lady, who was arrested in Panama in July 2013; whereas the extradition request subsequently made by Italy was not accepted by Panama, and Robert Seldon Lady was returned to the US in July 2013; whereas the Italian President decided on 5 April 2013 to pardon US Colonel Joseph Romano, who had been convicted by an Italian court for his responsibility in the abduction of Abu Omar in Italy;

K.  whereas in November 2012 the Parliamentary Ombudsman of Finland initiated an investigation into the use of Finnish territory, airspace and flight records systems in the CIA rendition programme, sent detailed written requests for information to 15 government agencies and asked the Lithuanian authorities for specific information on related flights;

L.  whereas the inquiry carried out by Denmark up to May 2012 does not constitute an independent, impartial, thorough and effective investigation as required by international human rights law and standards, given its lack of sufficient powers and its limited scope;

M.  whereas only two Member States (Germany and the United Kingdom) have replied to the follow-up letters sent to eight Member States (France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Sweden and the United Kingdom) by the UN Special Procedures, requesting additional information following the UN Joint Study on global practices in relation to secret detention in the context of countering terrorism(5);

N.  whereas US President Obama has reiterated his commitment to close Guantánamo, announcing on 23 May 2013 that he would restart the release of detainees and would lift a moratorium on releasing Yemeni prisoners who had already been deemed safe to transfer back to Yemen, despite resistance in the US Congress; whereas the US authorities must honour their international obligations by prosecuting Robert Seldon Lady;

O.  whereas, in the opening statement which she delivered at the 23rd session of the Human Rights Council (Geneva, May 2013), the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, quoted Parliament’s aforementioned resolution of 11 September 2012, asked for ‘credible and independent investigations’ as ‘a vital first step towards accountability’ and ‘[called] on States to make this a priority’;

P.  whereas, in his 2013 annual report(6), the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Ben Emmerson, cited Parliament’s work and endorsed some of the recommendations made in its aforementioned resolution of 11 September 2012;

1.  Deeply deplores the failure to implement the recommendations contained in its aforementioned resolution of 11 September 2012, notably by the Council, the Commission, the governments of the Member States, the candidate states and the associated countries, NATO, and the United States authorities, especially in the light of the serious fundamental rights violations suffered by the victims of the CIA programmes;

2.  Considers that the climate of impunity regarding the CIA programmes has enabled the continuation of fundamental rights violations in the counter-terrorism policies of the EU and the US, as further revealed by the mass surveillance programmes of the US National Security Agency and surveillance bodies in various Member States, which are currently being investigated by Parliament;

Accountability process in the Member States

3.  Reiterates its call on those Member States which have not fulfilled their positive obligation to conduct independent and effective inquiries to investigate human rights violations, taking into account all the new evidence that has come to light, and to disclose all necessary information on all suspect planes associated with the CIA and their territory; calls in particular on the Member States to investigate whether operations have taken place whereby people have been held under the CIA programme in secret facilities on their territory; calls on the Member States concerned (France, Italy, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Sweden) to respond to the letters sent by the UN Special Procedures;

4.  Urges Lithuania to reopen its criminal investigation into CIA secret detention facilities and to conduct a rigorous investigation considering all the factual evidence that has been disclosed, notably regarding the ECtHR case of Abu Zubaydah v Lithuania; asks Lithuania to allow the investigators to carry out a comprehensive examination of the renditions flight network and contact persons publicly known to have organised or participated in the flights in question; asks the Lithuanian authorities to carry out forensic examination of the prison site and analysis of phone records; urges them to cooperate fully with the ECtHR in the cases of Abu Zubaydah v Lithuania and HRMI v Lithuania; calls on Lithuania, in the context of reopening the criminal investigation, to consider applications for status/participation in the investigation from other possible victims; urges Lithuania to respond in full to requests for information from other EU Member States, in particular the request for information from the Finnish Ombudsman regarding a flight or flights that could link Finland and Lithuania to a possible rendition route; urges the Lithuanian Prosecutor General to carry out a criminal investigation into Mustafa al-Hawsawi’s complaint;

5.  Urges the Romanian authorities to swiftly open an independent, impartial, thorough and effective investigation, to locate missing parliamentary inquiry documents and to cooperate fully with the ECtHR in the case of Al Nashiri v Romania; calls on Romania to comply fully with its fundamental rights obligations;

6.  Asks Poland to continue its investigation on a basis of greater transparency, in particular by offering evidence of concrete actions taken, allowing victims’ representatives to meaningfully represent their clients by giving them their rightful access to all relevant classified material, and acting on the material that has been collected; calls on the Polish authorities to prosecute any implicated state actor; urges the Polish General Prosecutor, as a matter of urgency, to review the application of Walid Bin Attash and come to a decision; calls on Poland to cooperate in full with the ECtHR regarding the cases of Al Nashiri v Poland and Abu Zubaydah v Poland;

7.  Calls on the British authorities to cooperate fully with ongoing criminal investigations and to allow civil claims to proceed in full transparency in order to conclude those investigations and claims concerning the rendition of foreign nationals overseas; asks the British authorities to establish a human-rights-compliant inquiry into the rendition, torture and ill-treatment of detainees abroad;

8.  Encourages the Italian authorities to continue their efforts to obtain justice regarding human rights violations by the CIA on Italian territory, by insisting on the extradition of Robert Seldon Lady and requesting the extradition of the other 22 US nationals convicted in Italy;

9.  Encourages the Finnish Ombudsman to complete his investigation on a basis of transparency and accountability and, to this end, urges all national authorities to cooperate fully; asks Finland to pursue any leads that implicate Finnish state actors in the rendition programme;

Response of the EU institutions

10.  Is highly disappointed by the Commission’s refusal to respond in substance to Parliament’s recommendations, and deems the letters sent by the Commission to the Member States to be insufficient for achieving accountability on account of their generic nature;

11.  Reiterates its specific recommendations to the Commission:

   to investigate whether EU provisions, in particular those on asylum and judicial cooperation, have been breached by collaboration with the CIA programme,
   to facilitate and support human-rights-compliant mutual legal assistance and judicial cooperation between investigating authorities and cooperation between lawyers involved in accountability work in Member States,
   to adopt a framework, including reporting requirements for the Member States, for monitoring and supporting national accountability processes,
   to adopt measures aimed at strengthening the EU’s capacity to prevent, and provide redress for, human rights violations at EU level and to provide for the strengthening of Parliament’s role,
   to put forward proposals for developing arrangements for democratic oversight of cross-border intelligence activities in the context of EU counter-terrorism policies;

12.  Urges the Lithuanian authorities to seize the opportunity of their country’s EU Council presidency to ensure the full implementation of the recommendations contained in Parliament’s report and thus to put the issue on the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council agenda before the end of the Lithuanian presidency;

13.  Reiterates its specific recommendations to the Council:

   to present apologies for having violated the principle enshrined in the Treaties of loyal cooperation between the Union institutions when it incorrectly attempted to persuade Parliament to accept the provision of deliberately shortened versions of the minutes of the meetings of COJUR and COTRA with senior US officials,
   to issue a declaration acknowledging Member States’ involvement in the CIA programme and the difficulties encountered by Member States in the context of inquiries,
   to give its full support to the truth-finding and accountability processes in the Member States by formally addressing the issue at JHA meetings, sharing all information, providing assistance to inquiries and, in particular, acceding to requests for access to documents,
   to hold hearings with relevant EU security agencies to clarify their knowledge of Member States’ involvement in the CIA programme and the EU’s response,
   to propose safeguards so as to guarantee respect for human rights in intelligence–sharing, and a strict delimitation of roles between intelligence and law–enforcement activities so that intelligence agencies are not permitted to assume powers of arrest and detention;

14.  Calls on the Council and the Commission to include, in their respective multiannual programmes succeeding the Stockholm Programme, specific measures to ensure the rule of law and accountability for fundamental rights violations, especially by intelligence services and law enforcement authorities; asks the Commission to include the issue of accountability on the agenda for the ‘Assises de la Justice’ to be held in November 2013;

15.  Recalls that it is essential, in order to ensure Parliament’s credibility, to substantially reinforce its rights of inquiry for investigating fundamental rights violations in the EU, which should include full power to hear under oath the people involved, including government ministers(7);

16.  Asks Eurocontrol to recognise, as does the American Federal Aviation Authority, that flight route data should in no way be considered confidential and to release such data as are necessary for achieving effective investigations;

17.  Expects its inquiry into the US National Security Agency surveillance programme and surveillance bodies in various Member States to propose measures for effective democratic parliamentary oversight of intelligence services, considering that democratic scrutiny of those bodies and their activities through appropriate internal, executive, independent judicial and parliamentary oversight is essential;

18.  Expresses regret that no progress has been made by EU Member States towards accession to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, with the exception of its ratification by Lithuania in August 2013; calls on the 21 Member States which have yet to ratify that convention to do so as a matter of urgency;

19.  Calls on Belgium, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania and Slovakia to ratify the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture (OPCAT) as a matter of priority; considers regrettable the very limited support provided to the UN-managed OPCAT Special Fund, and calls on the EU Member States and the Commission to support the Special Fund’s work through substantial voluntary contributions; urges the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the Commission to step up their efforts to facilitate the establishment and functioning of National Preventive Mechanisms under the OPCAT in third countries;

20.  Asks the EU to review carefully FYROM’s progress in implementing the ECtHR decision in the case of El-Masri v the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, which the Committee of Ministers has now subjected to its enhanced procedure, in the context of FYROM’s bid for accession; urges the FYROM authorities to open a criminal investigation into state actors’ complicity in the El–Masri case and to hold those responsible to account;

21.  Calls on the US Government to cooperate with all requests from EU Member States for information or extradition in connection with the CIA programme; urges it to stop using draconian protective orders which prevent lawyers acting for Guantánamo Bay detainees from disclosing information regarding any detail of their secret detention in Europe; encourages it to complete its plan to close the Guantánamo Bay prison promptly;

22.  Urges the Member States to step up their efforts to resettle non-European detainees released from Guantánamo who cannot be repatriated to their home states because they are under threat of death, torture or cruel and inhumane treatment(8); asks the EU to revive the joint initiatives of 2009 by providing a framework for the resettlement of Guántanamo detainees in EU Member States and to engage in a dialogue on concrete plans for cooperation with the new US Special Envoy on detainee transfers out of Guantánamo, Clifford Sloan;

23.  Calls on the Agency for Aerial Navigation Safety in Africa and Madagascar to start its cooperation with Parliament promptly by providing the requested information on flight data;

24.  Calls on the next Parliament (2014-2019) to continue to fulfil and implement the mandate given by the Temporary Committee and consequently to ensure that its recommendations are followed up, to examine new elements that may emerge and to make full use of, and develop, its rights of inquiry;

o
o   o

25.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) Including Jeffrey W. Castelli, former CIA station chief in Rome.
(2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0309.
(3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0231.
(4) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0500.
(5) A/HRC/13/42.
(6) Framework Principles for securing the accountability of public officials for gross or systematic human rights violations committed in the context of State counter-terrorism initiatives, A/HRC/22/52, 1 March 2013.
(7) See: Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of the European Parliament’s right of inquiry and repealing Decision 95/167/EC, Euratom, ECSC of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, OJ C 264 E, 13.9.2013, p. 41.
(8) European Parliament resolution of 18 April 2012 on the Annual Report on Human Rights in the World and the European Union’s policy on the matter, including implications for the EU’s strategic human rights policy, OJ C 258 E, 7.9.2013, p. 8.


