Volledig verslag van de vergaderingen

Woensdag 28 januari 2015 - Brussel

12. Terrorismebestrijdingsmaatregelen (debat)

  Der Präsident. - Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung der Kommission zu Maßnahmen zur Terrorismusbekämpfung (2015/2530(RSP)).

  Dimitris Avramopoulos, Member of the Commission. - Mr President, honourable Members, allow me to express my thanks to you for giving me the chance to discuss this issue with you today, just some minutes before I fly to Riga for the informal Justice and Home Affairs Council. I will actually have to leave at 5 p.m. to catch my flight, and I would like to thank Vice-President Katainen for taking the floor if necessary, on behalf of the Commission, to conclude this debate.

The brutal terrorist attacks in Paris were an attack on our fundamental rights. It has once again become clear that we face an increased and severe terrorist threat to Europe. We have seen that terrorism knows no borders. Terrorists’ travel, financing and access to weapons are, by definition, cross-border problems and they require a strong, united and coherent response from the entire Union. This is not a time for competition among the EU institutions to act and be seen to be acting – with the danger of announcing badly-thought-through ideas which cannot then be delivered, leaving citizens even more disillusioned with the Union.

The Member States, as you know, remain primarily responsible for security, but Europe is part of the solution. There are a lot of relevant EU tools and measures already in place. The Commission is determined to take an approach that is comprehensive, result-oriented and realistically deliverable, with the focus on maximising the added value of existing EU measures and, where necessary, proposing new and complementary ones.

The Commission can add value by looking at gaps in the effectiveness of existing operational law enforcement and cooperation tools. Security is essential for a functioning democratic society. It is a prerequisite for our citizens’ wellbeing and a prerequisite for citizens’ ability to exercise their own rights. Freedom and security are two sides of the same coin, and not conflicting goals. Developing such a response requires that we all work together.

This Parliament is our strategic partner in developing an effective response that will respect our fundamental rights and values and be in line with the expectations of Europe’s citizens. That is why I am here to present and discuss our latest thinking and lines of action, with the aim of fighting terrorism and radicalisation, in the context of the preparation of the European Agenda on Security announced in our work programme.

All the EU institutions will be examining further action on counter-terrorism in the context of the upcoming European Agenda on Security. Initial discussions on this are expected to take place at the informal Justice and Home Affairs Council in Riga and at the meeting of the European Council on 12 February. A new agenda for European security for the years 2015-2020 will be presented in the coming months, around May. This agenda should aim to ensure the highest level of protection for the fundamental rights of our citizens and those residing in or staying in or visiting the European Union.

Upholding our democratic values and ensuring security are not only compatible: they are mutually reinforcing. It seems clear that there is a need to maximise the value of existing instruments and to deliver on pending proposals first, before developing further measures. Furthermore, we must make sure that the measures in place allow us to tackle the problems we face effectively. To maximise the value of existing EU measures we also need to make the best use of the Schengen Information System, under existing EU law, for checks on travel documents and on persons at the Union’s external borders and to assess any emerging need for improvement.

The Commission is assisting and will further assist Member States in identifying common risk criteria for checks on persons. Europol, in particular, will play an important role in the implementation of the future agenda. We need to make sure that it receives all the requisite information from all Member States so that it can deliver its added value in terms of intelligence and threat assessments. The same goes for Eurojust. As long ago as 2005 it was decided that the Member States should provide counter-terrorism information to both agencies.

On cybersecurity and the protection of critical infrastructures, we need to reassess whether additional action is needed. The Boston Marathon bombing highlighted the vulnerability of public events. We will work to protect such soft targets, and also critical infrastructure, more effectively.

A number of initiatives and trials are ongoing, which will feed into our reflections for future proposals. With regard to delivering on pending proposals, that is where I believe this House can add value in responding to calls from citizens. One example is the EU Passenger Name Record (PNR) Directive. An EU PNR directive is necessary in order to enhance substantially the security of everyone living in Europe. We need to make sure that our law enforcement authorities have access to the data necessary for the prevention of terrorist acts and serious transnational crimes.

No decision has been made, except that the Commission is committed to working with the co-legislators to achieve a legal instrument which is both effective and fully in line with fundamental rights. I am looking forward to seeing this, and I intend to help the European Parliament and the Council in moving forward quickly on this issue.

I have read – we have all read – articles about what the position of the Commission might be. Let me be clear: the Commission has not come forward with a modified proposal or other initiative today. That was never planned. There has not even been a College of Commissioners discussion since the orientation debate on the EU security agenda. Everything that has been published allegedly reflecting a Commission official position or decision is therefore wrong.

With regard to the data retention reform, and in particular the Law Enforcement Directive, I call on the co-legislators to work together towards quick adoption. This will be essential in providing a clear and predictable framework for the processing of personal data in Member States and the exchange of such data between law enforcement authorities. Furthermore, we need to optimise the sharing of information between law enforcement authorities.

To that end, the adoption of the Europol and Eurojust legal frameworks and the pending proposal to improve cross-border law enforcement training will be crucial, but progress can already be achieved without waiting for this. We will very shortly organise a joint meeting with Europol and Eurojust to see how information sharing can be improved under the current legal framework. The Commission is seizing the opportunity, during the preparatory work before adoption of the agenda, to consider whether further measures are needed to address the evolving threat, including whether the existing EU legal framework needs reinforcement. We had our first discussion with my fellow Commissioners just last week. It is clear that the fight against terrorism will be a major focus of this agenda.

Let me now put forward some preliminary reflections on the objectives that the European Agenda on Security should address, including how to continue to offer Member States comprehensive support in preventing and addressing radicalisation and other forms of extremism. The fight against arms trafficking is another building block. We need to review the implementation of the existing legislation and ensure a greater exchange of information both between Member States and with Europol, Eurojust and Interpol. At the same time, the fight against organised crime and the financing of terrorism needs to be stepped up. We must deprive terrorists of their sources of finance. The link with organised crime is striking.

