Debašu stenogramma

Ceturtdiena, 2015. gada 15. janvāris - Strasbūra

9.1. Krievija, it īpaši Alekseja Navaļnija lieta

  President. - The next item is the debate on six motions for resolutions on Russia, in particular the case of Alexey Navalny.

  Tamás Meszerics, author. - Madam President, I would like to welcome the High Commissioner to this debate. Every time we discuss a case of human rights problems or a lack of the rule of law in Russia, we hope and wish that it will be the last such case we need to discuss in this Chamber. In this case too I hope it will be the last one, but I am very much afraid that our hopes will be betrayed yet again.

The case itself is very clear. Alexei Navalny was accused and tried on trumped-up charges for no other reason than because he dared to expose corruption at high levels of the Russian state apparatus; for no other reason than the fact that he dared to run for office in opposition to Putin’s rule and Putin’s Government. His brother, Oleg Navalny, was sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison for no other reason than that of being the brother of Alexei Navalny. So, as I say, the case is clear, and I am sure that my colleagues could list a number of similar cases, as we do in fact in the resolution.

Threatening and intimidating political opposition through persecution and harassment of family members is one of the oldest tricks in the handbook of autocrats. It can work from time to time, but I am absolutely sure it is not going to work for all time, because it is a practice that violates our most basic sense of justice.

An autocratic government running on an extreme nationalistic ticket will most likely present all these charges as being basically anti-Russian. This is far from the truth. I know that there are many of us in this Chamber who love and admire the achievements of the Russian people and who wish for Russia the sort of future in which such cases will never be mentioned in this Chamber again because there will be no need to be looking for human rights violations in Russia. This is, unfortunately, not the real future, and as long as Alexei Navalny and his colleagues are imprisoned and sentenced for depicting their vision of Russia’s future, we have this duty, and we must be firm and thorough.

  Charles Tannock, author. - Madam President, following Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and its current military aggression in Eastern Ukraine, attention has largely focused recently on Russia’s foreign policy rather than its domestic affairs. The case of Alexei Navalny reminds us, however, of the internal problems that Russia also faces and of the increasingly authoritarian regime over which President Putin presides.

As one of the faces of the opposition movement at the forefront of many of the mass demonstrations recently seen in Moscow, Navalny’s placement under house arrest since February of last year on the basis of trumped-up and spurious charges is seen as a way to silence one of Putin’s most outspoken critics. The arrest and sentencing of Navalny’s brother is even more shameful, bearing in mind that he has no role in the protest movements and has been implicated by association, a tactic that we more familiarly associate with totalitarian regimes like North Korea rather than with a full member of the Council of Europe.

This case paints a painful picture of Putin’s Russia, and it should serve as a reminder of the regime we are dealing with. Sadly it also has echoes of the Khodorkovsky case a decade ago and demonstrates a serious lack of independence of the judiciary and the increasing role of the FSB – i.e. former KGB – in running Putin’s Russia. It is a very sad situation and we do hope that he is released immediately.

  Ignazio Corrao, Autore. - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il senso di questa risoluzione secondo me non deve essere quello di continuare ad attaccare in maniera continua la Russia e il suo governo per le violazioni. Sì, noi stiamo facendo un monito al governo russo di rispettare la libertà dei media, il pluralismo, la libertà di associazione e fare chiarezza su determinati casi che peraltro succedono in tantissimi posti del mondo. Però, ricordiamoci sempre che la Russia è un nostro vicino di casa, con cui noi dovremmo avere un atteggiamento dialogante, perché è necessario che il ruolo diplomatico dell'Unione europea che è una grande forza non deve essere quello di sbattere la porta in faccia a uno per una questione di tifoseria o una questione precostituita.

Noi dovremmo cercare di esercitare il nostro ruolo pacificatore come abbiamo fatto all'interno dell'Unione europea fra Stati che erano stati in guerra per centinaia di anni, come la Francia e l'Inghilterra, come la Francia e la Germania, lo dovremmo fare anche nei confronti della Russia, non avere un atteggiamento di chiusura prestabilito dal punto di vista politico.

