Kazalo 
 Prejšnje 
 Naslednje 
 Celotno besedilo 
Potek postopka na zasedanju
Potek postopka za dokument :

Predložena besedila :

O-000253/2011 (B7-0659/2011)

Razprave :

PV 14/12/2011 - 17
CRE 14/12/2011 - 17

Glasovanja :

OJ 15/12/2011 - 111

Sprejeta besedila :


Razprave
Sreda, 14. december 2011 - Strasbourg Pregledana izdaja

17. Pogoji izvrševanja pripora in zaporne kazni v EU (razprava)
Video posnetki govorov
PV
MPphoto
 

  El Presidente. − El punto siguiente es el debate sobre

- la pregunta oral al Consejo sobre las condiciones de detención en la UE, de Niccolò Rinaldi, Renate Weber, Gianni Vattimo, Jens Rohde, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Sarah Ludford, Louis Michel, Andrea Zanoni, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells, Giommaria Uggias, Cecilia Wikström y Marielle De Sarnez, en nombre del Grupo de la Alianza de los Demócratas y Liberales por Europa (O-000252/2011 - B7-0658/2011),

- la pregunta oral a la Comisión sobre las condiciones de detención en la UE, de Niccolò Rinaldi, Renate Weber, Gianni Vattimo, Jens Rohde, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Sarah Ludford, Louis Michel, Andrea Zanoni, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells, Giommaria Uggias, Cecilia Wikström y Marielle De Sarnez, en nombre del Grupo de la Alianza de los Demócratas y Liberales por Europa (O-000253/2011 - B7-0659/2011),

- la pregunta oral al Consejo sobre las condiciones de detención en la UE, de Kyriacos Triantaphyllides, Cornelis de Jong y Miguel Portas, en nombre del Grupo Confederal de la Izquierda Unitaria Europea/Izquierda Verde Nórdica (O-000265/2011 - B7-0660/2011),

- la pregunta oral a la Comisión sobre las condiciones de detención en la UE, de Kyriacos Triantaphyllides, Cornelis de Jong y Miguel Portas, en nombre del Grupo Confederal de la Izquierda Unitaria Europea/Izquierda Verde Nórdica

(O-000266/2011 - B7-0661/2011),

- la pregunta oral al Consejo sobre las condiciones de detención en la UE, de Salvatore Iacolino, Simon Busuttil, Carlos Coelho y Elena Oana Antonescu, en nombre del Grupo del Partido Popular Europeo (Demócrata-cristianos)

(O-000283/2011 - B7-0662/2011),

- la pregunta oral a la Comisión sobre las condiciones de detención en la UE, de Salvatore Iacolino, Simon Busuttil, Carlos Coelho y Elena Oana Antonescu, en nombre del Grupo del Partido Popular Europeo (Demócrata-cristianos)

(O-000284/2011 - B7-0663/2011),

- la pregunta oral al Consejo sobre las condiciones de detención en la Unión Europea, de Judith Sargentini, Jan Philipp Albrecht, Rui Tavares, Tatjana Ždanoka y Raül Romeva i Rueda, en nombre del Grupo de los Verdes/Alianza Libre Europea (O-000286/2011 - B7-0664/2011),

- la pregunta oral a la Comisión sobre las condiciones de detención en la Unión Europea, de Judith Sargentini, Jan Philipp Albrecht, Rui Tavares, Tatjana Ždanoka y Raül Romeva i Rueda, en nombre del Grupo de los Verdes/Alianza Libre Europea (O-000287/2011 - B7-0665/2011),

- la pregunta oral al Consejo sobre las condiciones de detención en la UE, de Birgit Sippel, Claude Moraes, Carmen Romero López, Sylvie Guillaume, Tanja Fajon, Roberto Gualtieri y Rita Borsellino, en nombre del Grupo de la Alianza Progresista de Socialistas y Demócratas en el Parlamento Europeo (O-000296/2011 - B7-0666/2011), y

- la pregunta oral a la Comisión sobre las condiciones de detención en la UE, de Birgit Sippel, Claude Moraes, Carmen Romero López, Sylvie Guillaume, Tanja Fajon, Roberto Gualtieri y Rita Borsellino, en nombre del Grupo de la Alianza Progresista de Socialistas y Demócratas en el Parlamento Europeo (O-000297/2011 - B7-0667/2011).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Niccolò Rinaldi, Autore. − Signor Presidente, sono onorato di essere stato promotore di questo dibattito in plenaria. Mi pare che le carceri europee soffrano almeno di due problemi.

Il primo è che c'è una grande difficoltà a far entrare gli strumenti della democrazia europea all'interno di queste istituzioni. Nelle carceri si fa abuso dei diritti dell'uomo, si mortifica la dignità della persona, sia relativamente ai detenuti che a chi vi lavora, come gli agenti di custodia.

Nelle carceri vi è sovraffollamento, simbolo dell'assenza di investimenti: si ammucchiano le persone e si chiude la porta. La conoscenza dei regolamenti carcerari è scarsa, mentre dovrebbero essere distribuiti e trasparentemente conosciuti da tutti.

Vi è abdicazione al ruolo principe di rieducazione che le carceri dovrebbero assumere anche non favorendo più con facilità lavori per i detenuti all'interno del carcere.

Poca trasparenza, una poca apertura ai cittadini, alle scuole, alle organizzazioni non governative!

I tagli minacciano i servizi essenziali e la formazione del personale e abbiamo un disinteresse generale dei media e della politica.

Passo al secondo punto. Personalmente, aderendo all'iniziativa che Marco Pannella ha lanciato in Italia, da tre anni visito ogni giorno di Ferragosto – la giornata simbolicamente più vacanziera – due istituti di pena, rimanendo colpito dall'assenza della dimensione europea nelle carceri. Non ci sono scambi di buone pratiche, sono pochi i momenti di confronto tra il personale e gli operatori dei vari paesi europei.

