President. – The next item is the debate on the report (A5-0285/2001) by Mrs Valenciano Martínez-Orozco, on behalf of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities, on female genital mutilation [2001/ 2035(INI)].
Valenciano Martínez-Orozco (PSE), rapporteur. – (ES) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioners, 130 million women worldwide have been the victims of genital mutilation. Every year two million girls are subjected to this horrific practice. Today the European Parliament must act as a spokesperson with regard to this situation which affects millions of women.
We have tried to work on the basis of consensus with all political groups in producing this report. We have considered the opinions of experts of both sexes, the governments involved and non-governmental organisations. Our aim is no less than to convince the communities which practice female genital mutilation of the need to eradicate it.
The custom of partially or totally removing the female sexual organs has it roots in a profoundly unjust notion of the role of women in a society which views them as inferior citizens, controlled by the people who make decisions, who are, in most cases, men.
For us, the defence of these traditions has a very clear limit. The limit is the defence of human rights. It is not possible, on behalf of any tradition, to accept that women should be seriously and irreversibly mutilated for the rest of their lives. Information, education and increased awareness are, therefore, essential factors in relation to the disastrous consequences for women’s lives, even though most of them are not even aware of what these may be. The truth of the matter is that they are going to suffer an irreversible amputation, but they do not even realise the real consequences of such an act.
We have produced a report which asks the Commission, the Council and the Member States to create an integral strategy, which does not only involve penalties, but which deals with the areas affected by this issue: public health, judicial, legal, political, etc. We view female genital mutilation as a serious attack on human rights, and on the basis of this view we request something which is a logical consequence of it: that the right to asylum be granted to women who wish to flee from this situation, that we take them in so that they may escape from something which will be irreversible for the rest of their lives.
According to the Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, persecution on the basis of sex must be cause for the granting of asylum rights. No other persecution on the basis of sex is clearer than this one. People can abandon their political ideas. People can abandon their religious beliefs. But it is impossible to abandon the sex you were born with. Therefore, since we are dealing with a brutal violation of fundamental rights, it is also fundamental that we offer these individuals the opportunity of refugee status. I believe that the directive currently being presented by the Commission, on the rules relating to the conditions to be fulfilled by residents of third countries requesting refugee status, moves in this direction, and it will be very important. For us, this is a question of principle and we cannot abandon this demand.
The report also calls for the promotion of external aid to those African countries which have adopted legislative and administrative measures that prohibit and penalise this practice. We also urge the European Commission to work closely with non-governmental organisations that make an enormous effort on the ground, very often with scant resources. We also ask for recourse to the human rights clause in order to make combating genital mutilation a priority action in terms of relations with third countries, in particular with the countries which have close relations with the European Union within the framework of the Cotonou agreement.
Ladies and gentlemen, many women, thousands of African women, are waiting to hear what we have to say in this regard. It is not solely a problem for African women. It is a problem for all of us, women and men, because it is a problem of fundamental human rights. These people are waiting and we must offer them an urgent response.
Dell'Alba (TDI), draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Development and Cooperation. – (FR) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I have a small correction to make: I am speaking on behalf of the Committee on Development and Cooperation and not the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development.
I am particularly glad I was appointed draftsman of the opinion on this crucial question, which affects so many women in developing countries aside from those in the Fifteen. I am glad because the Commission adopted my opinion unanimously. People often look askance at unanimous decisions, suspecting a degree of inattention. However, I think the Commission and the members of the Committee on Development and Cooperation voted advisedly in this case and were convinced by the various paragraphs that make up the opinion.
I would like to draw Members’ attention to two other points, aside from the unanimous vote, given that this unanimity is rather inconsistent with the debate that is still on-going in some political groups.
The first is the right of asylum. We supported Mrs Valenciano's suggestion to the Council, the Commission and the Member States in her report that the clauses on right of asylum should indeed include one recognising the immediate right of asylum in the Fifteen of women and girls at risk of being subjected to female genital mutilation. That is most important. Here the vote was unanimous. I therefore hope that a large section of Parliament will also vote for this paragraph tomorrow.
My second point, Mr President, concerns money. We asked for EUR 10 million to finance all the measures aimed at helping these countries escape from this trap. I hope that Parliament will vote for it tomorrow and that the Committee on Budgets will follow suit, something the Committee on Development and Cooperation has not done so far.