Ensuring the effective implementation of the fourth Anti-Money-Laundering Directive and the Funds Transfer Regulation agreed upon in December 2014 is crucial. The existing tools for the confiscation of criminal assets must be used. We must ensure the speedy execution of all confiscation orders. We also need to look carefully at reassessing the need for, and the added value of, possible EU solutions for data retention, respecting the principles set out by the Court of Justice last year.

The Commission is monitoring and evaluating the situation in each Member State before discussing the way ahead with the co-legislators. We need to find sound solutions for the exchange of passenger record data with those third countries that are key to our security interests and to make sure that they are fully consistent with the solutions to be reached for EU PNR.

Full implementation by Member States of existing legislative instruments on information exchange is therefore key. However, we also need to consider how to strengthen Europol’s intelligence analysis capabilities in relation to terrorism and radicalisation-related threats. We need to expand the use of existing EU policy-cycle tools to address serious and organised-crime-related threats as well as threats related to terrorism and radicalisation.

On the external front, the EU is stepping up its assistance to neighbouring countries and regions. The particular focus is on law enforcement cooperation, information exchange, extending criminal law tools and anti-radicalisation efforts.

Delivering rapidly and effectively on our response requires political will and the setting of clear priorities. The Commission has voiced its determination to take this up as a matter of priority. Working hand in hand with Parliament on developing a coherent response will be essential in defining and developing action to keep Europe both secure and open.

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ANTONIO TAJANI
Vicepresidente

  Monika Hohlmeier, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Anschläge von Paris, aber auch die Anschläge, die wir davor erlebt haben, die es in Brüssel, in London, in Madrid, in verschiedenen Städten der Europäischen Union und auch außerhalb der Europäischen Union gegeben hat, stellen uns vor Riesenherausforderungen. Mein Wunsch hier an dieses Europäische Parlament wäre – und wäre es übrigens auch bei der vorhergehenden Abstimmung gewesen –, dass wir uns geschlossen darauf verständigt hätten, dass wir über das Thema Terrorismus auch perpetuiert werden diskutieren müssen, auch öffentlich werden diskutieren müssen und eine Gemeinschaft werden zeigen müssen, so wie dies diejenigen Regierungen tun, die sozialistisch sind, die konservativ sind, auch grüne Innenminister – alle haben sich eine gemeinsame Agenda gegeben. Ein bisschen mehr Geschlossenheit würde ich mir da offen gestanden auch in diesem Parlament wünschen, um der Öffentlichkeit zu zeigen, was wir wollen und wie wir kämpfen.

Deshalb wünsche ich mir auch, dass wir ganz offen und zutiefst sachlich über die Instrumente diskutieren, die unsere Strafverfolgungsbehörden benötigen, um die Terroristen zu bekämpfen. Da gehören Fluggastdaten dazu, da gehört vielleicht auch Vorratsdatenspeicherung dazu, da gehören Themen dazu, die auch bei uns kontrovers sind, aber genau so die Diskussion über Präventionsmaßnahmen oder darüber, welche Formen der Deradikalisierung wir betreiben können, was wir in unseren Gefängnissen tun können. Wir müssen mit den Drittstaaten reden.

Meine Bitte an alle Kolleginnen und Kollegen ist: Lassen Sie uns da wirklich zusammenarbeiten und nicht zeigen, dass wir hier ein Haus sind, das wieder einmal um Kleinigkeiten streitet.

  Gianni Pittella, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, anche oggi il nostro pensiero non può che andare a Parigi, questa città, questo popolo colpito in maniera così profonda da quel crimine indelebile. Parigi è stata per noi anche la grande manifestazione di massa. Parigi ci richiama alla follia omicida ma anche a Lassana Bathily, il ragazzo musulmano, di origine maliane, che ha protetto gli ostaggi del negozio e che una settima fa è diventato francese e quindi nostro concittadino europeo.

Noi non vogliamo dimenticare quel sussulto di dignità e crediamo che da lì, bisogna ripartire, con spirito unitario, collega Hohlmeier.

Noi non faremo mancare il nostro sostegno a misure concrete ma negheremo il nostro sostegno a misure che inficiano la libertà, che è una conquista irrinunciabile dell'Unione europea. Ci chiamiamo Unione europea perché siamo fondati sulla libertà. Per il resto avrete tutti il nostro consenso sulle misure che vogliono combattere efficacemente il terrorismo.

L'Europa – l'ha ricordata il Commissario – ha a disposizione già alcuni strumenti: facciamoli funzionare! Abbiamo bisogno di rafforzare Schengen, nelle sue componenti che riguardano lo scambio di informazioni e il rafforzamento della sicurezza e le frontiere esterne, senza toccare il principio basilare della mobilità. Non abbiamo preclusione nei confronti del PNR purché si chiarisca le condizioni che riguardano la durata della detenzione dei dati ed altre condizioni. Nessuna pregiudiziale, ma attenzione ad illudere i cittadini: non è soltanto con il PNR che si risolve il problema. Il PNR può essere uno dei fattori di una strategia multifattoriale che dobbiamo mettere in campo, a cominciare dal rafforzamento della cooperazione giudiziaria.

L'azione e il lavoro in comune dell'intelligence, il rafforzamento della politica estera, una politica comune nei confronti dei paesi della sponda sud del Mediterraneo e, finalmente, una politica tesa all'inclusione e all'integrazione. Molti terroristi, soprattutto giovani, provengono dalle sacche di povertà, di miseria, di abbandono, di marginalità e di emarginazione: sono questi i fenomeni che dobbiamo combattere: più educazione, più istruzione, più finanziamento alla scuola, più dialogo per combattere il fanatismo e il terrorismo e nessuna strumentalizzazione.

