Verbatim report of proceedings

Wednesday, 31 March 2004 - Strasbourg

8. International organ trafficking

  President. The next item is the Council and Commission statements on international organ trafficking.

I give the floor to Minister Roche, on behalf of the Council.

  Roche, Council. Sorry, Mr President, I was a little distracted – Mrs Frassoni was flirting with me there. It just goes to show that on occasions the European Parliament can be a much more pleasant place to be than Dáil Éireann; I have not had that experience before!

We now turn from humour to something quite horrific – the modern equivalent of Burke and Hare, namely the trafficking in human organs.

As medical science has progressed in the area of organ transplantation there is a growing demand for organs, with a resulting problem in trafficking in human organs. This is an appalling and disgusting practice and is a serious violation of human dignity and physical integrity. It also has serious implications for the combating of organised crime, because as in everything else, organised crime has managed to get into this particular area. We know of the involvement of criminal gangs in this quite extraordinary activity.

I am aware that this has been an issue of concern and debate in Parliament. In fact, I commend Parliament because it has been very much to the fore in condemnation of this practice. It is also an issue of concern to the Council and it is important that in addressing this we do so properly and are clear on the scope of the problem. This is a complex and multi-dimensional issue and requires careful consideration.

A proposal for a Council Framework Decision on the prevention and control of trafficking in human organs and tissues was presented by the Greek presidency in February 2003, in the framework of the Justice and Home Affairs Council. The aim of the proposal is to contribute to combating trafficking in human organs and tissues as a form of organised crime.

The draft Framework Decision contains proposals to require Member States to ensure that the removal of an organ from a donor using force, threats or fraud, or the removal of an organ from a donor who has consented because of payment, become criminal offences. Also included as offences are the recruitment, transportation or harbouring of a person where use is made of force or threats or where payment is made for the removal of an organ or tissue. It also proposes that participation by medical or nursing staff in the transplantation of an organ in the knowledge that it has been acquired by any of these means will be a criminal offence. The proposition in the framework document will be quite wide.

The proposal has been discussed on a number of occasions by relevant Council bodies. Several Member States questioned the need for an instrument at this time. It has also transpired that Member States have no precise information on the scale of the problem, within the European Union or involving it as a destination. In this regard, the findings of the Falcone project, which includes a 13 Member State study of the matter, will be of interest. The Irish presidency will continue to monitor Member States’ views on the usefulness of a measure such as this at the level of the EU with a view to establishing whether progress might be made in respect of such a measure.

Turning to the related issue of the legal use of organs for transplantation, very specific issues arise because of the shortage of organs. There is a need to ensure high standards of quality and safety. The Commission has indicated that it will conduct a thorough scientific evaluation regarding the situation of organ transplantation. It will present the conclusions of this evaluation as soon as possible and we look forward to receipt of that report.

I can summarise by saying that at this stage we are very much at the beginning of a process which may well take a long time to reach any form of finality. But the fact that we are debating it is an indication that there is an awareness and a concern about the issue.

  Vitorino, Commission. Mr President, the Commission welcomes the debate here today on a problem that gives rise to serious concern, that of trafficking in human organs.

The victims of this type of crime are particularly vulnerable human beings, in particular children. Illicit trafficking in organs can lead to significant health risks for both the donor and the recipient. Trafficking in human organs is an obscene violation of the right to physical integrity and, in the most tragic circumstances, of the right to life, as recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

The Commission has recently been increasingly informed about alleged situations of illicit trafficking in human organs in Mozambique and Albania, not least through written questions recently addressed by Mr Ribeiro e Castro and Mrs Karamanou. It has also been alerted by increasing rumours in the media. These alleged situations of trafficking are particularly worrying and the Commission is following them very closely, through the Commission's delegation in the regions concerned and in close dialogue with Member States locally, in particular in the context of the political dialogue with these countries.

In relation to the situation in Mozambique, the Commission has contacted the Office of the Attorney General, who has assured it that investigations are under way. The Commission also reinforced its concern at a meeting in Brussels with the Ambassador of Mozambique.

The reality shows that trafficking in human organs tends to move from the south to the north and from the poor to the rich, not excluding, however, movements within a particular region. Regional and international cooperation are essential to tackle this phenomenon successfully. The criminals in this type of activity benefit from the weaknesses of local police, often undermined by corruption, which therefore does not prevent the transboundary illicit trade in organs; as well as from inefficient judicial systems.