Plaudo quindi alla pubblicazione di questo Libro verde, che potrà chiarire una serie di nodi: come migliorare la fiducia reciproca e, naturalmente, le condizioni di detenzione; come collegare le condizioni di detenzione con l'ordinanza di custodia cautelare europea, il mandato di arresto europeo, le condizioni dei minori, la facoltà di ispezioni, i diritti alle visite delle famiglie e tutta l'attività dei mediatori culturali, che è necessaria.

Il Consiglio è oggi presente e molte risposte dipendono da esso. Si tratta di una prova di civiltà, ovvero di identità europea.

Le prigioni saranno sempre prigioni. Non credo che la soluzione consista nel loro svuotamento, occorre che cessino di essere quegli angoli bui dei diritti e delle responsabilità europee.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Κυριάκος Τριανταφυλλίδης, Συντάκτης. − Κύριε Πρόεδρε, το προς συζήτηση θέμα είναι ιδιαίτερα σημαντικό, ειδικά σε μία περίοδο όπου λαμβάνουν μέρος διάφορες πρωτοβουλίες στον τομέα της δικαστικής συνεργασίας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, όπου η έννοια της αμοιβαίας εμπιστοσύνης χρησιμοποιείται σε κάθε ευκαιρία για τις ενέργειες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης.

Η Πράσινη Βίβλος της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής, που δημοσιεύθηκε πρόσφατα, είναι αρκετά ενδεικτική του ότι τα λόγια απέχουν από την πραγματικότητα. Εκθέτει πολυάριθμα προβλήματα τα οποία δεν μπορούμε ν' αγνοήσουμε· την ανησυχητική διαφοροποίηση των συνθηκών κράτησης στα κράτη μέλη, ιδίως όσον αφορά τον αριθμό των προφυλακισμένων, τα επίπεδα πληρότητας, την κατάχρηση του μέτρου της προφυλάκισης, την πρακτική εφαρμογή του ευρωπαϊκού εντάλματος σύλληψης.

Ειδική μνεία θα ήθελα να κάνω στο μέτρο της προφυλάκισης. Μέτρο κατ ' αρχήν εξαιρετικό και εφαρμοστέο ως έσχατη λύση, που παρά ταύτα στην πράξη η χρήση του έχει αυτοματοποιηθεί πλήρως, ενώ δεν εξετάζονται αρκετά τα εναλλακτικά μέτρα τα οποία είναι διαθέσιμα. Περαιτέρω, ειδική προσοχή πρέπει να δοθεί στις ευάλωτες κατηγορίες όπως τα παιδιά και οι έφηβοι. Σε σχέση με το ευρωπαϊκό ένταλμα σύλληψης η σωστή εφαρμογή του δεν μπορεί να αποβαίνει σε βάρος των βασικών δικαιωμάτων και ελευθεριών. Εγγυήσεις πρέπει να υπάρχουν σε σχέση με την ύπαρξη των απαραίτητων μέσων για την υπεράσπιση υπόπτων και για τις συνθήκες κράτησης.

Ακόμη λοιπόν και αν είναι εύκολο να κλείσει κανείς τα μάτια στα ζητήματα αυτά, οφείλουμε να τα προβάλουμε και να τα συζητήσουμε, ούτως ώστε να βρούμε λύσεις και να ζητήσουμε συγκεκριμένα μέτρα προς βελτίωση των κακών συνθηκών κράτησης με σεβασμό στα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα των κρατουμένων και σύμφωνα με το υψηλό επίπεδο προτύπων για τα οποία γίνεται τόσο συχνά λόγος. Μόνο έτσι μπορεί να πληρούται στο ελάχιστο η αμοιβαία εμπιστοσύνη, διαφορετικά οι ρυθμίσεις αυτές είναι κενό γράμμα και κάνουν περισσότερο κακό.

Σε αυτή την κατεύθυνση κινείται η πρόταση ψηφίσματος που θα τεθεί αύριο στην Ολομέλεια για ψηφοφορία. Καλούμε λοιπόν την Επιτροπή και το Συμβούλιο να εξετάσουν τα παραπάνω και να πράξουν επί των λεχθέντων και επί του μηνύματος του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου. Να εξετάσουν τον αντίκτυπο των ποινικών μέτρων και διατάξεων στις συνθήκες κράτησης και να προβούν σε συστάσεις σχετικά με τα ζητήματα αυτά.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Salvatore Iacolino, Autore. − Signor Presidente, non v'è dubbio che fra gli indicatori che misurano il grado di civiltà di una società vi siano proprio le condizioni dei detenuti.

Il sovraffollamento è una caratteristica costante di molti Stati membri, anche per la presenza notevole di cittadini provenienti da paesi terzi: 650.000 detenuti circa sono una cifra particolarmente significativa. Vi è un diritto, così come vi è un dovere, di scontare la pena da parte del detenuto sempreché, ovviamente, siano garantiti dignità e decoro della persona.

Siamo dell'avviso che occorrano omogeneità e uniformità di trattamento e riteniamo che la cooperazione e la fiducia fra Stati membri possano sussistere soprattutto se vi è omogeneità di condizioni nei confronti dei detenuti. Così non è! Vi sono negli Stati membri alcune realtà particolarmente complesse, sulle quali bisognerà indagare ulteriormente.

Certo, si sono questioni legate all'attesa di giudizio e al carcere preventivo, di cui in molti Stati membri non si fa sempre un uso prudente e accorto. C'è poi la questione del reinserimento lavorativo, della riabilitazione e del riscatto sociale, perché si tratta di persone a cui va offerta comunque una chance.