Turco (TDI), draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs. – (IT) Mr President, I would like to start by thanking Mrs Valenciano Martínez-Orozco for her work, which followed on a resolution supported by 316 Members. This may be part of the reason why the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs adopted the report unanimously. The most important element, which Mr Dell’Alba and Mrs Valenciano Martínez-Orozco referred to, recognising the right of asylum of women under threat from genital mutilation, is considered by our committee too to be one of the major, crucial points in this battle.
I would like to mention once again the two figures which have already been cited: there are 130 million victims in the world; 2 million children undergo genital mutilation every year. In addition to the various education and information, humanitarian, social and health initiatives and initiatives supporting non-governmental organisations, in particular, our committee feels that it must single out one in particular: the appeal to the Member States to ensure that female genital mutilation is prosecuted through the rigorous application of existing provisions laying down the right to health and personal integrity as a fundamental right, and the rigorous application of the provisions of the penal code which ban any deliberate action violating this right. We demand, that is, for there to be no possible recourse to the concept of exception or cultural diversity to justify relativism or the watering down of this fundamental right or of the related legal protection which is incumbent upon the State.
We therefore call upon the Commission, the Council and the Member States to endeavour to make our resolutions reality with all speed.
President. – Thank you very much, Mr Turco.
We shall now suspend the sitting until 9.00 p.m. when we shall continue the debate. I hope that you will gather your strength sufficiently to be back here at 9 on the dot.
Thank you very much, Commissioner. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.
(The sitting was suspended at 8.00 p.m. and resumed at 9.00 p.m.)
IN THE CHAIR: MR PROVAN Vice-President
Avilés Perea (PPE-DE). – (ES) Mr President, Commissioner, we are dealing with an own-initiative report by the Committee on Women’s Rights which examines a serious problem, the genital mutilation of a great number of women and girls. This ancient practice violates the fundamental rights of the women and girls who fall victim to it and therefore constitutes an attack on the fundamental human rights recognised in the Treaties and in the Declarations of the United Nations.
The report proposes the extension of protection and prevention in all the countries where it is practised and also in the European Union, where we know it is still practised within immigrant communities, or by means of a visit to the country of origin where the genital mutilation is carried out, since this practice is well-established within the customs of many people in Africa and some in Asia.
Only prevention by means of information campaigns and clear explanation of the irreversible consequences of this practice will help to eradicate it. These campaigns must be carried out by NGOs, but with the firm commitment of governments and the decisive support of leaders, religious leaders in particular; education campaigns in schools, directed at boys and girls, such as those being carried out with considerable success in Burkina Faso, as Mrs Campaore has told us today.
The prosecution of genital mutilation as a crime, both in the country where it is practised and when it is carried out in another country, that is, the extraterritoriality of the crime, will effectively help to eradicate it. In serious cases, some countries envisage the right to asylum, as contemplated in the directive under the heading of the right to asylum for reasons of sexual discrimination. We believe that to include here, in a general way, the right to asylum for alleged victims, that is to say, for millions of girls and teenagers, is inappropriate. We cannot open doors we are then unable to close, and we in the European Union cannot receive all the alleged victims who want to leave their country for this reason. The reality is that we cannot do it even if we would like to.
It is on this issue that the Group of the European Peoples’ Party differs with this report, which may mean, in the event that it is approved, that we will abstain in the final vote. This is regrettable, because the report has many positive elements, particularly the need for the commitment to include the fight against genital mutilations in all cooperation programmes and to provide them with adequate financial aid, and the demand that the governments of the states where they are practiced commit themselves effectively to their eradication.
We in the Group of the European Peoples’ Party unreservedly condemn genital mutilation and we defend the full physical rights of all women, their full sexual rights and their right to decide on their future even though that decision may be at odds with their people’s traditional past. We defend the rights of women as human beings, fully safeguarding their lives where ever they may be, and we are committed to continuing the work to eradicate this horrendous practice regardless of what may happen in relation to this report.