It is worth mentioning that the Commission has been emphasising how important it is for Albania to take the necessary steps to conclude an agreement with Europol. Albania, as I mentioned earlier, is one of the countries alleged to be the scene of activities of trafficking in children's organs, whose destination is, allegedly, the European Union. In order to prevent the entry into the European Union of human organs resulting from illicit trafficking, the measures taken to improve cooperation between Member States' police services and customs administrations and to strengthen external border controls are of great value.

However, specific measures directed at this type of crime seem currently to be inadequate. It was in this spirit that Greece, during its presidency of the Union, presented an initiative for the adoption by the Council of a framework decision concerning the prevention and control of trafficking in human organs and tissues. The aim of this initiative – as already mentioned by the presidency – was to define which types of conduct should be punishable in all Member States and to establish minimum rules relating to the penalties for such offences.

The Commission was largely supportive of this initiative, while recognising, however, that more in-depth legal and factual examination and knowledge of the situation in the Member States was necessary. In this context, and in view of the weaknesses detected when trying to move forward the Greek initiative, it is important to mention that Europol's competences were extended in January 2002 to include illicit trade in human organs and tissues. Europol is currently studying this phenomenon and collecting relevant information and data concerning the legal and illegal aspects of trafficking in human organs. Europol can indeed have a great added value in this common fight.

As far as the collection of information is concerned, I should also refer to the fact that the Council of Europe has recently looked at the issue of trafficking in human organs and that it produced a report in December 2003 that provides a useful insight into the current situation in Europe regarding this phenomenon. Under the Commission's AGIS financial programme for police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, it is also possible to support projects in this particularly delicate area of criminality, which has still not been fully examined.

In addition it is important to stress that the Commission recognises that the severe shortage of organ donors remains a major obstacle to preventing the full development of transplant services and imposes a severe limit on the number of patients who are able to benefit from this form of therapy. This shortage of organs can encourage illicit trade.

The Commission is fully aware of the consequences resulting from the shortage of organs and, for that reason, it has indicated as a priority action in its work plan for 2004 for the implementation of the programme on Community action in the field of public health 2003-2008, the development of a strategy for the European Union in order to raise awareness and increase availability of organs used for transplantation. Indeed, the Commission has already conducted a survey of the current practices and legal requirements related to organ transplantation in the Member States and the acceding countries and is in the process of analysing the results. This analysis will be communicated to the European Parliament, as well as to the Member States, as soon as it is concluded.

In conclusion, a number of initiatives have been launched to combat illicit trafficking in human organs and the Commission will continue to support such initiatives as are appropriate in order to combat this unacceptable trade.

  Coelho (PPE-DE). – (PT) Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, trafficking in human beings is one of the most sickening manifestations of the growing phenomenon of international crime, and the trafficking of children is more sickening still. The trafficking of children in order to remove organs is the most gruesome part of this immoral and repulsive business.

From the point of view of ethics, I have no interest in discussing the reasons behind this criminal activity, whether it be for reasons of witchcraft, organ trafficking or whatever. There are human beings who need our support and our protection, people who lose organs or even their lives as a result of this practice.

Information has recently come to light on the continued practice of this type of criminal activity in Mozambique, which is, of course, cause for great concern. In addition to the human dimension of these events, we Portuguese have linguistic and cultural ties with that country. I therefore welcome both this debate and the one that took place yesterday in the Portuguese Parliament, on the initiative of Mrs Morais, a Member of the Portuguese Parliament. I was also pleased to see that the Prime Minister of Portugal, Dr Durão Barroso, raised the matter with the Mozambican President during his ongoing State visit to the country.

I should like to make three points on the matter. Firstly, we must combat this crime wherever it occurs. I do not believe we can take any other stance. Trafficking in human beings and, especially, children for removing organs, is a despicable trade that must be combated and is one of the worst manifestations of the growing phenomenon of international crime. All specialists agree that most organised networks are international; like other types of crime, this goes beyond national borders. If we are to tackle crime effectively, to identify criminals and to protect victims, international cooperation must be strengthened. This brings us to my second point. We must not feel embarrassed at our level of development. I have read that the reluctance on the part of some countries to recognise that this type of criminality goes on in their territory is down to the narrow-minded notion that it only happens in developing countries. The truth of the matter is that this type of appalling activity occurs everywhere, given that it is a crime to buy, just as it is to sell, human organs and that there are fewer and fewer borders in international crime.