Vi è il problema del carcere duro per coloro che si sono macchiati di gravi crimini – primi fra tutti mafia, criminalità organizzata e terrorismo. In questi casi, ovviamente, la soglia di attenzione deve rimanere sempre altissima.

Un riconoscimento reciproco in materia giudiziaria fra gli Stati membri può essere di utilità. Vorremmo che Commissione e Consiglio si dimostrassero maggiormente coraggiosi, individuando questa priorità nell'elenco degli interventi da attuare – perché no – con maggiori mezzi e maggiori risorse per ampliare e ammodernare le strutture carcerarie – vi è un'apposita previsione nel programma di Stoccolma.

Nel contempo, anche gli Stati membri devono prevedere misure alternative che favoriscano il reinserimento dei detenuti: dignità e decoro vanno sempre offerti alla persona.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Judith Sargentini, Auteur. − Voorzitter, dat er in Europa gevangenissen zijn waar gevangenen, verdachten en veroordeelden risico's lopen op ziektes, op geweld, is een schande op zichzelf. Het is ongehoord dat er lidstaten zijn die evenals de Commissie nog steeds spreken van onderling vertrouwen in de rechtsstaat; het is slechts een kwestie van tijd totdat een van de hoven, Luxemburg of Straatsburg, een lidstaat verbiedt om een inwoner uit te zetten op grond van artikel 3 van het Europees Verdrag voor de rechten van de mens, het artikel dat over marteling en inhumane behandeling gaat.

De Nederlander Robert Hörchner zat vanwege een Europees aanhoudingsbevel acht maanden lang in een gevangenis in Polen. Hij kwam er mager - om maar niet te zeggen uitgemergeld - en met schurft over zijn hele lichaam uit. Hij werd overigens vrijgesproken. Dit Parlement wil dit soort dingen niet! Dit Parlement vraagt dus niet alleen om betere, schonere, veilige gevangenissen, maar zeker ook om de herziening van het beginsel van onderling vertrouwen zonder controle.

Hoe kan het nu dat in tijden van schuldencrisis lidstaten die elkaar wantrouwen op het gebied van financiën om sancties, om checks and balances, om controle vragen, maar waar het gaat om het uitzetten van een inwoner van het ene naar het andere land onderling vertrouwen goed genoeg wordt bevonden.

Dit Parlement vraagt daarom dus niet alleen om veilige gevangenissen, maar ook om een maximumtermijn voor het voorarrest en de mogelijkheid voor een rechter om een uitzettingsbevel op grond van het Europees aanhoudingsbevel te weigeren en een inwoner niet aan een ander land uit te leveren wanneer de detentiefaciliteiten daar zo zijn dat artikel 3 wordt geschonden. Want, Voorzitter, vertrouwen is goed maar controle is beter.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Birgit Sippel, Verfasserin. − Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Warum ist es überhaupt notwendig, in diesem Hause, in dieser Europäischen Union über Haftbedingungen zu sprechen? Die zunehmende Mobilität unserer Bürgerinnen und Bürger, aber insbesondere die verstärkte Kooperation von Polizei und Justiz und gemeinsame Maßnahmen wie der Europäische Haftbefehl erfordern Vertrauen! Vertrauen, dass überall in der EU die Charta, die Menschenrechtskonventionen beachtet werden. Vertrauen in funktionierende Rechtssysteme, die auf dem Prinzip der Unschuldsvermutung beruhen und in denen Strafe Strafe ist, nicht Rache oder Erniedrigung. Doch viele Berichte der letzten Jahre und auch manche Urteile des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte machten deutlich: Davon sind wir noch weit entfernt.

Die schlechten Bedingungen betreffen überfüllte Gefängnisse, mangelhafte Kontaktmöglichkeiten, fehlende medizinische Betreuung und viele Punkte mehr. Wir brauchen dringend gemeinsame Mindeststandards für die Haftbedingungen und auch für die Dauer von Untersuchungshaft. Gerade lange Untersuchungshaft kann – insbesondere, wenn diese nicht im eigenen Mitgliedstaat stattfindet – den Verlust sozialer Kontakte, der Arbeit und aufgrund von Sprachbarrieren Isolation in der Haft bedeuten. Insbesondere bei minder schweren Vergehen müssen daher Alternativen zu allen Formen des Freiheitsentzuges stärkere Berücksichtigung finden. Das Grünbuch der Kommission nennt dazu viele Beispiele. Diese müssen jedoch viel stärker in der Praxis angewendet werden.

Fazit: Mindeststandards von Haftbedingungen, verstärkte Nutzung von Alternativen sowie besondere Formen der Unterbringung für schwangere Frauen und Kinder sind notwendige Schritte. Das Europäische Parlament hat Veränderungen bei den Haftbedingungen bereits in der Vergangenheit gefordert. Jetzt müssen endlich konkrete Schritte unternommen werden. Dies fordern wir heute und morgen mit Nachdruck ein.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Maciej Szpunar, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, I am grateful to this Parliament for raising this important issue and for giving me the opportunity to respond on behalf of the Council. Fundamental rights are the basis on which the EU is founded and lie at the heart of everything it does. These rights enshrined in the constitutional traditions of Member States, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights include respect for the life, health and dignity of persons subject to imprisonment.

The Council is strongly committed to taking action to strengthen mutual trust between the judicial authorities of the Member States. This is key to ensuring the effective implementation of the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions in the area of freedom, security and justice. Detention conditions are important. They are particularly relevant in the context of ensuring the correct functioning of legal instruments on mutual recognition, such as the framework decision on the European arrest warrant.