  Marie-Christine Vergiat, auteure. - Madame la Présidente, nous allons voter aujourd'hui deux résolutions, l'une sur la Russie et l'autre sur l'Ukraine. Dans les deux, on trouve ce que j'appellerais volontiers les monomanies de certains membres de cette Assemblée, qui sont beaucoup plus prudents quand il s'agit, par exemple, de certains pays du Golfe dans lesquels on peut condamner un jeune blogueur de trente ans à mille coups de fouet sans que cela ne suscite d'émotion.

Que veut l'Union européenne? Faire plier la Russie ou œuvrer à une authentique amélioration de la situation des droits de l'homme dans ce pays?

Au sein du groupe GUE/NGL, nous avons fait notre choix. Nous exprimons une fois encore, ici, notre soutien aux citoyens russes qui exigent de leur gouvernement le respect des droits les plus fondamentaux. Nous demandons notamment aux autorités russes de cesser de harceler les ONG et de porter atteinte à la nécessaire indépendance des magistrats. Nous rappelons que le respect des droits de l'opposition est la condition sine qua non d'une démocratie effective. Je ne suis d'ailleurs pas sûre que le cas de M. Navalny, qui tient des propos pour le moins sulfureux, soit un très bon exemple.

Mais justement, pour toutes ces raisons, comme cela se fait par ailleurs, nous appelons à la reprise du dialogue avec la Russie, sans concession, mais sans volonté de domination, d'hégémonie ou d'humiliation, comme cela se fait avec bien d'autres pays dans cet hémicycle.

  Guy Verhofstadt, author. - Madam President, first of all I apologise, but I was at a Conference of Presidents meeting and that is the reason why I am here only now.

Alexey Navalny is one of the many Russian citizens who work to uncover corruption in the system of Vladimir Putin, and the system of Vladimir Putin is capitalism for friends. The fabricated process against Navalny’s brother is in my eyes yet another step to intimidate and silence his public activity. I find it particularly cynical and also very much like Soviet-era tactics that they are now sentencing Oleg Navalny with the aim of controlling a political opponent by taking a relative as hostage. That is what is happening.

It is important that we condemn this practice today and also encourage the court responsible to handle the appeal procedure in line with Russia’s international obligations to hold a fair trial, free from political pressure. In that sense the resolution is deemed absolutely necessary.

It is even more important to develop an EU strategy which would not only enable us to get Russia out of Ukraine and bring peace to Europe but also give us tools to challenge the sense of impunity with regard to Putin’s regime and support the Russian people when they stand up for their rights.

It is in that context that I want to conclude. High Representative, I am pretty disappointed by what I have read in the press, reporting that the paper on better relations with Russia that you have presented for the next Foreign Affairs Council does not mention the human rights issue in Russia.

  Josef Weidenholzer, Verfasser. - Frau Präsidentin! Die Verurteilung der Brüder Nawalny ist ein weiteres Glied in einer langen Kette der Behinderung und Ausschaltung missliebiger politischer Konkurrenten in Russland.

Wie in den anderen Fällen werden nichtpolitische Gründe konstruiert, auf deren Basis dann Urteile gefällt werden, die dazu führen, dass diese Personen nicht mehr politisch tätig sein können. Dies stellt eine systematische Verletzung der politischen Grundfreiheiten dar und behindert vor allem die Entwicklung Russlands zu einer entwickelten parlamentarischen Demokratie.

Die Reaktionen der Bevölkerung, die unter den schwierigen Bedingungen spontane Unterstützung für Nawalny demonstrierte, zeigen, dass die Menschen Alternativen suchen. Genau das aber wollte man verhindern. Eine Verbesserung unserer Beziehungen zu Russland ist dringend notwendig, dafür ist die Beachtung demokratischer Gepflogenheiten Voraussetzung.

  Cristian Dan Preda, auteur. - Madame la Présidente, la proposition de discuter le cas de M. Navalny vient de notre groupe. Je l'ai soutenue et je suis content que nous en discutions. Je suis désolé de constater que Mme Vergiat qualifie les propos tenus par M. Navalny de propos sulfureux.

Ce que M. Navalny dit, en Russie, c'est que le régime de M. Poutine est corrompu, qu'il y a des escrocs et qu'il faut lutter contre la corruption des élites. Je ne trouve pas que cela soit sulfureux. Je crois que dans cette enceinte il ne faut pas insulter les hommes de courage. Tout au contraire, il faut protéger les gens qui ont le courage de dire la vérité en Russie et d'aller contre le régime.