Gröner (PSE). – (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and a few gentlemen, I would particularly like to thank the rapporteur Ms Valenciano for her outstanding report, which sends out a very clear message: genital mutilation is a human rights violation! Various reasons are given to justify this human rights violation in the name of traditional culture or religion. In reality, this is an instrument which is intended to perpetuate women's oppression. Women who do not want to practise genital mutilation are excluded from society; as outcasts, they face unimaginable poverty and disgrace.
This grave assault on women, which irreparably damages their bodies, minds and health, has gone largely unnoticed. It was only the Fourth UN World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 which initiated a global debate and solidarity process and called for the international community to take joint action. We also encounter genitally mutilated women in Europe, as well as many different perpetrators and accomplices. Although FGM is punishable in many countries, the media and self-help organisations report that there are an estimated 5000 cases in Germany alone, and around four times as many cases involving girls being sent back to their countries of origin to be mutilated.
There are unscrupulous doctors and other individuals who earn between DM 1000 and 3000 per case. The Socialist Group demands that at-risk women be granted asylum, perpetrators be punished, and that we proceed in accordance with the principle of extraterritoriality.
Let me make this very clear: for my group, this is an important point, and we completely fail to understand why some sections of the PPE-DE – or indeed, the group as a whole – intend to abstain on this asylum issue, have no intention of voting for the report, and are thus abandoning women to their fate. The fight against ignorance and oppression must be fought at international level, and the Socialist International has therefore launched a worldwide campaign against violence against women. Fifteen states have already banned FGM, including nine African countries. More support must be given. My government in Germany has already allocated DM 3.8 million for education work and projects. The EU is helping with DAPHNE. Yet this is just a drop in the ocean.
We must work together to fight for reproductive health and combat AIDS and genital mutilation. Then we will have a chance of reaching women and giving them the help they need.
Van der Laan (ELDR). – (NL) Mr President, I would first of all like to express my appreciation to Mrs Valenciano, who, in her excellent report, has tackled this sensitive issue in a clear and compelling manner. The Liberal Group will therefore support the report.
The genital mutilation of women and girls is a terrible violation of fundamental human rights. More than 130 million women have already fallen victim to this, and another two million are added every year. Europe should therefore pull out all the stops to combat this phenomenon, wherever it appears.
I too understand that some Members are considering voting against this report on account of the sections on asylum and extraterritoriality. However, I would like to reassure everyone: if we consider the present asylum practice, we see that in most of the fifteen Member States, genital mutilation is already a basis for asylum. I believe that to be appropriate. From that point of view, the report merely accommodates existing practices.
It is true that at present, the principle of extraterritoriality only applies to child-sex tourism, but it should also cover mutilated women or women who are at risk. For this is the only way to prevent EU citizens, for example from Somalian extraction, from taking their daughters to Somalia during the summer holidays to have them mutilated. If these people realise that upon their return to Europe, they are at risk of being prosecuted, we then give the parents a weapon with which to protect their daughters against the pressure of society.
Finally, I would like to direct a comment to those who do not want to deal with genital mutilation due to it constituting an expression of a certain culture or religion. In all countries where genital mutilation is practised, local groups are running campaigns to abolish it. It is therefore not a case of us imposing our Western standards. No, it is precisely these women whom we need to support by showing our solidarity tomorrow during the vote. The Koran too leaves no room for mutilation. Despite this, it is mainly in Islamic countries that it is practised. We must therefore call on the Imams to help eradicate this phenomenon. This is crucial, since we cannot afford negative stereotyping of Islamic beliefs in the current sensitive climate. Genital mutilation is not a religious phenomenon, it is a violation of a fundamental human right.
Sörensen (Verts/ALE). – (NL) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of my entire group, I would first of all like to congratulate Mrs Valenciano on this sterling report and the recommendations it contains, to which I subscribe 200%.
By far the majority of women who have undergone genital mutilation – reference is made to 130 million – live in Africa. In at least 28 African countries located between the Equator and the Tropic of Cancer, female circumcision is practised systematically. Outside Africa, it is practised in southeast Asia, including Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, on the Arab peninsula in Yemen, in Oman and in the United Arab Emirates. Even in a country like Egypt, few tourists who visit the sphinx realise that 90% of the women are circumcised. However, some of these women have fled to Europe in order to save their daughters from this treatment, or to have operations in order to ease the pains. But if these women were to return to their native country, they would be ostracized. On the other hand, a summer holiday in the country of origin can turn into a nightmare for migrant girls, when family members deem it necessary to uphold their tradition.