The European Council specifically addressed this issue in the Stockholm Programme. It stated that efforts should be undertaken to strengthen mutual trust and render more efficient the principle of mutual recognition in the area of detention. Efforts to promote the exchange of best practices should be pursued and implementation of the European prison rules approved by the Council of Europe should be supported. Issues such as alternatives to imprisonment, pilot projects on detention and best practices in prison management could also be addressed.

The European Council invited the Commission to reflect further on these issues with the possibilities offered by the Treaty of Lisbon. The Council welcomed the adoption by the Commission on 14 July this year of a Green Paper on strengthening mutual trust in the European judicial area and the application of EU criminal justice legislation in the field of detention. It will follow closely the development of the consultation procedure launched by the Commission with this Green Paper.

However, the Council has not received any proposal to date for either legislative or non-legislative action in the field of detention conditions. Should the Commission decide that action is required and present a proposal, the Council will of course examine it closely, given the importance of the issue.

It goes without saying that the Union may only adopt legislation where the Treaties provide it with the powers to do so. In the area of detention, the limits of the Union’s competence are set out in the relevant provisions of Article 82 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Detention conditions are not covered by this provision. It is the responsibility of Member States to ensure that detention conditions and prison management respect fundamental rights and, in particular, that they meet agreed international standards, in particular those of the Council of Europe.

In its Green Paper, to which I have already referred, the Commission sets out some of the activities related to the issue of detention conditions and for which it provides support through various financial programmes. The Commission also has a regular dialogue with the Council of Europe on these issues. The Council supports these activities and would welcome other forms of support to Member States in the area of detention conditions and facilities. That said, and given the absence of relevant Treaty provisions, the Council has no further power to take action in the areas mentioned by the honourable Members.

Issues such as the setting of common standards on detention conditions, tackling the abuse of pre-trial detention and overcrowding, and the rates of non-nationals detained, all fall outside the scope of action by the Union. The Council is asked about the possibility of providing statistics on the relationship between recourse to the European arrest warrant and pre-trial detentions. Since 2005, the Council has carried out an annual statistical survey among Member States on quantitative data relating to the functioning of the European arrest warrant. However, this is the only statistical data held by the Council.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, detention issues mainly fall under Member States’ responsibility. There are, however, reasons for the European Union to take a closer look.

With the Green Paper on the application of EU criminal justice legislation in the field of detention, the Commission wanted to find out to what extent detention issues influence mutual trust between Member States and learn more about its impact on the application of the principle of mutual recognition and judicial cooperation within the EU.

Detention conditions can affect several mutual recognition instruments, such as the European arrest warrant (EAW), the transfer of prisoners, the mutual recognition of alternative sanctions and probation and the European Supervision Order.

The European Arrest Warrant Framework Decision requires the surrender of persons between Member States both in pre-trial and post-trial situations.

All Member States must comply with the EU Charter when applying EU law and are subject to the European Convention on Human Rights. However, there are doubts about the way in which standards are upheld across the EU. The Green Paper recalls respect for fundamental rights. In fact, judicial authorities are not obliged to surrender a person if this might breach the person’s fundamental rights because of very poor or unacceptable detention conditions.

The Council of Europe plays a key role in monitoring detention conditions. At global level, the 2006 Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Torture created a new system to prevent ill-treatment of detainees.

The Green Paper asked how we could better coordinate the work of these monitoring bodies to avoid duplications.

The Framework Decision on transfer of prisoners of 2008 is another example of the challenges we face when it comes to mutual recognition in the area of detention. The Framework Decision establishes a system for transferring convicted prisoners back to the Member State of nationality or habitual residence. Perceived poor detention conditions, or conditions that risk falling below the minimum standards required by the Council of Europe European prison rules, could be an impediment to the transfer of prisoners.

Following the road map for strengthening procedural safeguards, the Green Paper recognises that time spent in pre-trial detention varies widely from one Member State to another. In addition, non-nationals seem to have a disadvantage: obtaining bail is often more difficult for them as they are seen as a greater risk as they might leave the country.

We asked in the Green Paper whether mutual trust among Member States could be strengthened by creating common minimum standards on two points: first, on the right to review the decision to keep a person in pre-trial detention and, second, on time limits for pre-trial detention.

The consultation launched by the Green Paper was opened until 20 November. We will now analyse the replies to decide whether any specific action at the European level might be considered.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  El Presidente. − Si me permiten ustedes un suspiro, quiero, señor Szpunar, unir mi voz a quienes esta mañana han felicitado a su Gobierno por la excelente Presidencia realizada.

Como esta es mi última intervención como Vicepresidente en esta sesión, quiero felicitar también al señor Kallas y a la Comisión y desearles a todos ustedes, a los colegas presentes y a los ausentes, a los funcionarios que nos ayudan a realizar nuestros Plenos y, en particular, a los que nos acompañan en la Mesa, a los ujieres y a los intérpretes, unas buenas fiestas y, desde luego, que el año próximo sea incluso un poquito mejor que este, que está dando los últimos coletazos.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Carlos Coelho, em nome do Grupo PPE. – Associo-me aos votos que dirigiu à Presidência do Conselho, à Comissão e a todos os Colegas, e gostaria de recordar que temos defendido o reforço da cooperação judiciária em matéria penal para estabelecer um verdadeiro espaço judiciário europeu, promover um auxílio judiciário rápido e eficaz, respeitando as garantias fundamentais de defesa, as garantias processuais e os princípios gerais em matéria de direitos humanos.