Dobbiamo essere seri, perché parliamo e ci confrontiamo con una questione seria: non possiamo affermare, come facciamo talvolta, che l'immigrazione porta terrorismo. Nel mio paese nemmeno un immigrato è stato sospettato o denunciato come terrorista.

Allora, facciamo fronte comune: noi ci stiamo a fare il fronte comune seriamente per combattere e vincere la mala pianta del terrorismo.

  Timothy Kirkhope, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, the atrocities in Paris were shocking. As rapporteur for the EU PNR, it is clearly an important piece of the jigsaw in the EU’s coordinated approach to fighting not only terrorism, but also serious crime. The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) has stated that this Parliament does not have to wait for a new data retention directive or data protection package. I intend to apply the highest data protection standards and the judgment of the European Court of Justice to my proposals.

The EU Counter-Terrorism Coordinator says the use of PNR data reduces ethnic profiling. Europol says there are over 3 000 EU foreign fighters radicalised, military trained, returning to the EU and exploiting the gaps and deficiencies in law-enforcement information exchange across the EU. This directive would help to address that. At present there is no EU legal framework for citizens or the airlines and no clear legal or administrative redress in the use of data. My directive would provide these rights and clear legal boundaries. I ask the political groups and Members to work with me and cooperate with me. We can find a solution together to protect lives and to protect civil liberties.

  Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, my message this afternoon in this debate is clear. We have to work together in this Parliament and we cannot waste time. Two weeks after the attacks on Charlie Hebdo we must take a leap forward, and we must conclude in the European Union a broad and ambitious package to tackle terrorism. We have to do this as Parliament together with the Commission and together with the Council because it is a common task and there is a common goal to be achieved.

In fact, what we have to do is to repeat what happened after 9/11. After 9/11, in 2001, alongside other measures we decided on a package and created the European Arrest Warrant, which at that time represented a dramatic change in Europe because previously it had taken years to secure the extradition of a suspect. Sometimes it took 10 years to bring someone back from the UK to France whereas since we have had the European Arrest Warrant it takes just days to transfer a suspect or a criminal from one country to another.

We need the same level of ambition now: not to do the same things, because the threats have changed, but to have a similar package to strengthen our security in Europe – and two things are at stake here.

First of all, we need a common capacity to analyse the information and the risk, because that is lacking in Europe. In all major terrorist attacks over the past 10 years, Mr Kirkhope, the perpetrators have been known to the services of the different countries. The problem today is not so much that we do not collect the info; the problem is that we do not share the info between our services in Europe. That is the main problem. We have to create what we are calling ‘euro-intel’ – a system for sharing information and for common analysis of risks. I have heard a number of people today saying that this is not possible under the terms of Article 4 of the Treaty. Well, I can tell you that in the last parliamentary term we changed the Treaty twice: once to have 18 more Members of Parliament and the second time to introduce the European Stability Mechanism to save the banks. If it is possible to change the Treaty on the fast-track procedure to save the banks, it has to be possible to change the Treaty to increase the security of European citizens here in this European Union.

Secondly, we must not make the error of the nationalists and the populists, namely to say that the problem is Schengen. The problem is not Schengen. The problem is that we are not sufficiently solid among ourselves to strengthen the outside borders of the Schengen area instead of reinstating internal borders.

Finally, on passenger name records (PNR) I want to say just one thing, since Mr Kirkhope has spoken about this. We are in favour of a European PNR system but it has to go together with guarantees and with the protection of data and privacy. It is clear that Mr Pittella is right: this is about safety and freedom at the same time.

And one last sentence about the targets in this debate: you cannot abuse the death of Charlie Hebdo as some are doing here in this Parliament, Ms Le Pen, Mr Farage. This is not about a war between civilisations and religions: it is about a war against criminals and terrorists, and that makes all the difference.

  Cornelia Ernst, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Als ich gestern nachhause ging, lief ich bis zu meiner Wohnung an Polizeiautos und ich weiß nicht wie vielen schwer bewaffneten Soldaten vorbei. Ich habe mich gefragt: Schaffen wir damit mehr Sicherheit? Verhindern wir tatsächlich nächste Anschläge, Anschläge wie in Paris und anderswo mit verschärften Grenzkontrollen oder einer fünfjährigen Fluggastdatenspeicherung? Glauben Sie das wirklich, dass wir damit mehr Sicherheit schaffen? Wir rennen doch wieder einem Phantom hinterher, wir rennen doch wieder einer Fiktion hinterher, die uns wirklich gar nichts bringt!

Wir müssen Terrorismus dort bekämpfen, wo er entsteht. Er entsteht zum Beispiel in Ländern wie dem Irak. Warum? Weil dort die sunnitische Bevölkerung gedemütigt wurde und keine Versöhnung stattfindet. Terrorismus wird gefördert von Saudi-Arabien, deren Königen man die Hände reichte seitens des Westens, obwohl sie weltweit Terroristen finanzieren. Die erste Forderung muss doch sein: Waffenexporte in solche Regionen gehören sich nicht!

Mit Blick auf Europa: Terrorismus entsteht immer da, wo Inklusion versagt, und sie versagt in jedem Mitgliedstaat. Zum Beispiel in Deutschland, wo zugeschaut wird, wie junge Leute Dschihadisten zulaufen.

Wir müssen begreifen, dass man Feuer nicht mit Feuer löschen kann. Das geht nicht. Wir brauchen eine ehrliche Aussprache zu Antiislamismus, zu Antisemitismus, zu Ausländerfeindlichkeit, zu Ausgrenzung mitten in unserer Gesellschaft. Statt immer mehr Restriktionen brauchen wir Aussteigerprojekte, echten Dialog und ein Umdenken in der Gesellschaft in der EU, damit die Nöte der Menschen wieder eine Rolle in unserem ganzen politischen Leben spielen.