Strengthening cross-border law-enforcement cooperation in the EU
PDF 205kWORD 22k
European Parliament resolution of 10 October 2013 on strengthening cross-border law-enforcement cooperation in the EU: the implementation of the ‘Prüm Decision’ and the European Information Exchange Model (2013/2586(RSP))
P7_TA(2013)0419B7-0433/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 7 December 2012 on strengthening law enforcement cooperation in the EU: the European Information Exchange Model (EIXM) (COM(2012)0735),

–  having regard to the Commission report of 7 December 2012 on the implementation of Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (the ‘Prüm Decision’) (COM(2012)0732),

–  having regard to the Stockholm Programme, the Internal Security Strategy and the Information Management Strategy for EU internal security,

–  having regard to its resolution of 22 May 2012 on the European Union’s Internal Security Strategy(1),

–  having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 87 thereof,

–  having regard to the question to the Commission on strengthening cross-border law-enforcement cooperation in the EU: the implementation of the ‘Prüm Decision’ and the European Information Exchange Model (EIXM) (O-000067/2013 – B7–0501/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the Stockholm Programme acknowledged the need for more coherence and consolidation in the extensive toolbox for collecting, processing and sharing information between law-enforcement authorities in the EU in order to enhance the security of EU citizens;

B.  whereas the Internal Security Strategy called for the development of a comprehensive model for information exchange;

C.  whereas the exchange of information on criminal activities across borders is the basis for law enforcement cooperation in the EU and is particularly relevant in an area without internal border controls; whereas cross-border crime is on the increase in the EU, thus placing ever more emphasis on the need for an efficient and secure exchange of law enforcement information that respects data protection and fundamental rights;

1.  Notes that the Communications take stock of the different existing cross-border law enforcement information exchange instruments, channels and tools in the EU; believes that the current ‘landscape’ of the different instruments, channels and tools is complicated and scattered, leading to an inefficient use of the instruments and inadequate democratic oversight at EU level, as well as in some cases to ‘function and access creep’;

2.  Calls on the Commission to perform a mapping exercise of EU and national legislation, including (bilateral) international agreements, regulating the cross-border exchange of law enforcement information; agrees with the Commission that more meaningful statistics are necessary to measure the real value of instruments and calls for an independent, external evaluation of the existing instruments for EU law enforcement information exchange in order to assess their measurable impact;

3.  Supports the Commission’s recommendations to streamline the use of existing instruments and channels (such as the default use of the Europol channel and the creation of national integrated Single Point of Contacts) and to improve training and awareness on cross-border information exchange; is disappointed, however, that the Commission did not provide for a more ambitious, future-oriented vision, as was called for in the Stockholm Programme and the Internal Security Strategy, that could be a starting point for a political debate on how to shape and to optimise law enforcement data sharing in the EU, while guaranteeing a robust level of data protection and privacy; strongly encourages the Commission to come forward with this vision, setting a well-tailored framework for EU law enforcement information exchange based on principles such as necessity, quality, proportionality, efficiency and accountability and including a proper assessment of the availability principle and the concept of cross-matching;

4.  Calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of automating the manual procedures for implementing the existing instruments in order to ensure greater effectiveness along the lines set out in the DAPIX study conducted by a number of Member States, and to consider establishing a universal information exchange format so as to speed up the processing of approved requests;

5.  Points out that the different instruments of cross-border law enforcement information exchange, including providing cross-border access to national databases, lead to a scattered and unclear data protection regime which is often based on the lowest common denominator and follows a piecemeal approach; in this respect, reiterates its position that the proposed Data Protection Directive should be adopted as soon as possible;

6.  Calls on the Commission, with a view to consolidating and improving the information exchange system, to take measures aimed at underpinning an effective system serving also to guarantee data protection, as described in the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), using the reference framework provided by the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Europol repealing Decision 2009/371/JHA;

7.  Takes note that, for a growing group of Member States, Prüm has become a routine tool in cross-border police cooperation and crime investigation; regrets the considerable delays in the implementation of the Prüm Decision in several Member States; agrees with the Commission that further development of the instrument should not be considered before full implementation has been achieved; calls on the Member States concerned to implement the Prüm Decision fully and properly so that it can be used to its maximum extent;

8.  Points out that the Prüm Decision was adopted under the former third pillar and that its implementation is lacking proper democratic oversight and control by Parliament; calls on the Commission to speedily bring forward proposals to bring the existing cross-border police cooperation instruments adopted under the former third pillar – such as the Prüm Decision and the Swedish Initiative – within the legal framework of the Lisbon Treaty;

9.  Points out that European police training helps to strengthen mutual trust between police forces, thereby making for better information exchange and cross-border cooperation, and therefore needs to be preserved and expanded;

10.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ C 264 E, 13.9.2013, p. 1.


Caste-based discrimination
PDF 129kWORD 26k
European Parliament resolution of 10 October 2013 on caste-based discrimination (2013/2676(RSP))
P7_TA(2013)0420B7-0434/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its resolutions of 13 December 2012 on caste discrimination in India(1), of 17 January 2013 on violence against women in India(2), of 1 February 2007 on the Human Rights Situation of the Dalits in India(3) and of 18 April 2012 on the Annual Report on Human Rights in the World and the European Union’s policy on the matter, including implications for the EU’s strategic human rights policy(4),

–  having regard to international human rights conventions, including the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) and General Recommendation XXIX of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination,

–  having regard to the draft UN Principles and Guidelines for the Effective Elimination of Discrimination based on Work and Descent(5), published by the Human Rights Council,

–  having regard to the serious concerns, observations and recommendations of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights with regard to caste discrimination,

–  having regard to recent recommendations by UN treaty bodies and UN Special Procedures mandate-holders on the topic of caste-based discrimination,

–  having regard to the report of 24 May 2011 of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance(6), and to the reports of the Universal Periodic Reviews of caste-affected countries,

–  having regard to the Parliament study entitled ‘A human rights and poverty review: EU action in addressing caste-based discrimination’,

–  having regard to the oral question to the Commission on caste‑based discrimination (O‑000091/2013 – B7‑0507/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas caste denotes a socio-religious context, as in Asia, where those who fall outside the caste system are considered ‘impure’ and ‘untouchable’ by nature, but also, more broadly, a system of rigid social stratification into ranked groups defined by descent and occupation; whereas discrimination based on work and descent, being the more encompassing term preferred by the UN, is a form of discrimination prohibited by international human rights law as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the CERD, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and International Labour Organisation Convention No 111;

B.  whereas in June 2011 Githu Muigai, the UN Special Rapporteur on racism, stressed that it is essential to avoid establishing any hierarchy among the different manifestations of discrimination, even though they may vary in nature and degree depending on the historical, geographical and cultural context, including ‘the Roma community in Europe and victims of caste systems in Africa, Asia and the Middle East’;

C.  whereas despite the steps taken by the governments of some caste-affected countries to provide constitutional and legislative protection and introduce special measures against caste discrimination and untouchability, caste discrimination continues to be widespread and persistent, affecting an estimated 260 million people worldwide;

D.  whereas caste-based discrimination exists in numerous countries across the globe, with the highest number of victims being found in South Asia; whereas, however, there are large concentrations of victims in other areas, including Africa, the Middle East and the diaspora community;

E.  whereas non-implementation of legislation and policies and the lack of effective remedies and effectively functioning state institutions, the judiciary and police included, remain major obstacles to eliminating caste-based discrimination;

F.  whereas the provision of disaggregated data and the need for special legislation and measures to protect against caste discrimination remain unaddressed in many affected countries;

G.  whereas despite the efforts of governments and, increasingly, of some international agencies, castes continue to suffer from severe forms of social exclusion, poverty, violence, segregation, physical and verbal abuse linked to prejudices and a concept of purity and pollution;

H.  whereas untouchability practices remain widespread and are taking on modern forms; whereas affected communities face restricted political participation and serious discrimination in the labour market;

I.  whereas in a few countries, such as India, mandatory affirmative action has to some extent contributed to the inclusion of Dalits in the public sector, but whereas the lack of protective non-discrimination measures in the labour market and the private sector adds to exclusion and growing inequalities;

J.  whereas the ILO estimates that the overwhelming majority of bonded labour victims in South Asia are from the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes; whereas forced and bonded labour is particularly widespread in the agriculture, mining and garment production sectors, which supply products to a number of multinational and European companies;

K.  whereas non-discrimination in employment is one of the four fundamental labour rights and is included in international guidelines and frameworks for business such as the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights, the OECD Guidelines and the ISO 26000 Guidance on Social Responsibility, which specifically mentions caste-based discrimination as a serious form of discrimination;