On 23 October last year, in this House, we debated a proposal for a framework decision on promoting the fight against trafficking in human organs and tissues, to which both the President-in-Office of the Council and Mr Vitorino referred. At the time, I expressed our concern at the emergence of this phenomenon, and mentioned the alarming number of abductions in Brazil and Guatemala, as well as similarly worrying news from accession countries such as Hungary and the Czech Republic. I called for an integrated Community approach and for the definition both of offences in the trafficking of human organs and tissues and their respective penalties to be harmonised.

Thirdly and lastly, we must not be afraid to help. We have an obligation to help, both on behalf of the humanitarian causes to which we subscribe, and in the interests – which must be common interests – of putting a stop to this unholy trade and of dismantling the existing international networks. We therefore say clearly to the Commission and to the Council that we have a duty to help. We note the statement on the matter made by Commissioner Nielson at the time, to the effect that our help had not been requested, thus far, by the Mozambican authorities. We would therefore like to say to the governments, to the judiciary and to the police forces of the countries concerned that there is nothing to fear from international help to combat these crimes. In so doing we are not diluting, but strengthening the instruments and resources to combat this common evil.

  Lage (PSE). – (PT) Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, we are pleased to see that the question that we raised on the trafficking of human beings and children in Mozambique has sparked a broader debate on the illegal trafficking of human organs and tissues, not only in the EU, but on an altogether wider scale. There is, indeed, nothing more abominable than tampering with the human form – which should be a finished article in itself and whose integrity and dignity must be protected – and turning it into an object in which you can look for an organ to transplant into another person. This practice is so gruesome that the EU should be duly alarmed and we – that is, Parliament, the Commission and the Council – must do all we can to provide ourselves with the means to stop such trafficking from proliferating any further, from becoming any bigger and from making a few unscrupulous people and their criminal networks any richer.

I should like to speak about Mozambique. In Mozambique, mystery surrounds Nampula Province. Child trafficking has taken place there; fifty children are known to have disappeared, probably abducted and sacrificed, be this for the purposes of removing organs for witchcraft, magic rituals or satanic rituals, of sex slavery, or of removing organs to sell them on some international network. Mystery surrounds the existence or otherwise in Mozambique of an international child-trafficking network for obtaining organs.

The Mozambican church says that the suspicions are well-founded and that there is a fear that the network is indeed functioning. The Mozambican authorities have made contradictory statements on the matter, which range from statements, designed to allay people’s fears, that there is no proof that such trafficking takes place, to suggestions that there are indeed signs that the network exists. I should therefore like to ask you, Commissioner, Mr President, to call on the Mozambican authorities to clarify the matter. The matter needs to be clarified, and the people of Nampula, and the children of Nampula, and Mozambique as a whole, need to be helped, so that they can live in peace.

IN THE CHAIR: MRS LALUMIÈRE
Vice-President

  Calò (ELDR). – (IT) Madam President, the chilling reports arriving from Mozambique, particularly the Nampula area, where the inexplicable disappearance of children hides an obscene trade in human organs, might seem unbelievable because they are so repugnant to any human being. Unfortunately, however, even the Holocaust could seem unbelievable, and yet it happened without disturbing the sleep of those who must have had the means to know or intervene and yet did not do so.

After such a terrible experience, we must make a commitment today to stop this obscene trade with all the means that the international community has at its disposal. We must raise our voices as individuals and Members of this Parliament against those who connive or do not oppose it with sufficient determination and in favour of those who risk or even lose their lives to denounce and try to stop this modern massacre of the innocents. It is the members of civil and political society and not only religious society who should take charge of this problem.

Questions have already been asked, but they are not enough. All the prominent people in this world who share the ability to influence the destiny of so many have the ethical responsibility to take practical, urgent steps to guarantee the safety of children and the people who protect them.