Permettez-moi de vous dire que la candidature de M. Navalny à la mairie de Moscou – qui a recueilli 27 % des voix – est une victoire, car on ne peut pas gagner les élections en Russie sans être le client du régime.

C'est pour cela qu'il faut défendre M. Navalny, d'autant plus que la réaction du Kremlin est une répétition des pratiques staliniennes.On l'a accusé, comme au temps de Staline et des autres bolchéviques dans tous les pays communistes, d'avoir commis des délits. Il a été accusé d'avoir fraudé dans des affaires de bois, des affaires liées à la distribution des produits d'une compagnie française, et ainsi de suite. C'est du stalinisme pur et dur, Madame Vergiat. Je sais que vous êtes touchée chaque fois que nous discutons des crimes du communisme!

  Jaromír Štětina, za skupinu PPE. – Paní předsedající, někdejší sovětských disident a obránce lidských práv Sergej Kovaljov kdysi řekl: „Obrana lidských práv nemůže být vnitřní záležitostí žádného státu“. Obávám se, vážení kolegové, že ho Evropská rada nevyslyšela.

Když začátkem devadesátých let ruská armáda anektovala Abcházii, Evropa se zmohla jen na to, že vyjádřila znepokojení. Když ruská armáda vyvraždila v Čečensku osmdesát tisíc civilních obyvatel, Evropa nedokázala viníky těchto masakrů nazvat válečnými zločinci. Když v roce 2008 ruská armáda okupovala Jižní Osetii, mnoho evropských politiků neoznačilo za viníky války Kreml, ale zcela protismyslně samotnou Gruzii. Když vloni Rusko okupovalo Krym, byly protesty Evropy už mnohem silnější, nicméně to byly jenom protesty. Rusko Krym okupuje už takřka rok. Byla to, vážení kolegové, naše ustrašenost, která nás dovedla až k Donbasu. To je jeden z důvodů, proč musíme podporovat nový ruský disent, ke kterému patří i Alexej Navalný.

  Ana Gomes, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Em outubro de 2013 este Parlamento aprovou uma resolução, de que fui relatora, sobre o impacto da corrupção nos direitos humanos. Nela propúnhamos o alargamento da definição de defensores de direitos humanos nas orientações da União Europeia, a fim de a tornar extensível aos ativistas anticorrupção, como Aleksej Navalny, que, com coragem, têm consistentemente exposto a corrupção dentro dos mais altos níveis do aparelho de Estado russo e da oligarquia Putin.

A condenação dos irmãos Navalny, integrada na estratégia utilizada pelo poder russo de instrumentalizar leis e tribunais para silenciar opositores e a sociedade civil, vem reafirmar a necessidade de apoiarmos aqueles que denunciam a corrupção tanto na Europa como no exterior. Hoje pedimos uma estratégia da União Europeia e dos Estados-Membros que promova os princípios democráticos e o Estado de Direito na Rússia. A meu ver, tal terá de incluir uma lei Magnitsky, agora extensível à condenação dos irmãos Navalny. Uma lei que estabeleça listas de funcionários, procuradores e juízes, que, violando as suas obrigações constitucionais, forjam acusações e condenam ativistas. Essa lei deve impor sanções específicas, tais como a proibição de concessão de vistos na União Europeia e o congelamento de quaisquer ativos financeiros que esses ou os seus familiares próximos possuam em países da União Europeia.

  Mark Demesmaeker, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Ik kan alleen maar herhalen wat vele collega's al gezegd hebben. De dissidente blogger Aleksei Navalny is uitgegroeid tot één van de boegbeelden van de Russische oppositie. De manier waarop hij zijn huisarrest aanvecht is ongezien in Rusland. Zijn gevangenisstraf werd dan wel opgeschort, maar zijn broer werd onder dezelfde beschuldigingen wel opgesloten.

Spijtig genoeg is hij slechts één van de vele politieke dissidenten die de voortdurende intimidatie van het Putinregime moeten ondergaan. Het is voor Russische ngo's haast onmogelijk om onafhankelijk van het Kremlin te opereren.

Bloggers met meer dan 3000 bezoekers per dag moeten zich bekendmaken en verantwoordelijkheid afleggen voor gepubliceerde informatie. Buitenlandse ngo's moeten een haast Byzantijnse bureaucratie en verregaande pestmaatregelen trotseren. Al wie niet aan de regels voldoet, is automatisch een verrader of buitenlandse spion en riskeert zware boetes en straffen.