L.  whereas the governments and authorities of caste-affected countries are urged to take note of the draft UN Principles and Guidelines for the Effective Elimination of Discrimination based on Work and Descent, to take all necessary measures to eliminate and prevent caste‑based discrimination, to address any implementation gaps at federal, state, regional and local level and to implement, amend or introduce special legislation and policy measures for the protection and promotion of the rights of Dalits and similarly caste‑affected groups;

1.  Condemns the continuing human rights violations committed against people suffering from caste hierarchies and caste-based discrimination, including the denial of equality and of access to the legal system and to employment, continued segregation and caste-induced barriers to the achievement of basic human rights and development;

2.  Considers that identity cards should avoid references to caste, as these are contrary to the principles of equality and social mobility;

3.  Welcomes the report by Githu Muigai, the UN Special Rapporteur on racism, and stresses that all victims of caste discrimination throughout the world should receive the same attention and protection; stresses, more broadly, that all forms of racism and discrimination should be addressed with the same emphasis and determination, including in Europe;

4.  Expresses its serious concern that the social exclusion of Dalits and similarly affected communities leads to high levels of poverty among affected population groups and to exclusion, or reduced benefits, from development processes; stresses, furthermore, that it precludes their involvement in decision-making and governance and their meaningful participation in public and civil life;

5.  Remains alarmed at the persistently large number of reported and unreported cases of atrocities and untouchability practices in caste-affected countries, including India, and at the widespread impunity enjoyed by perpetrators of crimes against Dalits and other victims of caste-based human rights violations; recalls that in certain countries perpetrators of such discrimination hold high-level government positions;

6.  Reiterates its serious concern about the violence perpetrated against Dalit women and other women from similarly affected communities in societies with caste systems, who often do not report such violence for fear of threats to their personal safety or of social exclusion, and about the multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination based on caste, gender and religion affecting Dalit women and women from minority communities, leading to forced conversions, abductions, forced prostitution, and sexual abuse by members of dominant castes;

7.  Stresses the need to promote an enabling environment for civil society and human rights defenders working with people affected by caste discrimination in order to ensure their security and avoid any impediments to, or stigmatisation or restriction of, their work; stresses that such an environment should include access to funding, cooperation with UN human rights bodies and Economic and Social Council (Ecosoc) accreditation;

8.  Calls for the EU to promote the draft UN Principles and Guidelines for the Effective Elimination of Discrimination based on Work and Descent as a guiding framework for eliminating caste discrimination, and to promote their endorsement by the UN Human Rights Council;

9.  Calls on the Commission to recognise caste as a distinct form of discrimination rooted in the social and/or religious context, which must be tackled together with other grounds of discrimination, i.e. ethnicity, race, descent, religion, gender and sexuality, in EU efforts to fight all forms of discrimination; calls for the EU, in its policies and programmes, to consider people affected by caste-based discrimination as an identifiable group;

10.  Urges the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to mainstream the fight against caste-based discrimination in EU legislation, policies and programming documents and to adopt operational guidelines for its implementation; calls on the EEAS to enhance monitoring and evaluation mechanisms in order to assess effectively the impact of EU action on the situation of people affected by this form of discrimination;

11.  Recommends that the EU carry out a systematic assessment of the impact of trade and/or investment agreements on groups affected by caste discrimination, and address these issues with industry representatives, government authorities and relevant civil society organisations;

12.  Calls for the inclusion of caste-based discrimination as a human rights issue in future EU human rights policies, strategies and action plans;

13.  Calls on the Commission to provide stronger support for development projects combating caste-based discrimination as a serious human rights violation that exacerbates poverty, and to take this form of discrimination into account in all projects with a focus on education, women, access to justice, political participation or labour in relevant countries;

14.  Calls on the Commission to develop and apply caste-sensitive approaches in times of humanitarian crisis and ensure that humanitarian aid is delivered to all marginalised groups, including people suffering from caste-based discrimination;

15.  Urges the EU to raise the issue of caste-based discrimination at the highest level with the governments of affected countries during bilateral summits and other international meetings;

16.  Encourages the EEAS to strengthen its policy and human rights dialogues and promote joint initiatives to eliminate caste discrimination with the governments of states, such as India, Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, where caste-affected communities are subjected to so-called ‘untouchability practices’, and, more broadly, to combat discrimination based on work and descent, which occurs in various countries, including Yemen, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal and Somalia; recalls that caste discrimination has gone unmentioned in agreements with many of these states;

17.  Calls on the Commission and the EEAS to include, where relevant, a ‘caste-based discrimination clause’ in all trade and association agreements;

18.  Recommends that the EU promote non-discriminatory and inclusive policies and procedures in business operations with caste-affected countries, including affirmative action for Dalits and similarly affected people in the labour market and the private sector;

19.  Calls for the EU to promote regular, broad consultation with civil society on caste-based discrimination and to allocate adequate resources to civil society organisations for fighting caste discrimination;

20.  Calls for the EU to promote a caste-sensitive post-2015 development agenda, with the reduction of inequalities based on or aggravated by caste as a crucial and measurable goal, ensuring that caste discrimination is explicitly addressed as a major structural factor underlying poverty, and as a root cause of structural inequalities;

21.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Council, the Commission, the EU Special Representative for Human Rights, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the United Nations Human Rights Council.

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0512.
(2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0031.
(3) OJ C 250 E, 25.10.2007, p. 87.
(4) OJ C 258 E, 7.9.2013, p. 8.
(5) A/HRC/11/CRP.3.
(6) A/HRC/17/40.


Annual report on the activities of the Committee on Petitions 2012
PDF 156kWORD 34k
European Parliament resolution of 10 October 2013 on the activities of the Committee on Petitions 2012 (2013/2013(INI))
P7_TA(2013)0421A7-0299/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to previous resolutions on the deliberations of the Committee on Petitions,

–  having regard to Articles 10 and 11 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

–  having regard to Articles 24, 227, 228, 258 and 260 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

–  having regard to Rules 48 and 202(8) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions (A7-0299/2013),

A.  whereas, subject to Protocol 30 of the Treaty, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has already acquired legally binding force through the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon; whereas the same Treaty also establishes the legal basis for the EU to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights and to introduce the European Citizens’ Initiative;

B.  whereas the Committee on Petitions has a duty to review constantly and, where possible, to enhance its role, notably with regard to the development of democratic principles, such as the increased participation of citizens in the EU decision-making process and the enhancement of transparency and accountability; whereas, in its regular activity, the Committee works closely with Member States, the Commission, the European Ombudsman and other bodies in order to ensure that EU law is fully respected in both letter and spirit;

C.  whereas in 2012 the Committee on Petitions registered 1 986 petitions, mostly referring to the themes of fundamental rights, the environmentthe internal market, and economic and social crisis; whereas 1 406 petitions were declared admissible, and of those 853 were forwarded to the Commission for further investigation pursuant to Articles 258 and 260 of the Treaty, and 580 petitions were declared inadmissible; whereas the subject matters of at least five petitions submitted in 2012 were brought before the Court of Justice pursuant to Articles 258 and 260 of the Treaty; whereas the Judgment of 14 September 2011 in Case T‑308/07 made it clear that procedural decisions by Parliament in petition cases are also subject to judicial review; whereas, regarding the statistical analysis contained in this report, the highest number of petitions refer to the EU as a whole (27.3 %), followed by Spanish (15.0 %), German (12.5 %) and Italian (8.6 %) cases;

D.  whereas, in the field of fundamental rights, the Committee devoted much attention in 2012 to the rights of persons with disabilities, the rights of children, consumer rights, property rights, the rights of free movement without discrimination on any grounds, protecting freedom of expression and privacy, and the right of access to documents and information, as well as the rights to freedom of political association and to join a trade union; whereas the situation of economic crisis has prompted a number of petitions concerning social problems, such as housing, employment and banking sector malpractices towards savers;

E.  whereas petitions submitted by citizens give evidence that there is persisting discrimination against citizens as a result of disability, belonging to a minority or certain ethnic group, gender, age or sexual orientation;

F.  whereas EU initiatives to fight discrimination, such as the 2011 EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies, must be promptly adopted into national strategies and continuously reviewed and monitored in light of evolving economic and social situations;

G.  whereas, in relation to the protection of the environment, the threat posed by pollution and environmental malpractice can never be overstated, due to the ensuing risks to biodiversity and ecosystems, as well as public health risks, all of which are long-lasting and often life-threatening; whereas regarding biodiversity, some Member States have not yet determined the totality of minimum Natura 2000 protection areas nor fully implemented their effective protection; whereas due account should be taken of the aims of combating pollution and climate change; whereas the Committee devoted much attention in 2012 to the implementation of legislation on waste and water, as well as to the assessment of the impact of projects and activities on the environment and on public health;

H.  whereas we must conserve our natural resources with a view to safeguarding the earth’s future; whereas the precautionary principle must be applied in respect of technological innovations such as GMOs and nanotechnology;

I.  whereas on the waste management issue, the fact-finding visit to Italy highlighted the urgent need for all Italian authorities involved to find a sustainable solution for the waste management needs of the province of Rome ensuring respect for citizens’ health and dignity; whereas, despite the end of the emergency situation in the city of Naples, many challenges on a comprehensive approach to waste management remain in the Campania region in connection with the waste hierarchy set in Directive 2008/98/EC (the Waste Framework Directive) and the CJEU ruling of March 2010;

J.  whereas, although the Commission can fully check compliance with EU law only when a final decision has been taken by national authorities, it is important – particularly in relation to environmental matters – to verify at an early stage that local, regional and national authorities correctly apply all relevant procedural requirements under EU law, including implementation of the precautionary principle;

K.  whereas the work of the committee has led to water being declared a public good by Parliament; whereas the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘Right to water’ has been the first to reach the threshold of one million signatures from European citizens;

L.  whereas further irreparable losses of biodiversity must be averted, especially inside Natura 2000 designated sites; whereas Member States have undertaken to ensure the protection of special conservation areas under Directive 92/43/EEC (the Habitats Directive) and Directive 79/409/EEC (the Birds Directive);

M.  whereas in its resolution of 13 December 2012 on a new sustainable and competitive steel industry, based on a petition received(1), Parliament advocated the ‘polluter pays’ principle;