  Jan Philipp Albrecht, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, yes, we need to strengthen security. I agree with all those who say we need to deliver whatever is necessary and proportionate to get a higher level of security. But what is proposed now, the proposed blanket mass surveillance of citizens, is exactly the opposite of that. It does not deliver that. Instead, you are delivering a symbolic measure at the cost of effective security and the civil liberties of EU citizens.

Even before the Paris attacks it was possible to know who was on which plane. We already know that. We have advance passenger information: it is there, we can access it and we know who is on which plane. In the case of known suspects, we can follow them. So why do we not focus on the suspects? Why do we not focus on the risk? That is what you need to do in your directive, Mr Avramopoulos, because that would be a focused approach on security. We need to strengthen the capacity of police officers and security personnel – locally, regionally and at European level – to analyse this information. They need to be able to join the dots. That is exactly what has been missing in the past and what has led to the insecure situation we have today.

But the problem is that we spend all our money on blanket surveillance measures like data retention and other issues. It is proposed to invest hundreds of millions of euros in the blanket retention of personal name records. This money is very much needed by the police everywhere in Europe, and needed for the coordination of European security and police authorities. Europol has just a small amount of money for the setting up of joint investigation teams. We need to invest the money there. That is what we need.

So, Mr Avramopoulos, I am not convinced by your proposals, and I am not the only one. The Court of Justice has said very clearly that it is not legal and not in line with the fundamental right of data protection to put everybody under surveillance. You have to choose where you are shooting. You have to choose who you are going after. You have to create some determining criteria to indicate where there is risk or suspicion. Do not put everybody under surveillance because that would be no different to what China or Bahrain does.

  Jonathan Arnott (EFDD). - Mr President, I would just like clarification on why blue cards are not being taken because this question was, of course, asked at the last Strasbourg part-session. If we do not have the opportunity to question speakers then what happens in this Chamber is merely a series of pre-prepared statements; it is not a debate.

This question was supposed to go back to the Bureau but there has been no explanation whatsoever. So I would like to know, please: is there a reason why we are not having a debate today and could it be communicated to us if there is?

  Presidente. - Onorevole Arnott, è facoltà del Presidente ammettere o non ammettere, come prevede il regolamento, i "cartellini blu".

  Paul Nuttall, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Mr President, as I speak, we are in a building which is guarded by the Belgian army in full combat dress, and that tells us all we need to know about the terror threat we face from extremist Islam.

We have already witnessed attacks in London, Madrid, Brussels and now Paris. And let us be honest here: it is not a case of ‘if’ there is another attack; it is a case of ‘when and where’. We can prepare all we want, but none of this will be successful if we do not have the cooperation of the Muslim communities themselves. Europe’s Muslims must do more to root out extremists that exist in their midst. They must take responsibility in order to cut out this cancer. May I suggest that they follow the lead of President al-Sisi of Egypt, who recently attended a Coptic Mass and called on Islamic scholars to renounce jihad.

We must also deal with the thorny issue of Turkey. It is the same Turkey which turns a blind eye to extremist Muslims hopping over the border to fight in Syria for ISIS. It is the same Turkey which idly stood by and did almost nothing whilst the border town of Kobane was under attack. It is the same Turkey which has received nearly EUR 1 billion from this place in pre-accession funding, and it is the same Turkey that all of the British political parties, except my own, want in the European Union.

Therefore, if we want to tackle terrorism in Europe, then firstly we need Europe’s Muslims on side; secondly we must hold Turkey to account; and thirdly we must control our own borders.

  Ελευθέριος Συναδινός (NI). - . Κύριε Πρόεδρε, δυστυχώς τα πρόσφατα γεγονότα στο Παρίσι και το Βέλγιο, οι καθημερινές επιθέσεις τρομοκρατών τζιχαντιστών, με τη μορφή ένοπλων ληστειών, απαγωγών, βιασμών και φόνων, και η μετακίνηση «χαρακτηρισμένων» Ευρωπαίων πολιτών, που τελικά αποδείχθηκαν ακραία μουσουλμανικά στοιχεία, από και προς την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, αποδεικνύουν τις λάθος πολιτικές που εφαρμόζουμε όσον αφορά την τρομοκρατία. Έχουμε θεσπίσει πλήθος Συνθηκών, νόμων, στρατηγικών και δράσεων για την καταπολέμησή της. Δεν μπορούμε όμως να την αντιμετωπίσουμε μόνο με συζητήσεις. Ας πάρουμε γενναίες αποφάσεις, ας χρησιμοποιήσουμε όλους τους μηχανισμούς σε κοινοτικό επίπεδο και, κυρίως, ας παύσουμε την ανόητη εξωστρέφεια ασχολούμενοι, κατά βάση, με χώρες εκτός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Στρουθοκαμηλίζουμε και αδυνατούμε να κοιτάξουμε τα προβλήματα κατάματα.

Η τρομοκρατία αποτελεί ασύμμετρη απειλή και ως τέτοια πρέπει να την αντιμετωπίσουμε. Οι μονάδες ταχείας αντίδρασης που δημιουργήσαμε , όπως η Europol, δεv διαθέτουν τα απαραίτητα, σε νομοθετικό και επιχειρησιακό επίπεδο; στοιχεία. Δεν διαθέτουν ούτε την τεχνογνωσία, αλλά πολύ περισσότερο τον εξοπλισμό και τη βάση πληροφοριών. Τα μηνύματα που δεχόμαστε καθημερινά προειδοποιούν για τον επερχόμενο κίνδυνο. Οι εχθροί μας γνωρίζουν τις αδυναμίες μας. Καιρός είναι να τις παραδεχτούμε και εμείς.