A cooperação judiciária em matéria penal deve ser norteada pela confiança entre os Estados-Membros com base no princípio do reconhecimento mútuo, das sentenças e decisões judiciais. Sabemos que as condições de detenção e a gestão das prisões continuam a ser da responsabilidade dos Estados-Membros como, aliás, foi recordado pela Presidência do Conselho, mas não pode haver confiança mútua sem o respeito pelos direitos fundamentais e sem o esforço de aproximação dos direitos dos suspeitos e arguidos e dos direitos processuais no quadro do processo penal.

Ainda existem enormes diferenças entre Estados-Membros ao nível das condições de detenção. Nalguns Estados-Membros essas condições estão abaixo do aceitável, pondo em risco não só a cooperação judiciária em matéria penal ao nível da União Europeia, mas levantando também preocupações em termos de protecção de direitos fundamentais e da eventual violação da Carta dos Direitos Fundamentais.

Existem diferenças significativas em termos de sobrelotação de prisões, inadequação das estruturas penitenciárias, elevado número de detidos em prisão preventiva, bem como a média do período de tempo passado em prisão preventiva. Essas situações abalam a confiança mútua, como aliás o Vice-Presidente Kallas já recordou, e levantam problemas na execução da decisão tomada relativamente ao mandato de detenção europeu. Têm sido várias as recusas de entrega de detidos, com base no mandato de detenção europeu, por parte de diversos Estados-Membros.

Queremos apelar à Comissão Europeia para que estabeleça normas mínimas comuns. Espero que a Comissão possa apresentar uma iniciativa tendo em conta os resultados da consulta pública suscitada pelo Livro Verde que o Comissário Kallas referiu e apelo aos Estados-Membros, através da Presidência do Conselho, para que tomem medidas urgentes de forma a garantir que os direitos fundamentais dos reclusos, em particular os direitos das pessoas vulneráveis sejam respeitados e protegidos, e que apoiem a aplicação de normas mínimas de detenção comuns a toda a União Europeia.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Carmen Romero López, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señor Presidente, señor Comisario, señor Ministro representante del Consejo, hay un tipo de prisioneros en los países fronterizos de la Unión Europea de cuyas condiciones no se habla en el Libro Verde, siendo su situación lamentable: son los demandantes de asilo y refugio.

No son delincuentes. Quizá no todos se ajustan a lo que la Convención de Ginebra exige, porque no son individualmente perseguidos, pero huyen de las guerras y llenan nuestros campos de detención en Grecia, en Italia, en Malta y en otros lugares del Mediterráneo. La razón está en la lentitud en la resolución de su demanda. Pueden estar hasta seis meses privados de libertad porque los procedimientos se estancan. Esta es una privación de libertad que tenemos que denunciar porque nos avergüenza como europeos. Que reaccionemos así ante las catástrofes humanitarias es lo más contrario a nuestros valores. Podremos conocer las cifras y el tiempo de detención, pero ¿de qué nos sirve crear un mecanismo de alerta para las catástrofes humanitarias si no hemos resuelto la situación de los refugiados que tenemos en los campos de detención?

Señorías, sabemos que estas políticas son gubernamentales, pero existe la dotación para una oficina de asilo que todavía no tiene una labor y un encargo comunitario. Es tiempo ya de que la dotemos suficientemente y de que hagamos una política comunitaria sobre este tema que nos avergüenza.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Sarah Ludford, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, we are told that detention conditions are a national responsibility. It is shocking then that over one third of Member States have not ratified the Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture, which establishes a system of inspection visits. We should be ashamed that the Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture is having to take an interest.

Pre-trial detention is meant to be an exceptional measure, but we have Member States where the majority of the prison population is made up of people who have not been convicted of any crime. As Commissioner Kallas has said, non-nationals are given an exceptionally bad deal. My constituent Andrew Symeou was held in Greece for almost two years in pre-trial detention, in horrendous conditions before his case finally came to trial and where a Greek national would almost certainly have been granted bail. He was, be it noted, acquitted.

Member States should implement the European supervision order as an alternative to pre-trial detention, but we also need common rules to cut down abuses. On which note I would draw attention to the fact that the Italian President has said that the situation of prisons in Italy is a democratic emergency. My former MEP colleague Marco Pannella, a very brave man, is on hunger strike in protest. We have to give our support for fundamental rights, including in prison.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jan Philipp Albrecht, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, werte Kommission, werte Präsidentschaft! Ich bin schon ein bisschen überrascht, mit welcher Deutlichkeit der Rat und die Mitgliedstaaten hier die Verantwortlichkeit für die Standards bei den Haftbedingungen zurückweisen. Ich bin der Meinung – und ich glaube, diese Meinung wird hier im Europäischen Parlament sehr breit geteilt –, dass wir sehr wohl auf der Ebene der Europäischen Union tätig werden müssen, um gemeinsame Standards für diese Haftbedingungen zu schaffen, und ich finde es richtig, dass die Europäische Kommission da ein Grünbuch vorgelegt hat, das auch und gerade zu der Untersuchungshaft Stellung bezieht und Perspektiven aufweist, wie wir im Rahmen unserer vertraglichen Möglichkeiten solche Standards schaffen können.

Ich bin der Meinung, gegenseitige Anerkennung ist nicht etwas, was man einfach mal eben so machen kann, indem man sagt: Okay, wir akzeptieren, es gibt unterschiedliche Verfahren, und die sind halt einfach so, und wir schicken die Gefangenen hin und her und die Beweise hin und her, und das war es. Nein, das kann es nicht sein! Die gegenseitige Anerkennung ist etwas, das zwei Seiten hat: Das heißt einerseits natürlich, dass wir die Verfahren der anderen Mitgliedstaaten anerkennen, dass wir versuchen zusammenzuarbeiten, aber das heißt andererseits auch das, was wir übrigens schon seit vielen, vielen Jahren als Europäisches Parlament sehr deutlich einfordern: gemeinsame Standards schaffen. Und ich bitte Sie, gerade bei den Mindeststandards im Strafverfahren und bei den Haftbedingungen Ihren Widerstand gegenüber diesen Maßnahmen endlich aufzugeben und anzuerkennen, dass dafür sicherlich auch eine Kompetenz vorhanden ist.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  William (The Earl of) Dartmouth, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Mr President, when the European arrest warrant was proposed and steered through the European Parliament by a British Liberal Democrat MEP, it was already obvious then that the clear consequence of the European arrest warrant would be that British citizens and residents, and for that matter citizens and residents of other Member States, would be carted off to countries where conditions in prison are of a lesser standard. That was totally obvious.