Het is onze plicht om alle Russische dissidenten en vrijdenkers te blijven steunen. De mediablokkade van het regime zal de uitwisseling van ideeën gelukkig nooit tegenhouden.

  Urmas Paet, fraktsiooni ALDE nimel. – Paraku halveneb Venemaal nii inimõiguste kui ka inimõiguste kaitsjate olukord. Navalnõide kohtuasi on järjekordne näide selektiivsest kohtupidamisest. Samas jätkub inimõigusorganisatsioonide lisamine nn välisagentide nimekirja. Pärast seda, kui näiteks siinsamas Euroopa Parlamendis anti üle Sahharovi auhind, panid Vene võimud välisagentide nimekirja Sahharovi keskuse, mis tegeleb inimõigustega, ning veel kakskümmend organisatsiooni.

Ei maksa unustada, et näiteks ka Peterburi sõduriemade organisatsioon on Vene võimude meelest välisagent. Välisagendi staatus teeb aga sisuliselt võimatuks inimõiguste kaitsmise jätkamise. Niimoodi käitub võim, kes kardab omaenda inimesi. Euroopa Liit peab nendesse arengutesse suhtuma väga tõsiselt ja arvestama sellega ka oma edasise Vene poliitika kujundamises. Lõpetuseks tahan meenutada, et septembri algul võeti Eesti territooriumil Vene julgeolekuteenistuse poolt kinni Eesti politseinik Eston Kohver, kes on jätkuvalt Moskva vanglas. Ka tema tuleb viivitamatult vabastada.

  Jiří Maštálka, za skupinu GUE/NGL. – Paní předsedající, pokládám za správné, že cítíme potřebu vyjadřovat se k osudům jednotlivců, kteří čelí soudnímu stíhání a zároveň vyvíjejí politickou aktivitu. Vždycky existuje riziko, že se jedná o kriminalizaci odpůrců moci. Zároveň je ale vždy třeba dát možnost vyjádřit se všem stranám.

Podle mého názoru nelze považovat bez důkazů soudní rozsudek nad bratry Navalnými za zmanipulovaný. Prohlášení představitelů firmy Yves Rocher takovým důkazem rozhodně není. Zároveň nesdílím přesvědčení, že registrace NGO dostávající peníze na svoje politické aktivity ze zahraničí je automaticky chybná. Onen ruský zákon byl zpracován podle vzoru USA a nevzpomínám si, že bychom někdy proti americkému zákonu protestovali. Také nevěřím, že bychom tolerovali například NGO financované ze zdrojů Islámského státu. Měřme všem stejným metrem! Spravedlnost pro bratry Navalné musí přinést soudní odvolání, ne další politizace procesu z naší strany.

  Gianluca Buonanno (NI). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, qui ci deve essere, in questo Parlamento, la sindrome di Putin perché ogni volta che vengo in quest'Aula si parla di Putin, ma ve la fate sotto per Putin? Parlate sempre – adesso in questo caso di questo tizio che chissà che cosa gli è capitato? Ma perché non parliamo allora dei marò? Di che cosa è successo che abbiamo parlato qua a mezzanotte e c'erano quattro gatti! I marò italiani, non ve ne frega un tubo dei marò italiani?

Oppure, non sapete dell'imam di Londra che è venuto a dire – attenzione l'imam di Londra, non di un paese sperduto dell'Africa! – che dice che chi parla male di Maometto deve morire – e io gli faccio così all'imam di Londra. Oppure, non vogliamo parlare di quest'altro – cari europei che sembrate come dei conigli bagnati, ve la fate addosso! – questo qua è quello che ha detto che la strage a Parigi è merito loro, di Al-Qaida Zawahiri, questo è stato, e anche questo qua! Voi avete il coraggio di un coniglio bagnato, dovete svegliarvi cara Europa e Lei, Mogherini, si svegli, non dire che sta qua da 8 ore, perché un operaio italiano per 8 al giorno prende 1.000 euro, Lei deve stare qua a lavorare e salvare i marò e dare una sveglia e fare in modo che il terrorismo islamico non ci sia più, che è una vergogna, e voi europei, svegliatevi, questo è un Parlamento di morti viventi!