  Rachida Dati (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, les événements à Paris, ceux en Belgique, les attentats qui sont déjoués – comme je le disais hier – tous les jours, mais également les filières de djihadistes qui sont démantelées tous les jours – encore hier – en France: nous avons une urgence à agir. Je m'associe en ce sens à toutes les demandes de Monika Hohlmeier, mais, Monsieur le Commissaire, nous avions déjà fait de nombreuses propositions bien avant ces événements.

Il y a pourtant des mesures que nous pouvons prendre immédiatement, sans outils supplémentaires, et d'ailleurs, hier, Gilles de Kerchove les a rappelées et affirmées: l'amélioration de l'utilisation qui est faite du système d'information Schengen, l'échange d'informations au sein d'Europol, mais également la mise en place de contrôles plus systématiques aux frontières externes de l'Union européenne, ainsi que l'accélération – qui fait débat – de l'adoption du PNR européen qui sera toujours plus efficace que vingt-huit PNR nationaux.

Je suis d'accord d'ailleurs avec l'intervention de Guy Verhofstadt sur la nécessité d'agir vite, parce que nous sommes véritablement en guerre contre des criminels barbares et des terroristes.

Monsieur le Commissaire, je vous écoute, on vient à vos interventions, vous faites des exposés à longueur de journée sans jamais déterminer un calendrier, jamais. Aujourd'hui, il y a une urgence, qui est celle de la sécurité des citoyens européens. On vous demande "Quand allez-vous agir, quand allez-vous mettre ces mesures en place, qui ne nécessitent pas d'outils législatifs supplémentaires?"

  Birgit Sippel (S&D). - Herr Präsident! Die Kommission hat gestern im Innenausschuss gesagt, nach den Anschlägen von Paris brauchen wir Aktionen, keinen Aktionismus. Richtig! Denn ein Ziel der Terroristen ist es, Angst zu verbreiten damit wir Demokratie und Freiheiten beschränken, und diese Strategie darf auch und gerade nach den Anschlägen von Paris nicht aufgehen. Und genau deshalb sind die derzeit kursierenden Vorschläge in ihrer Fülle beunruhigend: Überwachung des Internets, Sammlung von Fluggastdaten, Verschärfung der Regelungen für den Schengenraum, Verhinderung verschlüsselter Kommunikation, vielleicht sogar eine neue Vorratsdatenspeicherung und weitere Maßnahmen mehr.

Ich möchte Kommission und Rat daran erinnern, dass der Europäische Gerichtshof in seinem Urteil zur Abschaffung der Richtlinie über Vorratsdatenspeicherung einen Grundrechtecheck für alle Überwachungsmaßnahmen aufgestellt hat. Das heißt, sie alle müssen den umfassenden Kriterien genügen, die der Europäische Gerichtshof aufgestellt hat. Und im Falle der Fluggastdaten heißt das nicht nur Prüfung der Speicherfristen, Zugriffsrechte oder wirksame Kontrollen, sondern eben auch die Beschränkung auf die anlassbezogene Nutzung von Daten.

Haben wir ein Problem, an Daten heranzukommen? Nicht nur im Fall der Attentate von Paris waren ja die Täter den nationalen Behörden bekannt! Aber die Mitgliedstaaten nutzen viel zu wenig vorhandene Instrumente, und insbesondere der Austausch von Informationen findet offensichtlich viel zu wenig statt. Wir brauchen deshalb eine umfassende Evaluierung bestehender Maßnahmen, bevor wir immer neue Instrumente vorschlagen, und wir sollten nicht vergessen, die eigentlichen Ursachen des Terrorismus in unserer Mitte – etwa die Diskriminierung und Ausgrenzung junger Menschen – werden hierdurch nicht beseitigt. Fazit: Statt Bürgerrechte abzubauen, müssen wir gerade jetzt den Rechtstaat verteidigen, Freiheit und Grundrechte sichern. Das ist das, was wir unseren Bürgerinnen und Bürgern schuldig sind.

  Karol Karski (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Według Jamestown Foundation (amerykańskiego think tanku) większość operacji antyterrorystycznych w Europie po atakach na początku stycznia w Paryżu była wymierzona w Czeczenów. Według BBC we Francji aresztowano obywateli Rosji pochodzenia czeczeńskiego z materiałami wybuchowymi. W Niemczech jednym z aresztowanych według Deutsche Welle jest z pochodzenia Turek podejrzany o kierowanie, jak to określono, „organizacją islamskich ekstremistów z Turcji oraz rosyjskiej Czeczenii i Dagestanu”, zaś po obławie policji w Belgii dwóch terrorystów zostało zabitych, a trzeci Czeczen został ujęty. Czy profilowanie przez policję czeczeńskich emigrantów z Rosji świadczy o tym, że władze państw członkowskich biorą pod uwagę wschodnie inspiracje obecnej fali terroryzmu? Czy i jak zatem Moskwa może zyskać na wzroście poparcia dla skrajnej prawicy, partii antyimigracyjnych i antyeuropejskich w celu destabilizowania i osłabiania jedności Unii Europejskiej?

  Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE). - Mr President, many people in Europe are afraid, understandably, because the images of Paris – but also other images that we see every day – are scary and intimidating. But our response to their fear should not be just symbolism or fake security. We should do what it takes and not just play to the gallery.

First of all, we already have an extensive toolkit. We have the tools but we need to evaluate whether we have all the tools that we need and whether we have the right tools or we need bigger or smaller tools. Maybe some tools are superfluous. We also need to assess whether all those measures being decided by Parliament, and also by the government leaders when they meet in Brussels, are subsequently implemented in the Member States. They make a lot of grand statements but I would like to know what the state of implementation of the measures is. I think we should have a scoreboard as in the internal market.