But in this place there is an obsessive determination for there to be Europe, Europe and yet more Europe, and Parliament and the Commission then ignored the inconvenient truth that detention conditions are simply not the same in the 27 Member States. Those of us who represent constituents ensnared in the net of the European arrest warrant have become well aware of the grim prison conditions which can await them on remand and so on.

For that reason I commend to you Amendment No 1 and related amendments. Whilst the European arrest warrant continues, nobody should be transferred to a jurisdiction where prison conditions fall below the standard in the home country.

Baroness Ludford very eloquently made the point, and I assume she is right, that in some Member States a majority of people in detention are on remand and, assuming that this is true, so long as this applies, the European arrest warrant should be suspended, and suspended with immediate effect.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Csanád Szegedi (NI). - Mindenekelőtt engedje meg, hogy a Jobbik delegációja nevében megköszönjem eddigi munkáját, és a továbbiakban is sok szerencsét kívánjak Önnek. Nos, a mi álláspontunk az, hogy a börtönhelyzettel kapcsolatban nem enyhítésre, hanem pontosan szigorításra lenne szükség. És itt bedobnék egy új fogalmat a köztudatba, itt az Európai Parlamentben: az önfenntartó, az önellátó börtönök rendszerének a fogalmát. Hiszen a börtönöknek kriminológiailag nemcsak az a jelentősége, hogy a bűnözőt egy bizonyos időre elzárják a társadalomtól, hanem elrettentő hatása is kell, hogy legyen. Hát teljesen érthetetlen az, hogy pl. Magyarországon egy fogvatartottra az állam költ egy hónapban 800-900 eurót.

Viszont egy óvodásra, egy egyetemistára, egy gimnazistára a töredékét költi az állam. Sőt, ennek az összegnek a töredéke egy minimálbéresnek a fizetése. Olyan mértékű aránytalanság, ami egyszerűen érthetetlen. A fogvatartottaknak a mi álláspontunk szerint bizonyos esetekben, az esetek többségében, elő kell teremteniük a fogva tartás költségeit. Ez lenne az, amiről érdemes lenne vitázni a jövőben itt, az Európai Parlamentben!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Roberta Angelilli (PPE). - Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, il rispetto dei diritti umani e delle libertà fondamentali è una delle priorità dell'Unione e per questo ritengo che si debbano garantire ai detenuti condizioni dignitose, nel pieno rispetto appunto dei diritti umani, ma come è noto, tutto ciò è incompatibile nella maggior parte delle carceri europee.

Il problema del sovraffollamento è comune a quasi tutti gli Stati membri e ci sono addirittura degli Stati membri i cui istituti carcerari ospitano detenuti per oltre il 100% della loro capienza. Ovviamente sarebbero utili, anche a livello europeo, norme comuni, minime, in materia di condizioni detentive, e una vera propria strategia per fornire soluzioni al sovraffollamento delle carceri.

Un problema specifico – che merita un opportuno approfondimento – è quello dei minori in carcere, con le loro madri: un situazione per la quale bisogna individuare soluzioni adeguate, alternative al carcere. Tutto ciò, ovviamente, nel pieno rispetto della vittime e delle parti lese e senza dimenticare il principio della certezza della pena, che deve rimanere una priorità nonché un principio cardine dei nostri sistemi giuridici e della stessa democrazia.

L'oratrice accetta di rispondere a una domanda "cartellino blu" (articolo 149, paragrafo 8, del regolamento).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Nicole Sinclaire (NI), Blue-card question. Mr President, I would like to ask my colleague, who mentions the deplorable conditions in some EU detention centres, whether she would join my colleague, the Earl of Dartmouth, in calling for the suspension of the European arrest warrant?

Today we have applauded with a standing ovation the Sakharov Prize. How can we talk about human rights in one vein, and be very sanctimonious and supportive of it, when in the European Union itself we have detention standards that are below common decency for human beings? Will she join me, and everyone else, in calling for the suspension of the European arrest warrant?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Roberta Angelilli (PPE), risposta cartone blu. Non capisco la domanda, non ho parlato del mandato d'arresto; sono d'accordo con l'onorevole Sinclaire che le condizioni nella maggior delle carceri europee non sono dignitose, ma probabilmente l'onorevole Sinclaire voleva fare una dichiarazione, non tanto una domanda a me.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  El Presidente. − No es una cuestión de orden, señora Sinclaire, y no le voy a dar a usted la palabra.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Emine Bozkurt (S&D). - Mr President, for better European cooperation in the area of justice it is crucial that the Member States can trust in each other’s justice systems. A shortcoming in detention conditions is one reason for this lack of trust. Even though detention conditions in some Member States might be worse than others, none of the Member States have a clear conscience when it comes to detention conditions. Problems such as overcrowded prisons and ill-treatment of the detainees are to be observed throughout the EU.

What is even more alarming are the cases of death and suicide in detention. In the resolution we asked the Member States to prevent suicides in prison and to carry out in-depth and impartial investigations, systematically in cases where a prisoner dies in prison. Six months after the death of İhsan Gürz in police detention in the Netherlands, there are still several versions of what happened leading up to his death. This makes it difficult for İhsan’s family to have closure. Unfortunately there are similar cases throughout Europe. Therefore we are urging independent investigations to be conducted when someone dies in detention.