N.  whereas in spite of the Interinstitutional Agreement between Parliament and the Commission, the latter appears reluctant to provide prompt information on the nature of its deliberations, as well as decisions taken, in infringement proceedings related to petitions and concerning the implementation of environmental legislation; whereas this is a major source of concern given the irreversible damage and destruction that could be inflicted on our ecosystems and health; whereas the European institutions ought to supply more information and be more transparent with regard to EU citizens;

O.  whereas 2013 has been designated the European Year of Citizens, and it is precisely the citizens and residents of the EU, individually or in association with others, who are well placed both to assess the effectiveness of European legislation as it is applied, and to signal possible loopholes which impair the proper implementation of legislation and the full exercise of rights; whereas due account should be taken of the contents of the ‘European Consumer Agenda to boost confidence and growth’; whereas a fundamental precondition for this is that information about European legislation should be made available to citizens in a practical fashion;

P.  whereas, for that reason, the Committee on Petitions devoted a great amount of time and effort in 2012 to discussing the meaning of European citizenship, which is closely associated with a complete freedom of movement and residence within the EU, as defined in Part III TFEU, but which also comprises many other rights and is of benefit to citizens who do not leave their home country; whereas petitions give evidence that Union citizens and residents still face widespread and tangible obstacles to exercising their cross-border rights in particular, a situation which has a direct and daily impact on the lives and welfare of thousands of households;

Q.  whereas the petitions process can be complementary to other European instruments available to citizens, such as the option to address complaints to the European Ombudsman or to the Commission; whereas the Committee on Petitions works closely with the European Ombudsman, other Parliament committees, European bodies, agents and networks, and Member States;

R.  whereas the petitions process can, and should, remain complementary to other mechanisms of redress available to citizens, such as lodging complaints with the Commission or the European Ombudsman; whereas SOLVIT, in particular, is an important tool which may be used by EU citizens in order to find speedy solutions to problems caused by the misapplication of internal market law by public authorities;whereas progress must therefore be made in jointly resolving legal cases brought by consumers and their associations; whereas the single web portal ‘Exercise your rights’ contains important information for citizens who wish to lodge complaints on the rightful application of EU law;

S.  whereas the field of action, and the modus operandi, of the right to petition granted to all EU citizens and residents under the terms of the Treaty differs from other remedies available to citizens, such as, for instance, the submission of complaints to the Commission or to the Ombudsman;

T.  whereas it is necessary to increase citizen participation in the EU decision-making process, with a view to reinforcing its legitimacy and accountability;

U.  whereas a new instrument for a participatory democracy, the ‘European Citizens Initiative’, entered into force on 1 April 2012 and registered a total of sixteen initiatives during the course of the year; whereas relevant concerns have been raised by various initiators of European Citizens’ Initiatives on the technical barriers encountered for the actual collection of signatures; whereas the Committee on Petitions will play a primordial role in the organisation of the public hearings for successful initiatives;

V.  whereas it remains evident that there is both a lack of clearly structured and widely publicised information and a lack of awareness amongst EU citizens about their rights; whereas these constitute decisive obstacles to exercising active EU citizenship; whereas, in this connection, the Member States should comply in a more comprehensive manner with their obligation to provide information and cultivate awareness;

W.  whereas European citizens and residents are legitimately entitled to expect that the issues they raise with the Committee on Petitions may find a solution without undue delay within the legal framework of the European Union, and in particular that the Members of the committee will defend the petitioner’s natural environment, health, freedom of movement, dignity and fundamental rights and freedoms; whereas the efficiency of the committee’s work is largely the result of swiftness of operation and thoroughness of its Secretariat, and this could be improved further, in particular by optimising the time taken to process petitions and by systematising the procedure for their assessment; whereas, in view of the ever-increasing number of petitions received annually, more resources and increased committee-meeting time should be devoted for this purpose; whereas there is a need for continuity in processing petitions, despite the changes in legislative periods and the resulting changes in personnel; whereas several petitions have been submitted by victims of the Franco regime and concerning abducted children in Spain;

X.  whereas certain petitions are pending between the Commission, Parliament, the European Court of Justice and national authorities without any solution found, leaving the petitioners on uncertain ground with no sign of a conclusion;

Y.  Whereas there has been a considerable increase in the number of petitions concerned with violations of the principles of fundamental democratic rights and the rule of law protected by the Treaty on European Union in the Member States, which shows that European citizens have increasing faith in the Community institutions to uphold their fundamental rights;

Z.  whereas individuals and local communities, as well as voluntary organisations and businesses, are well placed to assess the effectiveness of European legislation as it applies to them, and to signal possible loopholes that need to be analysed in order to ensure better, more uniform and comparable implementation of EU law in all the Member States;

1.  Takes note that petitions received in 2012 from European Union citizens and residents focused on alleged breaches of EU law in the fields of fundamental rights, the environment, the internal market and property rights; considers that petitions give evidence that there are still frequent and widespread instances of incomplete transposition or of misapplication of EU law;

2.  Notes that fundamental rights remain a key subject of the petitions submitted, notably raising issues related to the rights of persons with disabilities, children’s rights, property rights, the right of free movement, including the portability of social security entitlements, without encountering any form of discrimination on any grounds, the protection of freedom of expression and privacy, freedom of association, and the right of access to documents and information; calls on Member States to apply correctly and respect those rights as set out in the Treaty and calls on the Commission to take the necessary measures to oblige non-compliant Member States to close the gap between national laws and the fundamental rights of EU citizens; considers that special attention should be given to the right to historical memory and the rights to truth, justice and redress for families which suffered under Franco’s dictatorship, as well as to the right of Spain’s abducted children to know the identity of their biological parents;

3.  Considers that an interactive guide to be placed on the internet by the European Parliament, in line with with what the European Ombudsman has placed on the Internet, could reduce the number of petitions submitted relating to subject matter which does not fall within the field of activity of the EU;

4.  Confirms the key role of the Committee on Petitions in identifying non-judicial remedies for citizens, thereby providing a reality check on the way in which the European Union is seen by the people of Europe, enabling conclusions to be drawn regarding whether European legislation actually delivers the expected results and responds to the expectations people have of the Union;

5.  Calls on the Committee on Petitions to examine the effects on the admissibility of petitions of the Equal Rights Trust case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which gives, even in the case of purely national law, Union citizens a higher level of protection in the event of a national ruling having a bearing on the exercise of their EU-citizenship rights; calls for an investigation of the obstacles which actually exist for Union citizens in obtaining a reliable interpretation of European legislation in cases before national courts by applying for a preliminary ruling from the Court;

6.  As part of the efforts to improve the work of the Committee, calls for a procedure involving fact-finding missions which on the one hand ensures the right of all members of a fact-finding mission to present the facts from their point of view, while also guaranteeing all committee members the opportunity to participate in the decision‑making process with regard to the conclusions to be drawn by the Committee on Petitions;

7.  Is determined to make the petition procedure more efficient, transparent, and impartial, while preserving the participatory rights of the members of the Committee on Petitions, so that the handling of petitions will stand up to judicial review even at a procedural level;

8.  Draws attention to persisting discrimination against citizens on the grounds of religion or belief, disability, belonging to a minority group, age or sexual orientation; warns, in particular, that the Roma population across the EU continues to face obstacles to inclusion; calls, therefore, on the Commission to facilitate intergovernmental cooperation in this area, to provide adequate funding for the implementation of national strategies for Roma inclusion, and to monitor actively whether these strategies are being effectively implemented in Member States;

9.  Calls on the Commission to come up with a proposal for legislation to solve finally the problems relating to the mutual recognition by Member States of civil status documents and their effects, while at the same time respecting the social policy traditions of the individual Member States in accordance with the subsidiarity principle;

10.  Repeats its previous calls to Member States to ensure freedom of movement for all EU citizens and their families, without discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or nationality; repeats its call to Member States to implement fully the rights granted under Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2004/38/EC not only to different-sex spouses, but also to the registered partner, member of the household or partner with whom an EU citizen has a duly attested, stable relationship, including members of same-sex couples, on the basis of the principles of mutual recognition, equality, non-discrimination, dignity and respect for private and family life; calls on the Commission, in that connection, to ensure that the directive is strictly applied and ultimately reviewed accordingly for this purpose, if necessary, and to ensure that Treaty infringement proceedings are brought where necessary against Member States which fail to apply it;

11.  Observes that the environment remains another key subject of petitions, giving evidence that public authorities in the Member States repeatedly fail to ensure the preservation of biodiversity, natural resources and ecosystems, and that the highest standards of public health are guaranteed; points, in particular, to the numerous petitions submitted on waste management, on water, on the possible dangers of nuclear energy and genetic engineering, on protected species, and on the assessment of the impact of projects and activities on the environment and on public health, such as shale gas extraction by means of fracking; urges the Commission to strengthen the environmental legislative framework on the environment and combating climate change and, specifically, its correct implementation; regrets that some Member States, despite their efforts, have not been able to find sustainable solutions for problems related to waste management;

12.  Urges the Commission to take action to ensure that the Member States understand that water is a public good; takes the view that the precautionary principle must be stringently applied in respect of the use of biotechnology and nanotechnology in products that could seriously affect the health of consumers;

13.  Expects that the reviewed Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, revising Directive 2011/92/EU, will not only be strengthened by providing clearer parameters but will, above all, be duly implemented by the Member States,

14.  Takes the view that procedures must be developed for urgent petitions whereby fact‑finding missions can also be carried out in the long ‘white’ period with no parliamentary business during the European elections and also – if the nature of the petition suggests– during the ‘white’ period in summer (e.g. Damüls, where the summer months were the only possible time for a fact-finding mission);

15.  Welcomes the end of the emergency situation in Naples city and the new initiatives concerning waste management and expects that the persisting challenges in the Campania region will be duly addressed, namely by means of a comprehensive regional waste management plant in accordance with the EU Waste Framework Directive hierarchy and the CJEU ruling of 2010; still has serious concerns over the waste management approach in the Lazio Region, in particular regarding the follow‑up to the close-down of the Malagrotta landfill site;