  Ribeiro e Castro (UEN). – (PT) Madam President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, the trafficking of human organs is the new piracy of modern times, which is a particularly sordid and brutal form of piracy. It can lead to persecution, abduction and even murder. At its root is greed, and it knows no scruples. Combating this phenomenon must be firm, far-reaching and unflinching. Not all cases are the same. There are cases in which the authorities turn a blind eye to the trade in organs, whereby a person can sell, say, their own kidney for a fistful of dollars. Even in such cases, freedom is illusory and the reality is still a sordid form of piracy that exploits the helplessness of the poor, wretched donors.

Quite apart from the violence of this unholy trade, which violates human dignity and integrity, it also supports a gruesome market and stimulates highly dangerous criminal activity and the development of international mafia networks. As this gruesome market is allowed to operate, when insufficient numbers of organs appear for sale, the criminals then, in cold blood, bridge the gap in supply by abducting, or even killing people.

The principle of free organ donation for transplants is one of the fundamental principles of civilisation, and a fundamental requirement of people’s dignity and of our security and freedom. Where organ donation is not free, we are all, in theory, potential victims of this all-out assault on the human body. The EU must apply the principle of free donation across its territory, must make strenuous efforts to enshrine it in law and must ensure that it is complied with throughout the world. Where organ donation is not free, the threat of crime may rear its head or the criminals may already be operating. The EU must also take the lead in combating this modern scourge at international level, since it is one of the most gruesome manifestations of international crime in modern times. The framework decision proposed by the Greek Presidency must be approved without delay, in order to ensure that all Member States can eradicate this trafficking, as suppliers, as receivers or as a field of operation. We must react promptly and effectively whenever and wherever in the world such crime comes to light.

Recent attention has focused on certain regions of Mozambique, in East Africa. The facts of the case have yet to be clarified, yet we must, for this very reason, continue to take action until there is complete transparency and until people’s minds can be put at rest. We must respond in kind to the courage and tenacity of religious bodies and human rights activists in bringing attention to dozens of unexplained disappearances of children and young people, some of whom have since been found dead, their bodies mutilated. We must not allow ourselves to demur on action because of any misplaced concerns, or because of a lack of total transparency. It is possible that in Nampula there has been not one but many tragic events, possibly involving the trafficking of human beings and children, or the trafficking of organs for witchcraft or other non-medical uses and the trafficking of human organs to support international networks. We do not know, yet we cannot tire in our efforts merely because we are not in possession of the full facts. We must work ceaselessly to combat what is, in all its forms, a despicable crime.

Those authorities faced with such terrible crimes sometimes appear to be embarrassed; they begin to contradict themselves or appear hesitant when cases come to light. Nobody likes to see the name of their country associated internationally with this situation. We must understand this and must always treat any country involved with respect. This is precisely, however, why we must put across, with patience and perseverance, the notion that it is not the embarrassment that is the problem; the problem is the trafficking and the crime. Everyone, throughout the world, must collaborate in investigating and combating this perfidious piracy, which has no country of origin. The threat is international and affects every one of us.

Whether it be Israel or South Africa, on the Asian, European or American continents, whether it has its origins in Mozambique or in the poorer regions of Brazil, in Moldova or Albania, in the fragmented Balkans, in the vastness of Africa, in depressed Central Asia or in the poorest outskirts of Asian or Latin American cities, we know where this trafficking is going to attack. Like a vulture, this all-out assault on the human body seeks out regions of human poverty, and places where the State’s authority is weak. It preys on areas where people and communities are at their weakest; it senses the weakest and poorest members of society and attacks them. These are the areas where we must act, in cooperation with the competent authorities, in order to raise awareness, to offer encouragement and practical help, to process and exchange information, to prise out the whole truth, to put people’s minds at ease and to dismantle the networks, wherever they may appear. The Commission and the Council must work hard and I should like to see the Council act with the same level of diligence that the Commission has already shown here, whether cases appear in Mozambique or in any other part of the world.

  Evans, Robert J.E. (PSE). – Madam President, I have been listening to this debate, especially to Minister Roche, and it has been something of a surreal experience. I have been increasingly puzzled as it has gone on. Mr Roche, you concluded your remarks by saying that this process was at its beginning. This rather begs the question: what is the coordination between the presidencies of the European Union? You referred to the framework document produced, in February 2003, by the Greek Government, because it was a Greek initiative. I was the rapporteur for this Parliament on the framework document, and the Greek Government was very anxious to get it through during its presidency in the first half of last year.