The detention conditions are perhaps the responsibility of Member States but their shortcomings damage the trust which is needed to achieve judicial cooperation in criminal matters at European level. The lack of trust is preventing Member States from extraditing criminals. What does the Commission intend to do to ensure transparency in every Member State as to what happens in detention and how is the EU intending to ensure the fundamental rights of the detainees?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Cecilia Wikström (ALDE). - Herr talman! Det förslag som vi idag diskuterar handlar om hur vi ska förstärka förtroendet mellan våra medlemsländer på det rättsliga området. En del i detta handlar om villkoren för dem som är frihetsberövade, villkor som tyvärr på sina håll är alldeles förfärande. Europadomstolen har många gånger påtalat bristfälliga fängelseförhållanden och orimligt långa förvarstider.

Nu måste vi försäkra oss om att de intagnas grundläggande mänskliga rättigheter respekteras och att förhållandena i fängelserna håller någorlunda rimlig standard. Vi måste också komma till rätta med problemet med missbruk av frihetsberövande före rättegång.

EU:s medlemsstater är nu i full färd med att bygga upp ett omfattande rättsligt samarbete. Det bygger på principen om ömsesidigt erkännande av domare och rättsliga avgöranden. Men för att det skall fungera krävs tillit mellan medlemsländerna. Att säkerställa de grundläggande rättigheterna för frihetsberövade måste därför vara av hög prioritet.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE). - O que se passa com a ordem de detenção europeia e com as condições de detenção nas prisões faz certamente lembrar a muitos cidadãos europeus outras situações que se passam também na União Europeia. Basicamente é esta mania que nós temos de fazer as coisas pela metade: unificar onde é fácil e depois não harmonizar onde é difícil.

Eu sou a favor das vantagens e vejo interesse em haver uma ordem de detenção europeia. Acho que isso pode ser importante para as vítimas, pode ser importante para que se faça justiça. Mas, por outro lado, não podemos, e já o dissemos muitas vezes nesta casa, e a Comissão sabe-o muito bem, não podemos continuar durante muito mais tempo sem, do lado das condições de detenção, ou das condições procedimentais em geral com que se tratam os suspeitos e acusados de um crime, não se pode avançar com a ordem de detenção europeia sem, por outro lado, colmatar estas lacunas que existem ao nível da União Europeia.

A Comissão Europeia agora conhece-as bem. Fez um Livro Verde sobre a diferença, a enorme variedade que há de condições de detenção na União Europeia. Basicamente o que queremos saber é, agora, o que é que a Comissão vai fazer para harmonizar essas condições, porque sem isso será sempre muito difícil a nós, junto dos nossos cidadãos, explicar para que é que serve uma ordem de detenção europeia e por que é que alguns suspeitos se encontram em condições que às vezes são penosas, degradantes e desumanas em alguns dos países da União que têm condições verdadeiramente lamentáveis de detenção.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE). - Încrederea publică, ca şi cooperarea internaţională în materie penală depind de calitatea sistemelor juridice naţionale. Europenii trebuie să aibă încredere că vor avea aceleaşi standarde de protecţie indiferent de ţara în care se află în Uniunea Europeană.

Condiţiile de detenţie au un impact important asupra bunei funcţionări a recunoaşterii reciproce a hotărârilor judecătoreşti. Supraaglomerarea puşcăriilor şi tratamentul necorespunzător al deţinuţilor pot duce la slăbirea încrederii, care este esenţială pentru cooperarea judiciară în Uniunea Europeană.

De aceea, cred că avem nevoie de identificarea de bune practici, avem nevoie de proiecte pilot în materie de detenţie şi bune practici în administrarea închisorilor. Cu siguranţă, cel mai important este să stabilim care este cea mai potrivită direcţie de urmat în privinţa acestei reforme şi în ce măsură un instrument obligatoriu la nivel european este fezabil.

De aceea, ne adresăm astăzi Comisiei, aşa cum am făcut-o şi cu alte ocazii, semnalând necesitatea luării de măsuri urgente în acest domeniu.

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: GILES CHICHESTER
Vice-President

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Γεώργιος Παπανικολάου (PPE). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θέλω και εγώ να συγχαρώ και να ευχαριστήσω την πολωνική Προεδρία για τη σημαντική συνεισφορά της σε κρίσιμα θέματα τους τελευταίους έξι μήνες.

Πριν λίγες μέρες ένα πιστόλι βρέθηκε στο χέρι ενός Έλληνα φυλακισμένου και στη συνέχεια ξέσπασε μια μεγάλη εξέγερση στη μεγαλύτερη ελληνική φυλακή. Με αφορμή και αυτό το περιστατικό –και γι' αυτό το αναφέρω– βρέθηκε και πάλι στο επίκεντρο του δημοσίου διαλόγου το θέμα των συνθηκών κράτησης στα σωφρονιστικά καταστήματα. Και οι ελληνικές φυλακές όπως και οι περισσότερες ευρωπαϊκές είναι υπερπλήρεις. Χαρακτηριστικά αναφέρω ότι στην Ελλάδα το ποσοστό πληρότητας ανέρχεται περίπου στο 142% και βεβαίως είναι σίγουρα, όπως αναφέρθηκε από τους συναδέλφους, σύμφωνα με την Ευρωπαϊκή Συνθήκη, χρέος των κρατών μελών να διατηρούν ανθρώπινες συνθήκες και να τηρούν τις ελάχιστες προδιαγραφές όπως αυτές τίθενται από την Ευρωπαϊκή Σύμβαση για τα Δικαιώματα του Ανθρώπου, από τη σύμβαση για την πρόληψη των βασανιστηρίων και βεβαίως και τη σύσταση για τους ευρωπαϊκούς σωφρονιστικούς κανόνες.