I have devoted years of my life to helping women who had fallen victim to the trafficking in human beings. From my own experience, I know that circumcised women are often considered unclean and are therefore sold as prostitutes. In this way, they become victims twice over.
African girls, who work in brothels day in day out, who, genitally mutilated, are sold and re-sold, rely on their clients to pay off their debts. I therefore urge the Member States and the Commission once again to recognise genital mutilation, or the threat thereof, as a gender-specific reason for granting asylum. We should not hide behind a possible review of the Convention of Vienna.
I would ask those in this House who are still not convinced to watch the videos that are being made of these ‘festive occasions’, as they are sometimes referred to in those countries. It is of fundamental importance that the silence around this taboo subject is broken. That is why socio-cultural programmes in situ, as well as awareness campaigns involving the relevant migrants in Europe must be encouraged. We cannot continue to accept this flagrant violation of human rights and of the dignity of the women and girls involved, under the guise of national customs and traditions.
I would like to take the opportunity of saying that, in view of the excellent quality of the next report by Mrs Smet, our group will not be taking the floor: that report equals perfection.
By way of conclusion, I would like to congratulate Mrs Valenciano once again on the work she has done.
Bonino (TDI). – (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the importance and originality of this courageous report, in comparison with the countless reports and documents adopted by many international bodies, is that, unambiguously and without making any hypocritical concessions, it views the question of female genital mutilation as an issue of freedom, dignity, law and human rights for hundreds, thousands of women in the world. I hope that Mrs Valenciano Martínez-Orozco has the support of all of us here. She does not make any hypocritical concessions to supposed respect for traditions or cultural relevatism, which we hear talked about so often, nor does she make any concessions even to the cheap efforts to salve our consciences which so often characterise the positions we adopt. Indeed, while emphasising in the report that female genital mutilation is a crime, which must therefore be prosecuted, she proposes a raft of pro-active measures which it will also be our responsibility and the responsibility of the other institutions – Commission and Council – to implement.
I would, however, like to make one point to Mrs AvilésPerea, for whom I have great admiration. You presented to us a situation which does not exist, saying that it would be inappropriate to establish the threat of female genital mutilation as grounds for the right of asylum because that would be to open our doors to millions of women seeking protection. You see, Mrs AvilésPerea, if there were millions of women and children who were able to revolt, to come out into the open and flee family, social and male control, then the problem would already be resolved. Therefore, the situation must be different: sadly, there are not hundreds of thousands or millions of children and women who currently have the chance to revolt, to come out into the open, to go and knock on the door of an embassy to seek asylum. We are in a situation in which there are very few indeed who have the courage to do this, and to think about closing the door even on these few – and I beg you once again to consider this – is not responsible. We would not be doing our duty. We would be back in a situation of preaching empty sermons, of cheap efforts to assuage our consciences, of failing to assume responsibilities that our ours, that are the responsibilities of this free, civil, democratic Europe which upholds the rights of all. This, I believe, is what we are trying to say in our report tomorrow: we want to say that we are for a world in which human beings are all equal. I am convinced that, if such a brutal form of mutilation as this had been forced upon our male fellow Members, the issue would have been resolved long ago. The problem is that this is not yet the way in which the world works and it is our responsibility, the responsibility of this institution, to set an example.
Lastly – and I am addressing the Members who are also part of the Committee on Development and Cooperation – today, I have a meeting with the Secretary General of the ACP Secretariat, Ambassador Goulongana, who has declared himself willing to include this matter in the forthcoming meeting of the ACP-EU Joint Assembly in Brussels at the end of October. I know that the agendas are fixed and that it may be too late to make changes, but there must also be an element of political interest in all this that will ensure that some flexibility preserved in this rigid climate! There must be a difference which we can use to our advantage! I hope that the ACP-EU Joint Assembly will approve our position as well as this House.
Ladies, I would remind all of you who are hesitating that there are very few women – very few indeed – who have the chance, the courage and indeed the good fortune to be able to revolt.