On specific topics: regarding PNR, my group, as we signalled two weeks ago by letter, is open to discussion on an EU PNR, but there are two simple and clear conditions. One is that whatever proposal we discuss, it must meet the test of necessity and proportionality. That is a legal requirement, not a political one. Secondly, the Council needs to adopt the directive on data protection. It has been on their table for a year and a half. It is not that difficult. Parliament has voted; it will take them 30 seconds to pass it.

On encryption: I hear a lot of scary and worrying proposals about a ban on encryption or the obligation to hand over encryption keys. They are dangerous proposals. What is next? Will it become a criminal offence if you have a lock on the front door of your house? Because that too would be very useful in the fight against terrorism. We are on a slippery slope.

Finally, I am glad to see that we are all united in our determination to fight people who want to destroy our democracy through violent means. But I would like the Council and the Commission to be equally determined when it comes to defending democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights against threats from the inside. I call on the Commission to put forward proposals – as my group has asked many times – for binding instruments for ensuring and enforcing fundamental rights and the rule of law. Binding instruments, Commissioner!

  Barbara Spinelli (GUE/NGL). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, vorrei esprimere preoccupazione per le misure antiterrorismo che Commissione e Consiglio stanno discutendo e sui rischi di una legislazione emergenziale che, in nome dei valori, oppone Stato di diritto e sicurezza.

Parlo di rischi, Commissario, di misure già annunciate da Stati membri, di monitoraggio di siti Internet, di impedimenti alla circolazione nell'area Schengen, della raccolta sproporzionatamente lunga di dati dei passeggeri (PNR) che questo Parlamento e la Corte europea di giustizia hanno già respinto. Molte di queste misure esistevano prima dei terribili attentati in Francia. Non li hanno impediti.

Parlo del legame stabilito in tante scuole, in tanti luoghi pubblici tra terroristi e comunità musulmane. Parlo della tendenza generale, che si vide già nell'attentato contro le Torri gemelle, a parlare di "guerra contro il terrorismo". Questa non è una guerra.

  Eva Joly (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire et chers collègues, trois mots: sincérité, lucidité et proportionnalité.

Sincérité, d'abord. Ne jouez pas avec la peur de nos concitoyens et cessez de mentir. Non, un PNR européen n'aurait pas permis d'éviter ces drames. C'est de moyens dont nous avons besoin et pas de nouvelles législations.

Lucidité, ensuite. Faites l'analyse des dysfonctionnements avant de promouvoir de nouvelles mesures.

Proportionnalité, enfin. Comme l'a rappelé la Cour de justice, un juste équilibre doit être trouvé entre la lutte contre le terrorisme et le respect de nos libertés fondamentales. Seules les personnes suspectes et leurs proches doivent faire l'objet de surveillance. La surveillance généralisée ne préviendra pas les actes terroristes, elle engendrera par contre des démocraties fragiles qui pourraient être tentées par des dérives. Ne combattons pas les terroristes avec des méthodes interdites par la loi. Ne nous transformons pas en auxiliaires involontaires de la logique terroriste.

Ils tuent, ne les laissons pas en plus détruire les valeurs qui sont les nôtres.

  Laura Ferrara (EFDD). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la minaccia terroristica, riaffacciatasi con prepotenza con i fatti di Parigi, non deve indurci nel commettere errori analoghi a quelli verificatisi all'indomani dell'11 settembre, quando con il Patriot Act si ricorse a misure fortemente limitative della libertà e dei diritti fondamentali. La tutela della pubblica sicurezza non deve trasformarsi in ragione posta a fondamento di campagne di terrorismo psicologico, atte a garantire un sempre più efficace controllo sociale.

Occorre fare leva sui nostri valori, sui nostri principi e sui nostri diritti, tutelarli e renderli il nostro punto di forza. Ed è per questo che nel lungo periodo le politiche di prevenzione del terrorismo dovranno basarsi sul potenziamento del dialogo interculturale, dell'educazione e dell'integrazione sociale. Nell'immediato occorre invece intervenire laddove è più facile che si radicalizzino le reti terroristiche, controllando ad esempio, quei sistemi di comunicazione anonima per Internet, covo del mercato nero delle armi e delle droghe.

Occorre migliorare la cooperazione di polizia e lo scambio di informazioni tra Stati membri, nonché continuare a perseguire il contrasto di ogni forma di finanziamento delle reti terroristiche, in modo da ottenerne il loro definitivo smantellamento.

  Marine Le Pen (NI). - Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs, toutes vos décisions ont contribué à nous désarmer, y compris moralement, face au fondamentalisme islamiste, et ce depuis de nombreuses années.

J'aimerais, moi, toucher à un sujet qui me semble être totalement passé sous silence. À des journalistes italiens, le président de l'Assemblée constituante de la Libye, Ali Tarhouni, a exprimé une très vive inquiétude, je le cite: "L'Europe a sérieusement sous-estimé la possibilité que des militants s'infiltrent à Lampedusa, en Sicile ou à Malte. Les risques augmentent à un rythme spectaculaire."

La réalité, c'est que la simple déclaration de la nationalité, notamment syrienne, le simple dépôt d'un dossier de réfugié, nous obligent aujourd'hui, compte tenu de la législation, à accueillir et, d'ailleurs, à subvenir aux besoins de populations dont nous ne savons strictement rien, sur lesquelles nous n'avons absolument aucun renseignement. Nous avons d'autant moins de renseignements que nous avons rompu les relations avec les renseignements syriens, qui étaient une des sources sérieuses de visibilité sur les fondamentalistes.

Le ministre italien des affaires étrangères a fait la même déclaration et est revenu sur ses propos sous la pression du terrorisme intellectuel de la bien-pensance. On nous abuse et on nous abîme d'ailleurs de paroles rassurantes, on fait de l'angélisme. La réalité, c'est que nous n'avons, en l'espèce, aucun moyen de nous prémunir de ce type de risques, sauf à retrouver, notamment, nos frontières nationales.