Για να συμβούν όμως όλα αυτά και να μπορέσουμε να διατηρήσουμε ένα υψηλό επίπεδο σεβασμού όλων των κρατουμένων, θα πρέπει να υπάρχουν και κατάλληλες υποδομές και σε μια περίοδο όπου τα χρήματα για τη δημιουργία νέων σωφρονιστικών ιδρυμάτων είναι περιορισμένα –και όλοι το αντιλαμβανόμαστε αυτό εν μέσω της κρίσης– με την ευκαιρία της παρουσίας και της Επιτροπής θα ήθελα να ρωτήσω και εγώ και να παρακαλέσω για μια απάντηση: Κατά πόσο είναι εφικτή η αποδέσμευση πόρων από τα διαφορετικά ταμεία γι' αυτούς τους σκοπούς, για τη δημιουργία νέων σωφρονιστικών κέντρων στα κράτη μέλη;

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Tatjana Ždanoka (Verts/ALE). - Mr President, I recall the situation in my own country, Latvia. I know the situation very well, due to my experience as a human rights defender who has for many years worked on concrete applications coming from places of detention.

The Latvian Human Rights Committee (NGO), of which I am a member, has produced a number of reports on conditions of detention in Latvia, which it has submitted to the United Nations’ Committee Against Torture and the appropriate OSCE and Council of Europe bodies.

Thanks to our insistence, the place of detention for illegal immigrants situated at the very centre of Riga, in which people were held in terrible conditions, has been closed. But there still are huge problems relating to conditions of detention in Latvia, and the delegation of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture which visited Latvia in 2009 called on the Latvian authorities to improve conditions, especially for prisoners serving life sentences.

Therefore we need EU legislation incorporating European prison rules, particularly as regards accommodation, access to health care and legal advice.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). - Mr President, it is for each Member State to decide on domestic legislation by itself. However, this matter is not being discussed in a vacuum; it is being discussed in the context of the appalling European arrest warrant.

There is no requirement for the country seeking a warrant to provide any evidence that the person has committed the offence, still less to meet any standard of proof. Indeed, the court processing the warrant cannot refuse to extradite on the ground of insufficient evidence. It can refuse only on the grounds of one of the five legal bars to extradition. Some people extradited on the warrant have to spend months in custody awaiting trial.

Whilst I too would like to see the arrest warrant suspended or abolished, that is not going to happen. In the meanwhile, countries must be persuaded to adhere to minimum standards.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jaroslav Paška (EFD). - Nedávny prieskum Európskej komisie o uplatňovaní trestnoprávnych predpisov Únie v oblasti pozbavovania osobnej slobody potvrdil viaceré problémy v tejto oblasti v členských krajinách.

Skutočnosť, že za podmienky zadržiavania osôb, dĺžku vyšetrovacej väzby a justičnú správu odsúdil členské štáty aj Európsky súd pre ľudské práva, nedávne zistenia Komisie iba potvrdzuje. Keďže o otázky týkajúce sa vyšetrovacej väzby či podmienok zadržiavania spadajú čiastočne aj do právomoci Únie, má Komisia istý neveľký priestor na angažovanosť v tejto oblasti, najmä v súvislosti s častejším zadržiavaním cudzích štátnych príslušníkov či aplikáciou európskeho zatýkacieho rozkazu alebo aj európskeho príkazu na dohľad. Procedurálne požiadavky na zadržiavanie podozrivých vo vyšetrovacej väzbe, maximálnu dĺžku ich zadržiavania, ale aj podmienky ubytovania či zdravotnú starostlivosť by teda na základe štandardov Európskej únie mohli byť harmonizované tak, aby boli eliminované rozdiely v podmienkach zadržiavania medzi jednotlivými členskými štátmi Únie.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, I would thank honourable Members very much for their remarks. The Commission, as I said, is beginning to evaluate the comments which have been made in response to the Green Paper. The Commission will also carefully analyse your remarks and take them into account when it proposes legislation or considers proposing legislation.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Maciej Szpunar, Urzędujący Przewodniczący Rady. − Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Posłanki i Panowie Posłowie! Chciałem już teraz podziękować Państwu za poruszenie tego tematu w dzisiejszej debacie. Rzeczywiście, z jednej strony, Unia nie ma kompetencji w zakresie harmonizacji przepisów dotyczących przetrzymywania osadzonych i tymczasowo aresztowanych w więzieniach. Natomiast, z drugiej strony, te kwestie, które Państwo podnieśli, są niezwykle istotne i z pewnością Rada, jeżeli tylko wpłynie wniosek Komisji w jakiejkolwiek kwestii dotyczącej tego zagadnienia, na pewno dokładnie te kwestie przeanalizuje. Ja muszę powiedzieć także osobiście, że te przykłady nieprawidłowości w funkcjonowaniu rozmaitych przepisów są to kwestie bardzo istotne, także z punku widzenia rządu polskiego.

Chciałem przy okazji podziękować Komisji za przygotowanie zielonej księgi, która jest przykładem tego, że instytucje unijne, mimo braku wystarczających uprawnień, starają się ten problem w jakiś sposób rozwiązać. Dziękuję za uwagę.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. − I have received one motion for a resolution(1) tabled in accordance with Rule 115(5) of the Rules of Procedure.

The debate is closed.

The vote will take place tomorrow (Thursday, 15 December 2011).

 
  

(1)See Minutes.

Zadnja posodobitev: 7. marec 2012Pravno obvestilo