(Applause)
Schierhuber (PPE-DE). – (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, I am very pleased that this report has been presented. Every one of us who has read ‘Desert Flower’ by Waris Dirie will always be shocked and appalled by this practice. I am thinking today of the 130 million women and girls who have been subjected to female genital mutilation, and each year some two million more are affected. I am also thinking of the many young girls who die horrifically as a result. Let me say from the outset that I am strongly in favour of the EU and its Member States adopting a joint position to abolish these practices which are harmful to women's sexual and reproductive health. Within the framework of a joint immigration and asylum policy, the Commission and the Council will have to take account of these aspects of female genital mutilation. The same applies to refugee policy. In this context, let me point out – and this is clear, in my view – that asylum will then be granted primarily when political protection is required for reasons of state. Genital mutilation is a grey area, and it is usually carried out by private individuals. This makes it even more difficult to combat the practice. A great deal of persuasion, public information and educational work is required from all of us and a change of attitude is needed in society as a whole.
For me, genital mutilation is a human rights violation which I cannot accept under any circumstances or from anyone. A public debate on this issue is needed to raise awareness both in the EU and in the developing countries and spare future generations of women this dreadful mutilation.
Above all, we must ensure – and this has been mentioned by previous speakers – that this practice is also outlawed in the Member States, for I know that there is a major grey area here. I ask everyone to work together with a genuine will to stop this practice.
Theorin (PSE).(SV) Mr President, two weeks ago a Swedish TV documentary attracted a great deal of attention when it showed how religious leaders, Christian and Muslim, in Sweden recommend Sunna circumcision, how Swedish citizens have their daughters circumcised in Kenya and Somalia during the summer holidays, how circumcisers are flown into Sweden to conduct circumcisions and how a Swedish doctor failed to report to the social services the fact that he had saved a girl from bleeding to death after her parents had had her circumcised.
For those of us combating female genital mutilation, it is precisely the support of the holy men for this torture which is most disheartening. Religious leaders have a particular responsibility. Their influence is enormous and their voices crucial to putting an end to circumcision.
I welcome the excellent report from Mrs Valenciano Martínez-Orozco with its demands for a holistic strategy for eliminating female genital mutilation within the EU through initiatives such as extensive publicity campaigns and laws against female genital mutilation in all Member States. Of particular importance is the requirement for the introduction of specific national laws which also apply to circumcisions beyond national borders and which make it possible to punish citizens when they return home after travelling abroad to have their daughters circumcised. In 1999, Sweden became the first and only country in the EU to have this type of extra-territorial legislation, which hopefully will now make it possible to bring to book those Swedes who put their daughters through ‘summer holiday circumcision’ abroad.
Another key point in the report, which many have already mentioned, is the requirement that escape from this torture should be taken at least as seriously as escape from political persecution. The US and Canada have, on several occasions, already stopped the deportation of girls and young women who have sought asylum for fear of being circumcised. Europe should not lag behind in this respect.
It is high time that we took strong measures to save the two million girls around the world who, each year, are at risk of genital mutilation. We place our hope and our confidence in the Commissioner’s returning with practical proposals on which our ministers can then adopt a position.
Malmström (ELDR).(SV) Mr President, female genital mutilation is a terrible act of extreme violation which causes serious physical and mental damage and a lifetime of suffering. The mortality rate among those who are subjected to this practice is high. There is a need for really vigorous efforts to combat this abomination, this terrible act, wherever it occurs.
This is also a European problem, and it is important to ensure that knowledge, research and documentation on female genital mutilation is improved in Europe. We need cooperation in order to find common strategies to ensure that this operation, which is not prescribed by any religion, can be abolished. Several Members have highlighted the need to cooperate with religious leaders.
Those women already circumcised need care and rehabilitation, and we must therefore put our faith in more knowledgeable midwives, social workers and teachers. Mrs Theorin referred to what we in Sweden call summer holiday circumcision, which is when girls are taken abroad to be circumcised. In my country this is forbidden, and so it is only natural for the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party to support the proposals to introduce this ban everywhere. This would provide a clear signal that female genital mutilation is illegal at home and illegal abroad and that such mutilation constitutes a violation of human rights.
Maes (Verts/ALE). – (NL) Mr President, the use of genital mutilation is an extreme form of female repression which, in some countries, is as old as time itself. It was the women of those countries themselves, of Egypt and of Somalia, who told us about their extreme suffering. They denounced it and had to overcome a world of prejudice in the process, but they did it for the benefit of their sisters, who were often younger, or their daughters. They are asking us to show the same courage.