  Roberta Metsola (PPE). - Aħna ninsabu maħsuda b'dak li seħħ ftit aktar minn 24 siegħa ilu fil-lukanda Corinthia fil-Libja. Kellna attakk terroristiku ieħor b'nies maqtula li spiċċaw vittmi innoċenti. Għandna sitwazzjoni li qed tbaqbaq u li rridu nindirizzawha.

Jien li ġejja minn Malta nħoss il-gravità ta' dak li qed jiġri viċin pajjiżi. Dan l-attakk terroristiku fil-Libja segwa l-attakki li saru fi Franza li jmorru oltre minn attakki orribbli fuq individwi. Dawn kienu attakki fuq il-valuri u l-libertajiet li l-Ewropa hija mibnija fuqhom. Aħna qed niffaċċjaw sfidi ta' sigurtà li huma mingħajr preċedent. Għandna bżonn li jiġi żgurat li nkunu pass 'il quddiem mill-kriminali u t-terroristi. Fl-istess waqt irridu nirrispettaw il-valuri Ewropej li ngħożżu. Dawn il-valuri ma jistgħu qatt jitnaqqru quddiem l-isfida tat-terrur. Iżda t-tweġiba mhix kif qalu xi wħud li ngħalqu l-fruntieri tagħna jew insiru stati polizjeski. Li għandna nagħmlu hu li nassiguraw li jkollna leġiżlazzjoni moderna li tirrispondi għal theddid ġodda. Fl-istess ħin għandna bżonn li jiġi żgurat li inċidenti bħal dawn ma jkunux in-nar fuq il-ħatab li jkabbru r-razziżmu u l-ksenofobija.

Waħda mill-miżuri konkreti li għandna bżonn naħdmu fuqha, qaluha l-kollegi tiegħi, hija l-passenger name record system fl-Unjoni Ewropea. Minflok ikollna sistemi sparpaljati f'pajjiżi differenti jkollna sistema waħda u għalhekk ikun hemm intelligence sharing aħjar u iktar malajr. B'sistemi tajba ta' protezzjoni din tista' tkun għodda prezzjuża biex iċ-ċittadini tagħna jkunu iktar siguri. Issa huwa ż-żmien biex nikkonkludu.

  Sylvie Guillaume (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, depuis quelques jours, il me semble que le débat a un peu progressé sur une chose: ce combat contre le terrorisme implique que l'on recherche l'équilibre entre la nécessité d'assurer, d'une part, la sécurité de l'Union et de ses citoyens, et de garantir, d'autre part, le respect des libertés et des droits fondamentaux.

Je crois que nous avons également progressé sur l'idée que la lutte contre le terrorisme est loin de se réduire à une question technique s'inscrivant dans la seule logique sécuritaire. La radicalisation est un phénomène aux facettes multiples, évolutives et multidimensionnelles, se développant tant au sein de l'Union qu'à l'extérieur de ses frontières. La réponse européenne doit, par conséquent, privilégier une approche transversale, globale, de long terme et solliciter une multiplicité d'acteurs. Parmi les champs d'action à développer, je veux appuyer les pistes déjà évoquées, comme l'amélioration de l'échange d'informations entre les États membres et avec les agences de l'Union – Europol, Eurojust – , l'amélioration de la mise œuvre de l'efficacité du système d'information de Schengen, la lutte contre le financement du terrorisme et le commerce d'armes à feu illégales ou bien encore l'optimisation de tout le potentiel d'internet en matière de sensibilisation tout en combattant efficacement ses dérives. Dans ce panel d'actions, la dimension sociale et culturelle de la lutte contre le terrorisme ne doit pas être cosmétique ou déclarative, mais générer sur le terrain des actions concrètes. N'oublions pas que la radicalisation naît souvent du désarroi et de l'absence de perspectives.

Enfin, ne tombons pas dans le piège qui nous est tendu. Le débat actuel mérite de ne pas être traité sous le coup de l'émotion et de la précipitation avec, d'un côté, les urgentistes et, de l'autre côté, les homéopathes. Si personne ne défend le statu quo, il faut agir avec réflexion en se basant notamment sur une évaluation précise des outils européens existants et de leur mise en œuvre.

  Beatrix von Storch (ECR). - Herr Präsident, liebe Kollegen! Wir diskutieren heute über Terrorbekämpfung, und wir müssen eine Frage beantworten: Wieviel Freiheit wollen wir aufgeben für ein Mehr an Sicherheit? Garantiert ist bei allen Eingriffen in die Freiheit immer das Weniger an Freiheit, nie das Mehr an Sicherheit. Eine freiheitliche Gesellschaft wird immer verletzbar bleiben. Vielleicht kann man eine totalitäre Gesellschaft total sicher machen, aber eine freiheitliche?

Wir diskutieren oder haben bereits eingeführt: biometrische Reisepässe, Videoüberwachung, Telefonüberwachung, Vorratsdatenspeicherung, Einschränkung des Bargeldverkehrs, Aufhebung des Bankgeheimnisses, Verbot der Verschlüsselung von Kommunikation. Der Bürger ist heute bereits gläsern, und wenn Sie mich fragen, viel zu gläsern. Wenn ich mich entscheiden muss zwischen Freiheit und Sicherheit, entscheide ich mich für die Freiheit.

  Cecilia Wikström (ALDE). - Tack herr talman! Sedan Parisattackerna för ungefär tre veckor sedan, befinner vi oss alla återigen i ett tillstånd av djup sorg.

Detta kallar oss att nu agera tillsammans: Att både garantera trygghet för medborgarna och bevarande av det öppna samhället med respekt för grundläggande rättigheter och människans privatliv.