16.  Notes, in addition, that citizens in the European Union continue to face barriers within the internal market, notably while exercising their freedom of movement as individuals, as providers and consumers of goods and services and as workers, such as, for instance, in the case of Romanian and Bulgarian workers who continue to face restrictions on the labour market in some Member States; signals, in particular, that cross-border judicial cooperation and effectiveness remains an area of primary concern; concludes, overall, that strengthened cross-border cooperation and harmonisation provides marked benefits for the protection of citizens’ rights and economic stimulation;

17.  Urges the Commission to take action to facilitate consumer access to information and communications technology, ensuring that the requisite security and transparency guarantees are in place, and in particular to make sure that the websites of public sector bodies are accessible;

18.  Points to the efforts made by this Committee to convey the request by many citizens for an EU legal framework that offers more thorough protection and improvements in animal welfare, including for pets and stray animals;

19.  Stresses the importance of the creation of the Spanish Coastal Law Working Group, which could pave the way for other such initiatives, and which has been closely studying related petitions and the modification of the law; reiterates the importance of direct contact with the Spanish national authorities in this respect and stresses the urgent need for further intensified cooperation to find a better balance between property rights and their social function, and better solutions when the ultimate goal of the protection of the environment requires expropriation; expresses its fears that the new coastal law approved by the Spanish Parliament is not succeeding in resolving the concerns of petitioners, nor are there any plans for the further environmental protection of Spain’s coastal areas;

20.  Stresses the need to regulate coastal protection effectively, but notes that the costal law is not consistent with the objectives sought, since it is affecting historic heritage and traditional communities, impacting negatively on the inhabitants of coastal villages who have always coexisted sustainably with the sea and its ecosystems;

21.  Welcomes the Committee’s conclusions from the fact-finding visit to Berlin on youth and family welfare matters, particularly in cross-border custody cases; notes, however, based on the continuing inflow of petitions of this nature, that it is clear the issue of cross-border custody cases is ongoing, and that similar cases have also been brought to the Committee’s attention from other Member States, notably Denmark; further notes that in Denmark some of these cases have involved foreign nationals living in the country itself and that there have been proven instances of child abduction there (including from outside Denmark);

22.  Takes the view that better governance and more efficient redress mechanisms are directly linked with transparency and access to information in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;

23.  Considers it important to enhance cooperation with Member States’ parliaments and governments, based on reciprocity and, where necessary, to encourage Member States’ authorities to transpose and apply EU legislation with full transparency; stresses the importance of the Commission’s cooperation with the Member States and deplores the negligence of some Member States with regard to transposing and enforcing European environmental legislation;

24.  Draws attention, in that regard, to the Eurobarometer of public opinion which indicates that only 36 % of EU citizens consider themselves well informed about their rights and only 24 % feel well informed about what they can do if their rights are not respected; stresses, therefore, the urgent need for improved access to information and for a clearer distinction between the functions of the various national and European institutions, so that petitions and complaints can be addressed to the right bodies;

25.  Calls specifically on theCommission to make the ‘Exercise your rights’ web portal more user-friendly and to raise awareness amongst EU citizens of its existence;

26.  Is determined to put in place a more practical and visible petitions web portal by the end of 2013, in order to facilitate access to the petitions process and to provide valuable information on petitions, its public dissemination and an interactive approach to the petitions process, as well as on other redress mechanisms; calls for the right of petition to be given greater visibility on the Parliament website homepage;

27.  Emphasises that the Committee on Petitions, along with other institutions, bodies and instruments such as the European Citizens’ Initiative, the European Ombudsman, the Commission, and the committees of inquiry, play an independent and clearly defined role as points of contact for each individual citizen; further stresses that the Committee on Petitions must continue to be a point of reference for citizens whose rights are allegedly being infringed;

28.  Welcomes the constructive cooperation between the Committee and the European Ombudsman, as for instance in the case of the Ombudsman’s Special Report on Vienna Airport, regarding the appropriate application of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive; supports the activities of the Ombudsman concerning instances of maladministration in the activities of EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies; expects this task to be continued on the grounds of full independence, as has been the case until now;

29.  Points out that not all EU citizens have a national ombudsman with extensive powers, which means that not all EU citizens have the same access to redress; believes that with a national ombudsman in each Member State, the European Network of Ombudsmen would provide considerable support for the European Ombudsman;

30.  Welcomes the continued cooperation with the Commission with regard to the examination of petitions in the field of the application of EU law by Member States; stresses, nevertheless, that the Committee expects to be kept well and promptly informed about developments concerning infringement proceedings; asks the Commission to give equal consideration to petitions and complaints as regards the functioning of infringement procedures; calls, in addition, upon the Commission also to provide the Committee with details and a statistical analysis of all complaints it investigates; stresses that, for the right of petition to be fully respected, a thorough analysis and answer from the Commission is fundamental when requested, providing an assessment not only of the formal or procedural issues but also on the essential content of the matter;

31.  Emphasises that access to information held by the EU institutions, as specified by Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, is the primary interest of citizens aiming to understand better the decision-making process particularly when it concerns projects with an impact on the environment; takes the view that greater access to information on investigations and infringement files could be provided by the Commission without jeopardising the purpose of the investigations and that an overriding public interest might well justify access to these files, particularly in cases where fundamental rights, human or animal health and the protection of the environment against irreversible damage may be at stake, or where proceedings are under way regarding discrimination against a minority or violations of human dignity, as long as protection of trade secrets and sensitive information relating to court cases, competition cases and personnel files are safeguarded;

32.  Asks for a precautionary and preventive approach by the Commission when assessing projects with a potential negative environmental or public health impact, in early cooperation with the Member States concerned; notes the possibility of injunction measures to be established during deliberations in cases where irreversible damage is anticipated;

33.  Takes note, in particular, of the important contribution of the SOLVIT network in uncovering and resolving issues related to the implementation of internal market legislation; encourages the enhancement of this EU tool by ensuring that Member States provide adequate staffing to the SOLVIT National Centres; adds that collective action is needed to resolve disputes brought by consumers and their associations;

34.  Underlines that, as confirmed by the Legal Service in its Opinion of 29 February 2012, the fields of activity of the European Union institutions, as contained in the Treaty, are wider than the mere sum of the competences exercised by the Union; takes into account the view of Parliament’s Legal Service that Parliament is entitled to adopt internal administrative decisions which aim to establish a procedure for the processing of submissions from citizens; regrets in this respect the failure of the appropriate Parliament service to follow through on Parliament’s Resolution of 21 November 2012 on the activities of the Committee on Petitions 2011(2); takes note, finally, of the legal ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (Case T-280/09), specifying that a petition must be drafted in a sufficiently clear and precise manner so as to be properly understood, in light of the conditions set out in Article 227 TFEU;

35.  Urges Member States to transpose and apply EU legislation in full transparency and, with that objective in mind, considers it indispensable to improve the Commission’s early cooperation with Member States’ parliaments and governments, on a reciprocal basis;

36.  Deplores the bureaucratic obstacles placed before European Citizens’ Initiatives due to a lack of IT support; regrets, above all, that such a tool for citizens is being used so disparately in the various administrations, due to varying operating procedures in the Member States;

37.  Welcomes the Year of European Citizenship in 2013; calls on all institutions and bodies both of the European Union and of the Member States to enhance and advertise more widely their service to European citizens and residents during this year, in light of the principles contained in the Treaties and the facts revealed in this report;

38.  Notes that the petitions mechanism is not merely a service, but a right for all European citizens and residents; pledges to make the petition procedure more efficient, transparent, and impartial, while preserving the participatory rights of the Members of the Committee on Petitions, so that the handling of petitions stands up to judicial review even at a procedural level;

39.  Emphasises the essential role of fact-finding visits in the petitions procedure, not just as a participatory parliamentary right, but also as an obligation in relation to petitioners; reaffirms, as already stated in this Committee’s previous report, the need for more precise, written, procedural rules in relation to the preparation, implementation and evaluation of visits, ensuring on the one hand that all members of a fact-finding visit have the right to present the facts from their point of view while, on the other hand, guaranteeing all Committee Members the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process concerning the conclusions and recommendations to be drawn by the Committee on Petitions;

40.  Calls onParliament’s Conference of Presidents to reinforce this Committee’s investigatory role;

41.  Considers the organisation of public hearings a useful way of studying issues raised by petitioners in depth; wishes to bring attention, for instance, to the public hearing held on the exploration and exploitation of unconventional energy sources, which took note of the concerns raised in this respect by EU citizens through their petitions; recognises Member States’ right to choose their energy mix and the need for better EU-wide coordination when realising the threefold objectives of EU energy policy as a whole, namely competitiveness, sustainability and security of supply;

42.  Looks forward to organising public hearings for successful European Citizens’ Initiatives, alongside the legislative Committee responsible in accordance with Rule 197A of the European Parliament's Rules of Procedure; reaffirms its belief that this new tool will strengthen the democratic institutions of the Union and will give meaning to the notion of European citizenship;

43.  Is nevertheless concerned about the red tape and technical obstacles which have emerged during the first months of the practical application of the European Citizens’ Initiative; calls, therefore, on the Commission to consider seriously bringing forward the date of the review prescribed in Article 22 of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011;

44.  Stresses the need for regular review of the state of play with the European Citizens’ Initiatives, with the aim of improving the procedure and enabling effective solutions to be found as swiftly as possible to any obstacles at every stage of the procedure;

45.  Believes that the role and responsibilities of the Petitions Committee would be best performed, and its visibility, efficiency, accountability and transparency best enhanced, by improving its means for bringing issues of importance to European citizens to plenary, and upgrading its abilities to call witnesses, conduct investigations and organise hearings;

46.  Resolves to examine the extent to which amendments to the Rules of Procedure would be appropriate for the implementation of the above formal requirements concerning fact-finding visits and plenary resolutions under Article 202 of its Rules of Procedure;

47.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the report of the Committee on Petitions to the Council, the Commission and the European Ombudsman, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States, their committees on petitions and their ombudsmen or similar competent bodies.

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0510.
(2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0445.


