• EN - English
Motion for a resolution - B7-0540/2013Motion for a resolution

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Bolivia, notably the cases of Elód Tóásó and Mario Tadic

19.11.2013 - (2013/2953(RSP))

with request for inclusion in the agenda for a debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law
pursuant to Rule 122 of the Rules of Procedure

Willy Meyer, Inês Cristina Zuber, João Ferreira, Patrick Le Hyaric, Marie-Christine Vergiat, Sabine Lösing, Jürgen Klute on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group

Procedure : 2013/2953(RSP)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected :  
Texts tabled :
Texts adopted :


European Parliament resolution on Bolivia, notably the cases of Elód Tóásó and Mario Tadic


The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Principle of Non-Intervention foreseen by the UN Charter of 1945,


- having regard to Chapter 1, Article 1, part 2 of the UN Charter that states: “To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace”,


- having regard to the Conclusions of the Special Multiparty Committee of Inquiry of the events which took place in Santa Cruz de la Sierra of November 2009 adopted by the House of Representatives of the Plurinational State of Bolivia,


- having regard to the Statement of the UN Working Group on the use of mercenaries of 29 April 2009 and to the opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concerning the case of Elöd Toáso,


- having regard to the Declaration of the Committee on Human Rights, Minority, Civic and Religious Affairs and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the Hungarian National Assembly of 23 May 2012; having regard to the Declaration adopted by the Bolivian House of Representatives of 12th June 2012 reacting to the Hungarian Declaration,


- having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which the State of Bolivia has been part since 1982,


- having regard to Rule 122 of its Rules of Procedure,


A. Whereas on 28 March 2009 a bomb exploded in the house of the Bolivian Vice minister on Autonomies, Saúl Avalos, causing many material damages; whereas on 15 April 2009 an attack to the house of Cardinal Julio Terrazas took also place; whereas according to the Special Multiparty Committee of Inquiry it seems to be direct link between this second attack and the mercenary armed group of Eduardo Rozsa Flores,


B. Whereas on 16th April 2009 the National Bolivian Police arrested Elöd Toáso, with Hungarian and Romanian nationality, and Mario Tadic, with Bolivian and Croatian in an operation on “Las Americas Hotel”, where 3 other people died: Eduardo Rozsa Flores, a national of Bolivia and Hungary; Magyarosi Arpad, a Hungarian national, and Michael Dwyer, an Irish national; whereas according to the Bolivian police in their rooms several weapons and dynamite were founded;


C. Whereas the UN Working Group on the use of mercenaries is gravely concerned by allegations that mercenaries were involved in a plot against Bolivian authorities; whereas this UN Working Group also denounces that the use of mercenaries and their recruitment, financing and training with the objective of overthrowing the governments of United Nations member states are offences of grave concern to all States,


D. Whereas Eduardo Rozsa Flores was considered as the leader of the paramilitary group operating in Bolivia; whereas he founded a paramilitary group of 380 members that fought in the Balcans War in 1991; whereas he was accused of killing multiple Serbian civilians and the Swedish journalist Christian Wurtenberg and the British Paul Jenks; whereas he has participated in the wars of Congo, Ruanda and Sierra Leone;


E. Whereas members of this group belonged to the Szekler Legion, a Fascist paramilitary group created in 2002 with several thousand of members of mercenaries; whereas the Eduardo Rozsa group was recruited to support an action of “defence and liberation of Santa Cruz de la Sierra”;


F. Whereas Mario Tadic Astorga with Bolivian and Croatian nationality is a military expert on explosives and anti-tanks weapons; whereas he fought besides Rosza in the Balcans War; whereas Elod Toaso, with Hungarian and Croatian nationality was in charge of the communication systems of the group;


G. Whereas Mario Tadic and Eloy Toaso are accused of taking part in a plot against Bolivian authorities, including an attempt to assassinate President Evo Morales and several action of destabilization of the democratically elected government;


H. Whereas on 16 April 2009, Prosecutor Marcelo Ricardo Soza Alvarez issued a formal indictment against Elöd Toásó and Mario Tadic; whereas on 17 April 2009 the Seventh Court of Criminal Instruction in the city of La Paz issued a resolution arranging preventing detention; whereas therefore the preventive detention was prepared by a competent judicial authority,


I. Whereas the Bolivian Government is of the view that there have been no undue delays in the proceedings, whereas on 17th December 2010 public accusation was formulated, whereas the trial has been postponed because of main legal impediments, including 96 appeals by the accused, whereas the oral proceedings are currently being heard according to Bolivian law;


J. Whereas Elod Toaso has tabled a petition to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention where he claims to be a victim of arbitrary detention and declared that he has been tortured and held incommunicado and has not been provided access to interpreters, whereas according to Bolivian authorities he has been accompanied since his detention by the Honorary Consul of Hungary in Bolivia and had access to interpreters,


K. whereas Mario Tadic held in the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) a request; whereas to date the IACHR has not requested any precautionary measure against the Bolivian State;


1. Deeply deplores this new case of interference of an EU institution in the internal affairs of third countries with a political aim to undermine the ALBA countries; declares that this is not a case of urgent violation of Human Rights;

2. Stresses that dialogue with third countries should not under any circumstances result in restrictions being imposed on the right of peoples to self-determination; deplores the fact that the EU and its Member States too often give priority to diplomatic, political or economic considerations over human rights, an approach which, moreover, gives rise to a policy characterised by double standards which is at odds with a universal vision of human rights; stresses the importance for the very credibility of the EU of avoiding any exploitation of these issues;


3. Recalls the principle of self-determination by which all people have the right to determine freely their political status and to pursue freely their economic, social and cultural development as well as the right of the people of a certain nation to decide how they want to be governed without the influence of any other entity.


4. Condemns in this regard the use of mercenaries and recalls all relevant resolutions affirming that the use of mercenaries and their recruitment, financing and training with the objective of overthrowing the governments of United Nations member states are offences of grave concern to all States.


5. Recalls that the investigation into the death of EU citizens abroad is to be done by the authorities of the State were the death occurred, believes the independence of the judicial branch is guaranteed by the Plurinational State of Bolivia and considers this case to be a Bolivian internal affair.


6. Reminds nevertheless the invitation made by the Bolivian House of Representatives of 12 June 2012 to HHRR organisations and EU, UN and Council of Europe bodies to visit the country in order to get proper information on this case,


7. Reminds that the European Commission attended a meeting for the diplomatic corps organised in La Paz by the Bolivian Government where the Vice President Garcia Linera, the Presidency Minister Quintana and the Interior Minister Rada gave a detailed account of the terrorist incident in Santa Cruz on 16 April 2009, including the personal histories of each of the suspects and the weapons found.


8. Takes note of the fact that Elod Toaso was held incommunicado during two days after his detention, reminds that in some EU Member States this incommunicado period can legally take 5 days and even be prolonged to 13 days in cases of terrorism,


9. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, the Andean Parliament and the EUROLAT Assembly.