  Enrico Gasbarra (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Alto rappresentante, intervengo per sostenere la risoluzione comune negoziata dai principali gruppi politici con cui ancora una volta il Parlamento europeo si trova ad esprimere preoccupazione per la libertà di espressione e di associazione in Russia. Il processo e la condanna di Alexei Navalny sono circondati da troppe ombre per lasciarci senza reazione e l'Europa, che pur deve lavorare, così come sta facendo l'Alto Commissario per la ripresa delle relazioni con la Russia, in questo caso non può non far sentire la sua voce per ribadire il rispetto dei diritti e di libertà. L'Europa inoltre, con questa risoluzione, si impegna a incrementare il proprio impegno anche finanziario a sostegno delle ONG indipendenti, per non permettere che la fase di stallo tra Bruxelles e Mosca possa danneggiare – e questo sarebbe veramente paradossale! – anche quelle organizzazioni che sono in prima linea per la libertà di espressione.

  Dawid Bohdan Jackiewicz (ECR). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Prawa człowieka i prawa obywatelskie oraz zasady państwa prawa w Rosji są nieustannie ograniczane i łamane. Gwałcone jest prawo do wolności słowa, do pokojowych zgromadzeń, do zrzeszania się. Każdą osobę niewygodną dla władzy można dziś w Rosji bezprawnie oskarżyć, aresztować i skazać w pokazowym procesie pod dowolnym pretekstem. Jedną z ofiar takiej polityki jest rosyjski opozycjonista Aleksiej Nawalny – człowiek, który otwarcie sprzeciwia się rządzącej Rosją korupcji, upubliczniając liczne malwersacje z udziałem władzy rosyjskiej i nadużycia z jej strony. Nawalny na zawsze trafił na czarną listę Putina, był prześladowany i bezprawnie aresztowany, a w lipcu 2013 roku został skazany na 5 lat więzienia. Nie ugiął się jednak pod presją i siłą rosyjskiego reżimu i wciąż ma odwagę publicznie krytykować prezydenta Rosji. Z Aleksiejem Nawalnym dzieli nas bardzo wiele. Ciężko zgodzić się z jego stanowiskiem w sprawie Krymu czy Gruzji. Mam jednak nadzieję, że niezależnie od tego, zawsze, gdy w Rosji łamane będą prawa człowieka i zasady praworządności, będziemy głośno i zdecydowanie protestować i występować w obronie ofiar tego reżimu. Nie bójmy się domagać od prezydenta Rosji szacunku dla ludzi i prawa. Nie bądźmy naiwni, nie bądźmy ślepi i bojaźliwi. Rosja to nie jest kraj demokratyczny.

  Hans-Olaf Henkel (ECR). - Frau Präsidentin, meine Damen und Herren! Was zeigt eigentlich das Beispiel dieser beiden Brüder? Es zeigt, dass die Meinungsfreiheit, die Pressefreiheit, das Rechtssystem, die Demokratie und die Gleichheit in Russland mit Füßen getreten werden.

Was folgt daraus eigentlich für uns? Nun, erstens natürlich die Pflicht, auf diese Missstände aufmerksam zu machen, und das tut diese Entschließung. Zweitens folgt daraus, dass wir auch die Schönredner und Weißwascher dieses Regimes bloßstellen müssen. Ich finde, es ist eine Schande, dass wir davon auch in diesem Parlament welche haben. Wir haben ja hier auf der ganz rechten Seite und da drüben auf der ganz linken Seite einige leider hören müssen. Übrigens gibt es diese auch in den Nationen, zum Beispiel in meinem eigenen Land haben wir einen ehemaligen Bundeskanzler, der sich von Herrn Putin heute noch bezahlen lässt und der die Stirn besitzt, ihn vor diesem Hintergrund immer noch als „lupenreinen Demokraten“ zu bezeichnen.

Meine Damen und Herren, der Dialog mit Russland ist wichtig, aber er muss immer auch mit der Kritik an den dortigen Zuständen begleitet werden.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Petras Auštrevičius (ALDE). - Madam President, today we are discussing one more disappointing case concerning Russia’s policies. The Kremlin’s patrons have created a system which enriches very few at the expense of the whole country. Today’s Russia in no way complies with democratic countries’ criteria, and this is of great concern for all of us.