Recent cases of violence and persecution against Christians, notably in Maaloula (Syria) and Peshawar (Pakistan) and the case of Pastor Saeed Abedini (Iran)
PDF 134kWORD 27k
European Parliament resolution of 10 October 2013 on recent cases of violence and persecution against Christians, notably in Maaloula (Syria) and Peshawar (Pakistan) and the case of Pastor Saeed Abedini (Iran) (2013/2872(RSP))
P7_TA(2013)0422RC-B7-0449/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its resolutions of 15 November 2007 on serious events which compromise Christian communities’ existence and those of other religious communities(1), of 21 January 2010 on recent attacks on Christian communities(2), of 6 May 2010 on the mass atrocities in Jos, Nigeria(3), of 20 May 2010 on religious freedom in Pakistan(4), of 25 November 2010 on Iraq: the death penalty (notably the case of Tariq Aziz) and attacks against Christian communities(5), of 20 January 2011 on the situation of Christians in the context of freedom of religion(6), of 27 October 2011 on the situation in Egypt and Syria, in particular of Christian communities(7), and of 13 December 2012 on the annual report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2011 and the European Union’s policy on the matter(8),

–  having regard to its recommendation to the Council of 13 June 2013 on the draft EU Guidelines on the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief(9),

–  having regard to the EU Guidelines on the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief,

–  having regard to the statement of 23 September 2013 by Catherine Ashton, High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy / Vice-President of the Commission, condemning the attack on the Christian community in Peshawar, Pakistan,

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 21 February 2011 on intolerance, discrimination and violence on the basis of religion or belief, as well as the Council conclusions of 16 November 2009 underlining the strategic importance of freedom of religion or belief and of countering religious intolerance,

–  having regard to Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948,

–  having regard to Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966,

–  having regard to the UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination based on Religion and Belief of 1981,

–  having regard to the reports of the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief,

–  having regard to Rules 122(5) and 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the European Union has repeatedly expressed its commitment to freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom of thought, and has stressed that governments have a duty to guarantee these freedoms throughout the world; whereas political and religious leaders have a duty at all levels to combat extremism and promote mutual respect among individuals and religious groups; whereas the development of human rights, democracy and civil liberties is the common base on which the European Union builds its relations with third countries and has been provided for by the democracy clause in the agreements between the EU and third countries;

B.  whereas, according to international human rights law and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in particular, everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; whereas this right includes freedom to change one’s religion or belief, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest one’s religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching; whereas, according to the UN Human Rights Committee, the freedom of religion or belief protects all beliefs, including theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs;

C.  whereas several UNHRC resolutions call on ‘all States, within their national legal framework, in conformity with international human rights instruments, to take all appropriate measures to combat hatred, discrimination, intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by religious intolerance, including attacks on religious places, and to encourage understanding, tolerance and respect in matters relating to freedom of belief or religion’;

D.  whereas according to various reports, government repression and social hostility against individuals and groups from various religious or belief backgrounds are on the increase, in particular in Pakistan, Arab Spring countries and parts of Africa; whereas in some cases the situation facing Christian communities is such as to endanger their future existence and, if they were to disappear, this would entail the loss of a significant part of the religious heritage of the countries concerned;

Maaloula, Syria

E.  whereas on 4 September 2013, militants from Jabhat al-Nusra, a group with ties to al-Qaeda, launched an assault on the Syrian village of Maaloula;

F.  whereas Maaloula is a symbol of Christian presence in Syria and has been home to different religious communities who have lived in peaceful coexistence for centuries; whereas every September Syrians of all religions have participated in the Day of the Cross festival in this town; whereas Maaloula is one of the three towns and villages in the country where Aramaic is still spoken by the local population;

G.  whereas the violent clashes in Maaloula are the first attacks specifically targeting a notable Christian community since the beginning of the violent crisis in Syria; whereas at least four people – Michael Thaalab, Antoine Thaalab, Sarkis Zakem and Zaki Jabra – were killed in these clashes while others – Shadi Thaalab, Jihad Thaalab, Moussa Shannis, Ghassan Shannis, Daoud Milaneh and Atef Kalloumeh – were kidnapped or disappeared; whereas since fighting began in the town, most of its 5 000 residents have fled to neighbouring villages or to Damascus; whereas events in Maaloula are evidence of the further sectarianisation of the Syrian conflict;

H.  whereas the Convent of St Tekla (Mar Takla) has historically been home to nuns and to orphans of both the Christian and Muslim religions; whereas around 40 nuns and orphans have stayed in Maaloula despite the intense fighting and are trapped in the convent under deteriorating conditions due to the lack of water and other supplies;

Peshawar, Pakistan

I.  whereas on 22 September 2013, in a double suicide bomb attack on the All Saints Church in Kohati Gate, a suburb of Peshawar, at least 82 people were killed and over 120 injured;

J.  whereas the Islamist group Jundullah with links to Tehrik-i-Talibaan Pakistan claimed responsibility for the attack, saying it would continue with attacks on Christians and non-Muslims because they are enemies of Islam and would not stop until US drone attacks in Pakistan cease; whereas Tehrik-i-Talibaan Pakistan denied any involvement in the blast and having any links with Jundullah;

K.  whereas Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, condemned the attack, saying that targeting innocent people is against the teachings of Islam;

L.  whereas Christians, who represent about 1,6 % of the population in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, suffer from prejudice and sporadic bouts of mob violence;

M.  whereas the majority of Pakistani Christians lead a precarious existence, often fearful of allegations of blasphemy, a subject which can provoke outbursts of public violence;

N.  whereas on 9 March 2013, Muslims in Lahore torched more than 150 Christian homes and two churches in response to an allegation of blasphemy;

O.  whereas Pakistan’s blasphemy laws make it dangerous for religious minorities to express themselves freely or engage openly in religious activities;

The case of Pastor Saeed Abedini, Iran

P.  whereas Saeed Abedini, an Iranian-American pastor imprisoned in Iran since 26 September 2012, was sentenced on 27 January 2013 by a revolutionary court in Iran to an eight-year prison term on charges of disturbing national security by creating a network of Christian churches in private homes; whereas it is reported that Saeed Abedini has suffered physical and psychological abuse in prison;

Q.  whereas the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran asserts that Christians should not face sanctions for manifesting and practising their faith, and therefore remains concerned that Christians are reportedly being arrested and prosecuted on the grounds of vaguely worded national security crimes for exercising their beliefs;

1.  Strongly condemns the recent attacks against Christians and expresses its solidarity with the families of the victims; expresses once again its deep concerns about the proliferation of episodes of intolerance, repression and violent events directed against Christian communities, particularly in the countries of Africa, Asia and the Middle East; urges the governments concerned to ensure that the perpetrators of these crimes and all persons responsible for the attacks, as well as for other violent acts against Christians or other religious minorities, are brought to justice and tried by due process;

2.  Strongly condemns all forms of discrimination and intolerance based on religion and belief, and acts of violence against all religious communities; stresses once again that the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion is a fundamental human right;

3.  Reiterates its concern about the exodus of Christians from various countries, especially Middle Eastern countries, in recent years;

Maaloula, Syria

4.  Is worried about the current situation facing Christians in Syria; condemns the actions of Jabhat al-Nusra and associated militants in Maaloula and the surrounding area; notes that until now Christians and Muslims used to coexist peacefully in this village, even during the conflict, and agreed that the town must remain a place of peace; recognises that the attack on Maaloula is only one aspect of the Syrian civil war;

5.  Emphasises that the monasteries of Maaloula have to be protected in order to preserve life, religious activities and architectural treasures, and to allow Christians and Muslims to live peacefully together;

6.  Calls for immediate support and humanitarian assistance to the nuns and orphans trapped in the Convent of St Tekla (Mar Takla); calls on all sides involved in the conflict to allow access to the convent to humanitarian groups;

7.  Is concerned about the consequences of these attacks and the possible risks to the Christian community; is aware that Christian and other communities are being caught in the crossfire and are being forced to take sides in a war that continues to sectarianise;

8.  Stresses that all actors have a duty to protect all the different minorities present in Syria, including Shias, Alawites, Kurds, Druzes and Christians;

Peshawar, Pakistan

9.  Strongly condemns the attack on the All Saints Church in Peshawar and the other recent terrorist attacks;

10.  Welcomes the widespread condemnation of the attacks by political players and sections of Pakistan’s civil society;

11.  Urges the Government of Pakistan to do everything in its power to bring the perpetrators of the attack on the All Saints Church in Peshawar to justice; calls for stronger action to ensure the protection of all Pakistani citizens – regardless of their religion or belief – and to bring to justice all groups and individuals responsible for inciting and carrying out acts of terror;

12.  Calls on the Government of Pakistan to take action to protect victims of religiously motivated mob violence, to actively address religious hostility by societal actors, to combat religious intolerance, acts of violence and intimidation, and to act against the perception of impunity;

13.  Is deeply worried about the growing danger for Christians in Pakistan, given the recent rise in attacks on this minority, such as the persecution of hundreds of Christians by Islamic zealots in March in Lahore over allegations of blasphemy against Islam;

14.  Is deeply concerned about the general situation facing religious minorities in Pakistan, and especially the Christian churches, which have received threats from the Taliban and other extremist groups;

15.  Expresses its deep concern that the controversial blasphemy laws are open to misuse that can affect people of all faiths in Pakistan; expresses its particular concern that use of the blasphemy laws, which were publicly opposed by the late Minister Shahbaz Bhattiand and by the late Governor Salman Taseer, is currently on the rise to target Christians in Pakistan;

16.  Calls on the Government of Pakistan to carry out a thorough review of the blasphemy laws and their current application, in particular Sections 295 B and C of the Penal Code, which prescribe mandatory life sentences (295 B and C) or even the death penalty (295 C) for alleged acts of blasphemy;

17.  Recalls that freedom of religion and minority rights are guaranteed by Pakistan’s constitution; encourages all Pakistanis to work together to promote and ensure tolerance and mutual understanding;

18.  Welcomes the measures taken in the interest of religious minorities by the Government of Pakistan since November 2008, such as establishing a five per cent quota for minorities in the federal job sector, recognising non-Muslim public holidays and declaring a National Minorities Day;

The case of Pastor Saeed Abedini, Iran

19.  Is deeply concerned about the fate of Pastor Saeed Abedini, who has been detained for over a year and was sentenced to eight years of prison in Iran on charges related to his religious beliefs;

20.  Calls on the Government of Iran to exonerate and immediately release Saeed Abedini and all other individuals held or charged on account of their religion;

21.  Reiterates its call on Iran to take steps to ensure that full respect is shown for the right to freedom of religion or belief, including by ensuring that its legislation and practices fully conform to Article 18 of the ICCPR; points out that this also requires that the right of everyone to change his or her religion, if he or she so chooses, be unconditionally and fully guaranteed;

22.  Welcomes the talk of moderation and religious tolerance from Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani; believes that the EU should engage in a human rights dialogue with Iran;

23.  Reiterates its call on the Council, the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy / Vice-President of the European Commission to pay greater attention to the subject of freedom of religion or belief and to the situation of religious communities, including Christians, in agreements and cooperation arrangements with third countries, as well as in human rights reports;

24.  Welcomes the adoption by the Council on 24 June 2013 of the EU Guidelines on the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief; urges the Commission, the EEAS and the Member States to fully implement these guidelines and to make full use of any tools and suggestions presented therein;

25.  Supports all initiatives aimed at promoting dialogue and mutual respect between communities; calls on all religious authorities to promote tolerance and to take initiatives against hatred and violent and extremist radicalisation;

o
o   o

26.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the European External Action Service, the Vice-President of the European Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the EU Special Representative for Human Rights, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Secretary-General of the UN, the UN Human Rights Council, UN Women, the Government of Syria, the Syrian National Council, the Government and Parliament of Pakistan, and the Government and Parliament of Iran.