A number of women have sent the European Parliament a petition in the same vein. We are supported by women across the world. Respect for the human being must be judged the same for men and women alike: women’s rights are human rights. Allowing this mutilation to take place under medically acceptable conditions does not make the mutilation itself acceptable. Neither is the fact that this cruel custom is one of the oldest traditions in some communities – I am deliberately avoiding the term ‘religions’, for they have little to do with it – reason for us to tolerate it. The sexual mutilation of girls must be considered a punishable offence in every country and every society, as demanded in various international agreements.
A positive development is that, in any event, an increasing number of countries have prohibited genital mutilation in women. But in many cases, they are merely paying lip service to this ban, and we should therefore amend the Cotonou Agreement so that we can implement it in the same way as for human rights violations.
For the rest, I share the view of fellow MEPs.
Kauppi (PPE-DE).– (FI) Mr President, Valenciano Martínez-Orozco’s excellent report clearly states that female genital mutilation is a crime, about which Europe must not remain silent. I too appeal to all Members of Parliament to show their unanimous support for the report in tomorrow’s vote.
Female genital mutilation, of whatever degree, is an act of violence against women, which violates their fundamental rights, their individual integrity, and their physical and mental health. The rights of women, young girls or baby girls are being trampled on in the name of various cultural traditions or even the assumed dictates of religion. Ever present in the background, however, is women’s social status and position, which is inferior to that of men in these cultures. There is therefore also a need to promote equality.
Regrettably, female genital mutilation has been found to have taken place and to be taking place in immigrant communities in the EU also, although this practice is prohibited in the criminal legislation of Member States and it is clearly in breach of the principles of the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights. No religious or cultural practice can be allowed to take precedence over the basic principles of human rights or someone’s physical and mental integrity, on which European democracy is based. We must also vehemently resist the demand that genital mutilation should be carried out by doctors in clinical conditions. This must not be compared to male circumcision, where this practice has been adopted in some Member States.
I support the report’s positive measures that aim to end these crimes in EU Member States. Information, awareness-raising and prevention must be the priorities. But we also have to take action where the crime of mutilation has already occurred, with penal measures and sanctions. Personally, I am also prepared to adopt the principle of extraterritoriality in this connection. I urge authorities in the Member States, and, as a Finnish member, obviously those in my native country of Finland in particular, to implement all necessary measures as soon as possible to bring to an end these inhuman violations of human rights, which are something out of the Middle Ages.
(Applause)
Karamanou (PSE). – (EL) Mr President, I too should like to congratulate Mrs Valenciano Martínez-Orozco on her excellent and comprehensive report. It is a fact that, for millions of women throughout the world, genital mutilation is an unavoidable, terrifying ordeal which they have to go through if they are to survive. The absence of any alternative and a complete lack of information are one of the most serious problems for women who suffer this degrading mutilation, which is one of the worse forms of suppression, terrorism and exploitation of women, a criminal practice which violates their personal freedom, their physical integrity, their freedom of conscience and their right to health by causing serious physical injury and mental side effects, not to mention the impact on their sexual identity and ability to bear children.
One hundred and thirty million mutilated women in the world is a terrifying number. Unfortunately, this horrible practice has also been introduced into the European Union. According to a statement by the British Medical Association, three thousand women are mutilated in the United Kingdom every year and naturally the fundamentalists, even within the European Union, have no hesitation in applying mediaeval practices in order to subjugate women and control their sexuality.
Every human being is entitled to protection under the law when fundamental freedoms and rights are at risk, as is the case with mutilation. However, European Union law seriously lacks any teeth, which is why we are calling for legislation to be applied which will make this horrible practice a crime. And, of course, the European Union can exert a great deal of influence through the trade agreements under the Cotonou agreement which it concludes with countries in which such practices are rife and by introducing extraterritorial legislation. Finally, I should like to call on the PPE-DE, for us to unite in demonstrating our solidarity with the thousands of women who have undergone this horrible procedure and for you to change your decision by tomorrow.