The European Union has no right to neglect abuses of democratic values and human rights in the Russian Federation. Support for the observance of human rights must become one of the cornerstones in building future relations with Russia and a consistent and united strategy towards Russia. With the Alexei Navalny case in mind, I call on the Council of Europe to keep the present policy of no voting rights for Russia and, especially taking into account the European Union Member State representatives, to keep a united line in the 29 January vote.

  Giulia Moi (EFDD). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il caso Navalny richiede tutta l'attenzione del Parlamento europeo e della Commissione, in quanto è ritenuto un sopruso ai diritti di libertà di parola e viene utilizzata la giustizia corrotta russa per tenerlo al chiuso e zittire l'opposizione politica. Questo non è giusto e il Parlamento europeo dovrebbe fare qualcosa per tutelare quest'ingiustizia.

  Morvai Krisztina (NI). - Elnök asszony, ez az Alekszej Navalnij úgy látszik az orosz Budaházi György, akit a polgárjogi tevékenysége miatt büntetőeljárással és börtönnel sújtanak. Ugyanúgy szívesen kiállnék az ő emberi jogaiért, mint ahogy Budaházi Györgyért kiálltam, akivel egyébként egyáltalán nem volt hajlandó foglalkozni a Parlament. Egy gondom van viszont. Itt van az I. pontja a preambulumnak. Ez a következőképpen szól: „mivel egyre nagyobb szükség van következetes, koherens és átfogó, valamennyi tagállam által támogatott, határozott és igazságos bírálattal alátámasztott uniós politika bevezetésére Oroszországgal szemben”. Ezzel az indokkal vezeti tehát be a jelentés egy állítólagos emberi jogi jogsértés elleni fellépést. Kérdezem Önt is Biztos asszony, a raportőrt, illetve a kollégákat, hogy akkor most pontosan mi a cél-eszköz viszony az e teremben egyre erősödő oroszellenesség és hidegháborús hangulatnak a feszítése és az esetlegesen megalapozott emberi jogi fellépés között.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Federica Mogherini, VPC/HR. - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, dispiace non vedere in quest'Aula l'onorevole Bonanno perché credo che come lui anche gli alti membri del suo gruppo sia soltanto un mio specifico dovere essere qui a parlare non soltanto del caso dei due marò, ma anche di casi molto importanti in alti paesi ma come è mio dovere farlo è anche dovere credo dei membri del Parlamento europeo partecipare ai dibattiti così importanti.

Let me thank this Chamber for the opportunity not only to focus, as we did yesterday, on the external or foreign policy implications of Russia’s behaviour but also on the internal dimension as well.

On 30 December Moscow courts delivered a verdict against Alexei Navalny and his brother Oleg, giving him a suspended sentence and jailing his brother. This new court case against Navalny, an opposition leader and anti-corruption activist, as you mentioned, is illustrative of the flaws which persist in the judiciary in Russia. Procedural irregularities were plentiful from the moment the case was built until the verdict, which was announced in the absence of most press and international observers.

I reacted publicly and immediately when the verdict was announced. I stressed that judicial decisions should be free from political interference, independent and in full compliance with the rule of law. For years, through our Partnership for Modernisation, the European Union worked on ways to professionalise and reform Russia’s judiciary, notably by the establishment of an appeal system.

On what Mr Verhofstadt referred to – and I would like us to refer not to leaks from newspapers or from the media but to what we say in this official place – it is a fact that we also need to work and focus on the human rights dimension and on the rule of law dimension in our dialogue with Russia. In fact, in the paper that we will discuss with the ministers on Monday – and again I would invite you not to refer to leaks in the media but to what we do and what we actually say in official places – there is an option of a partial resumption of these forms of cooperation to promote the rule of law. This is mentioned in the paper that has been leaked – and let me mention also that leaking official documents or issuing papers that are intended to contribute to a discussion of ministers is possibly not the best way of having a serious political discussion. But I think that we need to have, as we are having this morning, a serious discussion about, for example, the ways in which we could think of partially restoring options and instruments for cooperation on the rule of law and the judiciary in Russia, because this obviously affects the internal situation of many people in Russia and the respect for basic human rights.

In recent years in too many instances, from the Magnitsky case to the Bolotnaya convicts, from the Kosenko case to Pussy Riot, we have witnessed serious violations of basic human rights, which courts were unable to redress – which they even rubber-stamped. We call upon the Russian authorities to uphold human rights. We will also extend available financial means to Russian NGOs which keep working in that endeavour, as this House has repeatedly asked, even this morning.