(1) OJ C 282 E, 6.11.2008, p. 474.
(2) OJ C 305 E, 11.11.2010, p. 7.
(3) OJ C 81 E, 15.3.2011, p. 143.
(4) OJ C 161 E, 31.5.2011, p. 147.
(5) OJ C 99 E, 3.4.2012, p. 115.
(6) OJ C 136 E, 11.5.2012, p. 53.
(7) OJ C 131 E, 8.5.2013, p. 108.
(8) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0503.
(9) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0279.


Clashes in Sudan and subsequent media censorship
PDF 132kWORD 29k
European Parliament resolution of 10 October 2013 on clashes in Sudan and subsequent media censorship (2013/2873(RSP))
P7_TA(2013)0423RC-B7-0444/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Sudan and South Sudan,

–  having regard to the statement of 30 September 2013 by the Spokesperson of the Vice‑President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the violence in the current protests in Sudan,

–  having regard to the statement of 27 September 2013 by the Spokesperson for the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, urging restraint as death toll in Sudan fuel protests rises,

–  having regard to the report of the UN Human Rights Council Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, of 18 September 2013,

–  having regard to the statement of 6 September 2013 by the Spokesperson of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the Summit between the Presidents of Sudan and South Sudan in Khartoum in Sudan,

–  having regard to the agreed outcome of the Government of Sudan, African Union and United Nations Tripartite Coordination Mechanism meeting on UNAMID held on 28 September 2013,

–  having regard to the Roadmap for Sudan and South Sudan set out in the communiqué issued by the African Union Peace and Security Council on 24 April 2012, which is fully supported by the EU,

–  having regard to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

–  having regard to the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

–  having regard to the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials,

–  having regard to the Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1996/39 (1996),

–  having regard to the Sudanese Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2005,

–  having regards to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights,

–  having regard to Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States of the other part, signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000 and revised successively in 2005 and 2010,

–  having regard to its resolution of 11 December 2012 on a digital freedom strategy in EU foreign policy(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2013 on the freedom of press and media in the world(2),

–  having regard to Rules 122(5) and 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas Sudan is experiencing increasing waves of popular protests and the political situation in the country is fragile;

B.  whereas on 23 of September 2013 demonstrations and protests erupted throughout Sudan following President Omar Al-Bashir’s announcement of cuts to fuel subsidies in a bid to reform the economy, which resulted in a sharp 75 % increase in the price of petrol and gas;

C.  whereas in protest thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of cities throughout the country, including Wad Madani, Khartoum, Omdurman, Port Sudan, Atbara, Gedarif, Nyala, Kosti, and Sinnar, as the austerity measures introduced by the government, together with the virtual doubling of fuel prices, hit the poor hardest;

D.  whereas the economic situation in Sudan remains extremely difficult, marked as it is by rising inflation, a weakened currency and a severe shortage of dollars to pay for imports since South Sudan gained independence two years ago, taking with it about 75 % of the formerly united country’s crude oil production;

E.  whereas the lack of agreement on transitional economic arrangements between Sudan and South Sudan, including on the use of oil, has been used as a threat by both parties, contributing significantly to the current crisis; whereas the distrust between the two neighbouring countries over the division of national debt and how much the land-locked South should pay to transport its oil through Sudan is one of the unsettled issues;

F.  whereas, according to reports, at least 800 activists, including members of opposition parties and journalists, have been arrested amid ongoing demonstrations, in which up to 100 people were reportedly killed by security forces, a toll that prompted the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to call for ‘utmost restraint’ from law enforcement officials; whereas, according to reports, the majority of persons killed are between the ages of 15 and 25, but children as young as 10 to 12 have also been shot by security forces;

G.  whereas the education ministry has stated that schools will remain closed until 20 October 2013;

H.  whereas the violent crackdown by the Sudanese Government includes the use of live ammunition against peaceful protesters and large-scale detentions; whereas a number of activists, opposition party members and civil society leaders, including teachers, and students, were arrested at their homes or held incommunicado, and their homes were searched by National Intelligence Security Services (NISS) agents; whereas there have been summary trials, such as that following the arrest of Majdi Saleem, a well-known human rights defender, and since the end of September, there has been an information blackout through high censorship of the print media and an internet shutdown;

I.  whereas Sudan is ranked among the worst countries in the world as regards respect for freedom of information; whereas on 25 September 2013 the NISS brought this to a whole new level by prohibiting the editors of the main newspapers from publishing any information about the protests that did not come from government sources;

J.  whereas there have been numerous violations of the freedom of the press, such as disconnection of the internet, the seizing of newspapers, harassment of journalists and the censoring of news websites; whereas the offices of Al-Arabiya and the Sky News Arabic Service television stations have been closed; whereas daily newspapers such as Al-Sudani, Al-Meghar, Al Gareeda, Almash’had Alaan, Al-Siyasi and the pro-government Al-Intibaha were banned from publication on 19 September 2013, and issues of three newspapers, including Al-Intibaha, were seized as they came off the press;

K.  whereas uncensored access to the open internet, mobile phones and ICTs have a positive impact on human rights and fundamental freedoms, by expanding the scope for freedom of expression, access to information and freedom of assembly across the world; whereas the digital collection and dissemination of evidence of human rights violations can contribute to the global fight against impunity;

L.  whereas access to the internet is a fundamental right, equal to other basic human rights, recognised by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), and should be defended and maintained accordingly;

M.  whereas the state’s regulatory authority has established a special unit to monitor and implement filtering, and the Sudanese authorities openly acknowledge that they filter content that transgresses public morality and ethics, or poses a threat to order;

N.  whereas on 25 September 2013 the authorities disconnected the internet throughout the country for more than 24 hours in a blackout on a scale that had not been seen since the uprisings in Egypt in 2011; whereas the internet was slowed down drastically in June 2012 during a series of protests;

O.  whereas, in the Freedom House report ‘2013 Freedom on the Net’ released on 3 October 2013, Sudan is rated as ‘not free’ and ranked 63rd out of 100 countries; whereas Sudan is ranked 170th out of 179 countries in the Reporters Without Borders 2013 Press Freedom Index; whereas Reporters Without Borders has condemned measures undertaken by the government;

P.  whereas most activists rely on the use of internet to communicate with each other, transfer information out of the country and voice their opinions and concerns; whereas citizens have reported that even the text-messaging service was interrupted during the blackout;

Q.  whereas in the general election held in April 2010 – the first multiparty election held in Sudan since 1986 – Omar al-Bashir was re-elected President of Sudan; whereas the EU Election Observation Mission, which found many irregularities and deficiencies in the electoral process, said that the election did not meet international standards;

R.  whereas two arrest warrants for President al-Bashir were issued in 2009 and 2010 by the International Criminal Court (ICC), accusing him of responsibility for war crimes, crimes against humanity and acts of genocide, and whereas, although Sudan is not a state party to the Rome Statute, UN Security Council Resolution 1593 (2005) requires it to cooperate with the ICC, and Sudan must therefore comply with the ICC arrest warrant;

S.  whereas according to UN estimates 50 % of the population of Sudan (totalling 34 million) are younger than 15, and about 46 % of the population live under the poverty line;

T.  whereas conflict in transitional areas of Sudan has affected over 900 000 people, including over 220 000 who have taken refuge in Ethiopia and South Sudan, and whereas since early 2013 an estimated 300 000 people have been newly displaced as a result of the fighting among tribes in Darfur;

U.  whereas in 2012-2013 the EU has allocated more than EUR 76 million in humanitarian aid for Sudan (figure as at 20 August 2013); whereas Sudan has not ratified the 2005 revised Cotonou Agreement and cannot therefore receive financial support through the 10th European Development Fund;

1.  Expresses its deep concern at the deteriorating political, economic and social situation in Sudan, marked by violence and loss of life during the protests which have recently swept through the country;

2.  Condemns the killings, the violence against demonstrators, the media censorship, the political intimidation and the harassment and arbitrary arrest of human rights and political activists and journalists;

3.  Calls on the Government of Sudan to end the harassment and immediately release all peaceful demonstrators, political activists, members of the opposition, human rights defenders, medical personnel, bloggers and journalists arrested while exercising their right to freedom of speech and assembly; stresses that all detainees must be given the opportunity for a fair trial based on a credible investigation, the right to an attorney and respect for the presumption of innocence, and that the government must allow the detainees access to their families and medical care;

4.  Deplores the use of live ammunition against protesters, resulting in unlawful killings, disproportionate force and allegations of the intentional killing of protestors by security forces; urges the Sudanese Government immediately to put a stop to the crackdown and to end the impunity enjoyed by NISS members; calls for the draconian 2010 National Security Act to be scrapped;

5.  Calls on Sudanese security forces to respect the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, which set out the conditions in which force may lawfully be used without violating human rights, including the right to life;