The process is far from its beginning; in fact, this time last year we were hoping it was near its end. Some governments – perhaps the Italians, the Irish, and certainly some of the Scandinavian ones – were putting a spanner in the works and stalling on this. My report was adopted by 420 votes to nil in the European Parliament. Are you aware of that report on trafficking in human organs? Have you read it? Mr Coelho referred to it earlier on. Certainly, my report would answer some of the problems that you raised. I could tell you a great deal about this situation – over 1000 European Union citizens a year, allegedly, going to poorer countries in the world to seek human organs, whether it be India, Pakistan, Albania or some of the other countries that have been referred to.

There is much information already in the market; we are not starting from scratch. What chance is there of real progress? Indeed, what point is there in this debate? What is the research that has gone into your statement, if you have not taken account of all that has gone through this Parliament already, if you have not read in depth the work that has been done and the reports that have gone through this Parliament, in consultation with the Commission and other governments? The danger is that all the good work and good intentions that colleagues have spoken about here will come to nothing if presidency after presidency does not build on what has happened already.

  Roche, Council. Madam President, we have had an interesting debate. There is not any point in trying to turn a debate in which there has been no disagreement into an adversarial matter. I referred to the point that was made in an excellent contribution in the documents that there is still a lot of information needed in this area. I do not disagree that excellent work commenced during the Greek presidency. My personal view is that it is a pity that more concrete steps have not been taken to date.

It is an astonishing debate. Commissioner Vitorino rightly cited a concern about this particular trade that would exist in any civilised community. He outlined in considerable detail the efforts that have been made. I was very impressed by Mr Coelho, who demonstrated the need for the Union to act in a coherent way to address a policy. Mr Lage and Mr Calò made similar points. I agree with the point made by Mr Ribeiro e Castro, when he suggested that we should not allow ourselves to demur on action because of any misplaced concerns. At the end of the day, the reality is that the Union has not progressed in this matter. It was introduced and put before the Union by the Greek presidency. There are reasons why it did not progress any further. I am not quite certain that any Member States put 'spanners in the works'. If they did, I am sure they may have done so because they felt that there were good and cogent reasons for doing so.

Nonetheless, with the exception of that final fractious point, this was a good debate. It has helped to highlight the need for concerted Union action. It illustrates how, if the Union were to act in a concerted manner, it could bring to an end what is clearly an evil trade.

  Vitorino, Commission. (PT) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I should first like to reiterate that the Commission will continue to monitor closely the cases that have been mentioned, relating to Mozambique and Albania, and to remain vigilant, in close cooperation with the embassies of Member States in both of those countries.

Secondly, I must point out that, from a legal point of view, Greece’s initiative during its presidency raises certain questions that require political debate. Our studies have shown that, in fact, the illegal trafficking of organs has not been criminalised in all Member States. The information at our disposal shows significant discrepancies in the appropriate classification of offences.

Thirdly, there is a certain complexity as regards the enforcement of criminal measures, given that, as we know, the beneficiaries of the transplants of illicitly obtained organs are, more often than not, European, although those transplants are carried out in third countries, which raises the question of criminal punishment based on the principle of the national territory in which the criminal act was committed. Consequently, these questions were raised during the presentation and the first debate of the Greek initiative for a framework decision applicable to the illegal trafficking of organs, and a study was carried out within the scope of the Falcone Programme, in order to identify what exactly were the fundamental questions that required legislative treatment at European level.

As you are aware, and as I have just mentioned, this was not a Commission initiative, and in some ways, the crux of this debate is the lack of continuity of Member States’ initiatives, which enjoy a certain momentum when the country concerned holds the presidency, but which have no guarantee of continuity thereafter. For our part, we have put together this study and today we are better equipped to identify, more comprehensively than the Greek initiative was able to, the key areas that must be the subject of any legislative intervention in this area.

  President. – Thank you, Commissioner.

The debate is closed.⁽¹⁾

(The sitting was suspended at 5.49 p.m. and resumed at 6 p.m.)

(1) Common Position of the Council and the Commission – Amendment to the agenda: see Minutes.