Russia’s membership of the Council of Europe, which was mentioned by the last speaker, carries a number of obligations. It is our duty, as the European Union, to hold Russia accountable when it ignores those obligations. On Tuesday I discussed with Secretary-General Jagland the ways in which the European Union can provide more and better support for the Council of Europe in these efforts. All relevant instruments should be fully mobilised to respond to human rights violations.

We will be looking forward to forthcoming European Court of Human Rights rulings involving Russia, notably on the case of Mr Navalny and, I should also say, on the case of Mr Magnitsky. The conviction of Mr Navalny; the wave of harassment against civil society, labelling as foreign agents 30 organisations such as Memorial or the Sakharov Centre, which was mentioned; and the threats against human rights defenders dealing with Chechnya are the most recent instances to which we firmly reacted, all of this happening over less than a month.

Human rights are core elements of our policies and our relationships in all countries in the world, and we should always react firmly, as this House did today, when abuses take place, and we should take measures on this.

(Applause)

  President. - The debate is closed.

The vote will be held at the end of the debates.

Written statements (Rule 162)

  Eduard Kukan (PPE), in writing. – The situation in Russia, with regards to respecting human rights and legal procedures, is worrying. Apart from its violent international excursions, annexation of Crimea and support to paramilitaries in eastern Ukraine, Russia has been continuously and systematically curtailing its own political dissent and civil society, contrary to all international obligations that stem from its membership in the CoE and the OSCE. Basic freedoms of its citizens are constantly challenged. This time, the target is Alexej Navalny. His biggest ‘guilt’ and ‘fault’ is that he is someone gaining in popularity, possibly endangering the political dominance exerted by President Putin and his allies. While jailing might not be on the table for the moment, different innovative tactics are used by the government to assure that all opposition voices are effectively marginalised and, eventually, silenced. This contributes to creating a society which is forced into auto-censorship. I believe that this House is the right institution to strongly oppose moves by the government which lead to creating an atmosphere of fear in society. We stand with those who want to see Russia move away from authoritarian practice and those who want to see a functioning, impartial and independent judiciary.

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE), písomne – Politický nátlak a ovplyvňovanie súdov a sudcov narušuje fungovanie justície v štáte a právnu istotu občanov, ktorých ústavné a zákonné práva sa stávajú arbitrárne interpretované, relativizované a v konečnom dôsledku popierané .

Prípad Alexeja Navaľného sa stal ďalším z mnohých znepokojujúcich prípadov nasvedčujúcich o manipulovaní výkonu spravodlivosti v súdnych konaniach v Rusku.

Malo by byť v záujme Ruska takúto situáciu promptne napraviť, a tak zosúladiť výkon súdnictva so svojimi medzinárodnými záväzkami vyplývajúcimi z plného členstva v Rade Európy a Organizácii pre Bezpečnosť a Spoluprácu v Európe a Organizácii spojených národov.

Z uvedených dôvodov podporím prijatie predmetného uznesenia Európskeho parlamentu o situácii v Rusku.

  Dubravka Šuica (PPE), napisan. – Podržavam raspravu o ljudskim pravima i demokratskim načelima jer su to temeljne europske vrijednosti, a svjedoci smo da se često krše u posljednje vrijeme. Nije novost kršenje ljudskih prava i demokratskih sloboda u Rusiji, ali nedavna događanja dodatno izazivaju brigu. Medijski sadržaji se kreiraju prema nalozima vladajućih struktura, a svako odstupanje od toga znači izloženost represiji. Aleksej Navalny je novinar koji je kritizirao ruske vlasti te je pod kontroverznim okolnostima osuđen za korupciju i pranje novca. Osuđen je na kućni pritvor i zabranjen je njegov blog, a suspendirani su i svi mediji koji su dijelili njegove sadržaje. Treba potaknuti Rusiju na razvoj demokratskih načela i vladavinu prava, jer su poznati i drugi oblici kršenja europskih vrijednosti poput rata u Čečeniji i progona Čečena, osuđivanje neistomišljenika i oduzimanje njihove imovine. Podržat ću apel na Rusiju da pokrene razvoj demokratskog društva i vladavinu prava uz poštovanje čovjeka i njegove slobode.