6.  Calls on the Sudanese authorities to restore and respect human rights and fundamental freedoms under international law, including freedom of expression, both online and offline, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, women’s rights and gender equality, and to immediately end all restrictions on access to information and communication technologies;

7.  Urges the Sudanese Government to cease all forms of repression against those who exercise their right to freedom of expression, both online and offline, and to protect journalists; emphasises the role played by the media in providing citizens with information and a platform to voice their legitimate concerns, and therefore strongly condemns the blackout of 22 September 2013 and the intimidation operation led by the NISS;

8.  Urges the Sudanese Government to allow its population free access to the internet at all times; stresses that access to the internet is a fundamental right, recognised by the UNHRC, which should be maintained and defended like all other human rights;

9.  Calls on the Sudanese Government to continue implementing the necessary political reforms to provide solutions to the country’s chronic economic mismanagement, poverty, rising levels of corruption and insecurity in the west and south, and recommends that the Sudanese authorities and all regional and international partners implement programmes for young people in order to promote education, training and employment;

10.  Calls on the Sudanese authorities to engage in a genuine process of comprehensive national dialogue with the opposition, especially in Darfur; strongly urges the Governments of Sudan and South Sudan to reach an agreement on the unsolved transitional economic arrangements between the two countries, including the use of oil, which has contributed to the current unrest in Sudan;

11.  Recalls the June 2008 GAERC conclusions addressing the continued failure of the Government of Sudan to cooperate with the International Criminal Court (ICC) and pointing out that the Government of Sudan has an obligation, and the capacity, to cooperate and that any arrest warrant issued by the ICC should be respected; urges Omar al-Bashir to comply with international law and to appear before the ICC for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide;

12.  Calls on the Sudanese Government to review its National Security Act, which allows the detention of suspects for up to four-and-a-half months without any form of judicial review, and calls also on the Sudanese Government to reform its legal system in accordance with international human rights standards;

13.  Calls on the Sudanese Government to repeal the death penalty, which is still in force, and to commute death sentences to appropriate alternative sanctions;

14.  Calls on the authorities, while welcoming their decision to set up an investigation committee in order to bring to justice those responsible for killings, to proceed with a comprehensive, independent investigation into all reported killings;

15.  Calls on the African Union, in close coordination with the special procedures of the United Nations Human Rights Council, to send an urgent commission of inquiry to investigate allegations of excessive and intentional use of lethal force by the Sudanese authorities and the circumstances leading to the deaths of protestors, including human rights defenders;

16.  Calls on the Commission, as a matter of urgency, to legally restrict the export of mass surveillance technologies from the EU to countries where they are likely to be used to violate digital freedoms and other human rights;

17.  Regrets the decision taken by the EU High Representative to terminate the mandate of the EU Special Representative for Sudan/South Sudan, given the severe political unrest in Sudan and armed conflicts during which Sudanese forces and government-sponsored militias continue to engage in war crimes with impunity; considers that without a designated EU Special Representative for Sudan/South Sudan the EU will be left on the sidelines of international negotiations and efforts, especially in view of the fact that the US, Russia and China all have special envoys for Sudan; calls therefore on the High Representative to reverse this decision and extend the mandate of the Special Representative for Sudan/South Sudan;

18.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Government of Sudan, the African Union, the United Nations Secretary-General, the Co-Presidents of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly and the Pan-African Parliament (PAP).

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0470.
(2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0274.


Recent violence in Iraq
PDF 122kWORD 24k
European Parliament resolution of 10 October 2013 on recent violence in Iraq (2013/2874(RSP))
P7_TA(2013)0424RC-B7-0446/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Iraq, notably that of 14 March 2013 on ‘Iraq: the plight of minority groups, including the Iraqi Turkmen’(1),

–  having regard to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Iraq, of the other part, and to its resolution of 17 January 2013 on the EU-Iraq Partnership and Cooperation Agreement(2),

–  having regard to the Commission’s Joint Strategy Paper for Iraq (2011-2013),

–  having regard to the ‘Report on Human Rights in Iraq: January to June 2012’, presented jointly by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on 19 December 2012,

–  having regard to the International Crisis Group’s Middle East Report N°144 of 14 August 2013 entitled ‘Make or Break: Iraq’s Sunnis and the State’

–  having regard to the UN casualty figures for September, released on 1 October 2013,

–  having regard to the statement of 29 July 2013 by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, urging leaders to pull Iraq ‘back from the brink’,

–  having regard to the statement of 1 September 2013 by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki–moon on the tragic events in Camp Ashraf which killed 52 people,

–  having regard to the 1981 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief,

–  having regard to the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Iraq is a party,

–  having regard to the statement of 5 September 2013 by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Catherine Ashton, on the recent violence in Iraq,

–  having regard to Rules 122(5) and 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas Iraq continues to face serious political, security and socioeconomic challenges, and whereas its political scene is extremely fragmented and plagued by violence and sectarian politics, to the severe detriment of the legitimate aspirations of the Iraqi people for peace, prosperity and a genuine transition to democracy;

B.  whereas, according to casualty figures released by the UNAMI, a total of 979 Iraqis were killed, and another 2 133 wounded, in acts of terrorism and violence in September 2013; whereas Baghdad was the worst-affected governorate in September 2013, with 1 429 civilian casualties (418 killed and 1 011 injured), followed by Ninewa, Diyala, Salahuddin and Anbar; whereas Kirkuk, Erbil, Babil, Wasit, Dhi-Qar and Basra also reported casualties;

C.  whereas the impact of violence on civilians remains disturbingly high and is still growing, with up to 5 000 civilians having been killed, and up to 10 000 injured, since the beginning of 2013 – the highest figure in the last five years;

D.  whereas serious social and economic problems – widespread poverty, high unemployment, economic stagnation, environmental degradation and a lack of basic public services – continue to affect a large proportion of the population; whereas numerous peaceful demonstrations demanding more social, economic and political rights continue to result in very systematic repression by the security forces, carried out with impunity;

E.  whereas the Iraqi constitution guarantees equality before the law for all citizens, along with the ‘administrative, political, cultural and educational rights of the various nationalities’;

F.  whereas the EU-Iraq Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, in particular its human rights clause, emphasises that the EU-Iraq political dialogue should focus on human rights and strengthening democratic institutions;

1.  Strongly condemns the recent acts of terrorism and heightened sectarian violence, which carries the danger that the country will fall back into sectarian strife and is generating fears of wider sectarian conflict across the region; points out that although violence occurs along sectarian lines, its causes are political rather than religious;

2.  Extends its condolences to the families and friends of the deceased and injured;

3.  Condemns the recent attacks of: 3 September 2013, in which at least 60 people were killed in mainly Shia districts of Baghdad; 15 September 2013, in which more than 40 people were killed in blasts across Iraq, mostly targeting Shia areas; 21 September 2013, in which at least 60 people were killed at a funeral in Sadr City, Baghdad; 30 September 2013, in which at least 54 people were killed in car bomb blasts in mainly Shia areas of Baghdad; 5 October 2013, in which at least 51 people were killed and more than 70 injured in an attack in Baghdad by a suicide bomber targeting Shia pilgrims in the al-Adhamiya district, while at least 12 people were killed and at least 25 others wounded when another suicide bomber struck a café in Balad, north of Baghdad, on the same day; 6 October 2013, in which at least 12 children aged between 6 and 12 were killed, and many more injured, by a suicide bomber who struck next to a primary school in the Shia Turkmen village of Qabak; 7 October 2013, in which at least 22 people were killed in a fresh wave of explosions in Baghdad; and 8 October 2013, in which at least 9 people were killed by a car bomb in Baghdad and attacks on security forces in the north of the country;

4.  Strongly condemns the attack on Camp Ashraf of 1 September 2013 by Iraqi forces, in which 52 Iranian refugees were killed, and 7 residents abducted, including 6 women who, as stated by Vice-President / High Representative Catherine Ashton, are believed to be held in Baghdad, and calls for their immediate and unconditional release; expresses its support for the work of the UNAMI, which is trying to relocate the 3 000 or so residents outside of Iraq;

5.  Expresses its grave concern over the new surge of instability and calls on all Iraqi political leaders, from all ethnic and religious backgrounds, to work together to put an end to sectarian violence and distrust and to bring the Iraqi people together;

6.  Calls on both the Government of Iraq and the regional governments to condemn the attacks and to facilitate a full and swift independent international investigation into the recent terrorist attacks in the region, and calls on the Iraqi Government to cooperate fully with that investigation in order to bring those responsible to justice;

7.  Is concerned about the spill-over of violence from the conflict in Syria to Iraq, where jihadist rebels linked to the Islamic State of Iraq, a Sunni militant umbrella group that includes al-Qaeda, have risen to prominence;

8.  Calls, as a matter of urgency, on political, religious and civil leaders and the security forces to start to work together to end the bloodshed and ensure that all Iraqi citizens feel equally protected;

9.  Calls on the Iraqi Government and on all political leaders to take the necessary measures to provide security and protection for all people in Iraq, in particular members of vulnerable minorities; calls on the Iraqi Government to ensure that the security forces comply with the rule of law and international standards;

10.  Calls on the international community and the EU to support the Iraqi Government by promoting initiatives for national dialogue, consolidation of the rule of law and the provision of basic services, with the goal of creating a secure, stable, unified, prosperous and democratic Iraq, in which the human and political rights of all people are protected;

11.  Calls on the Iraqi authorities, given that the security situation has exacerbated problems for more vulnerable groups such as women, youth and fundamental rights activists, including trade unionists, to take urgent action to direct more resources towards programmes aimed at improving the situation;

12.  Encourages religious dialogue between Sunni and Shia clerics as a necessary tool for conflict resolution; considers that the recent talks between the US and Iran also afford an opportunity for Iraq to act as a bridge, given that it is one of the few countries to have strong relations with both parties; calls on Iranian leaders to engage constructively in the stabilisation of the region;

13.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Council, the Commission, the EU Special Representative for Human Rights, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Government and Council of Representatives of Iraq, the Regional Government of Kurdistan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the United Nations Human Rights Council.

(1) P7_TA(2013)0101.
(2) P7_TA(2013)0022.

Legal notice - Privacy policy