Junker (PSE). – (DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, female genital mutilation inflicts endless pain and suffering on women and girls in at least 25 African countries, most of them ACP countries. Women are the victims of violent and life-threatening cultural traditions which must be ended, for a tradition which violates individual rights – in this case women's rights – in a truly horrific way must not be allowed to continue in the twenty-first century. Thankfully, the ACP countries in Africa are increasingly recognising this fact. It is gratifying that Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Uganda, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo, Burkina Faso, the Central African Republic and the Côte d’Ivoire have legislated against female genital mutilation.
Efforts are also being made – with the support of aid organisations and numerous NGOs – to stop this dreadful practice through public information campaigns and awareness-raising. In this context, a resolution adopted by the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly at its last meeting in Libreville (Gabon), Ms Bonino, should be emphasised in positive terms. Supported by the representatives of the ACP countries, the resolution called unanimously on the authorities to take the necessary steps to end this practice, adopting all appropriate legislative, administrative and judicial measures and launching cultural awareness and information campaigns.
The meeting thus branded the practice as a human rights violation. This is a great improvement on the earlier taboos surrounding this issue, and we must pay tribute to it. However, the battle to protect the physical and mental integrity of women in the ACP countries and elsewhere is still not won. Our solidarity and support are still needed.
Diamantopoulou,Commission. – (EL) Mr President, I should like to congratulate Mrs Valenciano Martínez-Orozco and start by stressing the political importance and impact of this report, which will of course be even greater if it is supported by a large majority. This report will give momentum both to the Commission's work and, more importantly, to the women's organisations in Europe and Africa trying to combat this barbaric practice. This is a problem which, as several Members of Parliament have said, does not only exist in Africa. According to data from the DAPHNE programme, there are about 700,000 women from these countries in Europe today. It is difficult to quote an actual figure but we suspect that it is much higher than we can possibly imagine.
This is a difficult, thorny problem. Obviously cultural traditions which go back centuries in certain areas of our planet form part of it. But a cultural tradition cannot be used as an alibi for trampling all over human rights. Obviously, as stated at the World Conference in Beijing, genital mutilation is a violation of human rights and, at a secondary level, it is discrimination, because it only applies to women and girls.
What can the European Union do? First, proposals and legislation. There is some disagreement as to whether the present Treaty provides a legal basis for European legislation. The Charter of Fundamental Rights adopted in Nice cannot as yet form a legal basis. However, legislation is not always the only solution and there is a great deal which can be done in this area.
The question of asylum. Several speakers raised this argument and the report is clear here. May I say that, a few days ago, the Commission submitted a proposal for a directive to the Council on the adoption of minimum requirements for recognising the status of third country nationals or stateless persons or refugees in accordance with the Geneva Convention. After a great deal of discussion and effort, the text includes a clear reference stating that applications for protection for women will be recognised, especially where there is a probability of sexual violence or some other gender-related conduct. I think, therefore, that it is worth examining this Commission proposal, which could provide a basis for an agreement which would be very important to all the groups in the European Parliament.
However, over and above the legislative framework, current European Union programmes can be used as a basis for supporting action and campaigns to recognise the problem, mobilise society and increase public awareness and, of course, to inform and educate hospital staff. Medical and health workers in at least five countries in the European Union often come into contact with such cases and they must be specially trained and specially qualified to help these people.
The potential for educating and supporting immigrants. Clearly, women need financial resources if they are to be financially independent and organise their own rebellion, and support for female immigrants in Europe is therefore paramount. We can support them and integrate them into the labour market and fund information and public awareness campaigns through existing programmes which we have already debated in Parliament and we are waiting for proposals from non-governmental organisations on these issues.
As far as our relations with the third world are concerned, we have already made a serious effort to ensure that development aid is predicated on respect for human rights by governments, especially in this area, and to take account of governments' efforts to apply policies to educate, train, raise awareness and support women and families. We already intend, in collaboration with the development sector and the Commissioner responsible, to increase financial support to countries intent on wiping out this practice. I think we can draw satisfactory conclusions from the implementation of this programme in Ethiopia as to what we can achieve if the European Union works with governments through development aid.
Finally, we appreciate that non-governmental organisations can act as a catalyst both in the European Union and in Africa, which is why they are the Commission's main contacts, our main partners in this endeavour.