Terrorister känner inga nationsgränser, det vet vi. Därför är det nu hög tid för oss att vi genom EU:s rättsvårdande myndigheter förstår det, och agerar lika effektivt och gärna lite mer effektivt än vad terrorister och kriminella nätverk kan göra. Eftersom vi vet att det största problemet är att utbyta information mellan medlemsländerna, så är det detta vi behöver åtgärda. Vi behöver skapa en komplett underrättelsetjänst och vi behöver stärka samarbetet mellan rättsvårdande myndigheter kring hot och utbyta information kring personer och nätverk som planerar att genomföra fasansfulla attacker. Detta är vi skyldiga våra medborgare, och inget annat än detta godtas. Både öppenhet och trygghet – samtidigt.

  Judith Sargentini (Verts/ALE). - Natuurlijk maken wij ons zorgen over het feit dat Europese Jihadi's in Irak en in Syrië met de IS meevechten. Laten wij niet vergeten: de beul van de IS is een Brit! Wij noemen hem Jihadi John. Het is begrijpelijk dat wij ons zorgen maken over aanslagen hier in Europa, ik doe dat ook. Maar wij moeten ons ook erg zorgen maken over wat Jihadi John en zijn vrienden aan het doen zijn in Syrië en in Irak.

Ik begrijp niet, dat als wij dat verwerpen, als wij denken: wat moeten wij hieraan doen, ondertussen al onze Europese regeringsleiders niet weten hoe snel zij naar Saoedi-Arabië moeten afreizen om hun respect te betuigen aan de overleden koning. Saoedi-Arabië! Het land dat het terrorisme helpt te financieren, het land dat net zulke barbaarse praktijken heeft als de IS, het land dat er niet voor terugschrikt om mensen stokslagen te geven, handen en voeten af te hakken, doodstraffen uit te delen.

Dames en heren, dáár moet het begin zijn van ons anti-terrorismebeleid!

  Kristina Winberg (EFDD). - Tack herr talman! Det har påståtts från vissa håll att terrorism och radikalisering beror på fattigdom och obefintliga chanser att få jobb för ungdomar. I så fall borde väl Grekland, med en ungdomsarbetslöshet på över 50 procent, vimla av IS-krigare och Boko Haram-anhängare. Ändå har vi inte sett en enda självmordsbombare i Aten, och inga terroristattacker på mycket länge.

Vad har då Grekland istället? Låg invandring, en gemensam nationell identitet och förstånd att uttrycka sitt missnöje genom att gå till valurnorna och välja ett nytt styre.

Studie efter studie har visat att utländska terrorister generellt sett har högre utbildning och högre inkomster än genomsnittet i länderna de kommer från. Vad har terrorister för minsta gemensamma nämnare med den antisemitism vi såg i Paris? Ett intensivt hat mot väst och sina nya hemländer och en extrem tolkning av och bekännelse till islam.

Man kanske kommer åt en och annan genom arbetsmarknadspolitiska program, exit-program, integrationsåtgärder osv, men i det långa loppet måste vi inse att det finns väldigt många människor med en betydande kapacitet att skada oss, såväl inom som utom EU, som helt enkelt inte ser världen på samma sätt utan av hela sin själ vill upprätthålla ett islamiskt kalifat under strikta sharialagar.

  Diane Dodds (NI). - Mr President, firstly allow me to express my personal sympathy and that of my constituents in Northern Ireland following the recent abhorrent attacks and loss of life. Today, we stand with communities in France and in northern Nigeria, and indeed with those from the Jewish community experiencing the awful rise of anti-Semitism.

As a Member of this Parliament from Northern Ireland, I know all too well how the threat and the out-workings of terrorism can have devastating consequences, not only for the victims and their families, but also for a nation’s consciousness. In Northern Ireland we are privileged to have committed police and armed forces, and today as we assess anti-terrorism measures across Europe, Member States must ensure that their forces are given all the necessary resources to succeed in this fight against terror.

The Charlie Hebdo rallies in Paris and across France show a resilience of character that says the bullet and bomb will not prevail. Such resilience of character was also evident in my community as the IRA waged a campaign of terror. We held similar rallies after the Enniskillen bomb, after the Omagh bomb and other atrocities and, while the IRA was defeated, sadly for many justice still evades them and those scarred by terrorist activities. Today’s debate is about stopping terrorism, but every day we in this House must focus on the rights and needs of victims of terrorism.

  Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra (PPE). - Señor Presidente, empiezo con una cita del portavoz de al Bagdadi (es de antes de ayer): «Cualquier musulmán con capacidad de derramar una gota de sangre de los cruzados, que lo haga. ¿Visteis lo que un simple musulmán hizo con Canadá y su parlamento de holgazanes y lo que nuestros hermanos en Francia, Australia y Bélgica hicieron? Que Alá tenga misericordia con todos ellos. Lo que viene será peor y más amargo».

Antes de ayer. Esta es la amenaza, es una amenaza inequívoca, actual, permanente y sostenida en el tiempo y letalmente cumplida. ¿Y la respuesta? ¿Estamos aquí para la respuesta? No lo sé. La respuesta tiene que venir de la mano de la prevención, la detección, la persecución y la represión. Tiene que venir de la mano de todo ese catálogo de actuaciones que se han puesto aquí de manifiesto. Ayer mismo hice yo un diccionario, un diccionario de medidas y de objetivos, en el ámbito de las libertades y en el ámbito de la represión, la prevención, en la investigación y el enjuiciamiento.

Hay que mejorar las relaciones con Turquía, con Canadá, con Australia y con los Estados Unidos. Hay que mejorar nuestras fronteras exteriores, hay que neutralizar el tráfico de armas de fuego y de explosivos. Todo esto lo podemos hacer, lo tenemos que hacer con la fuerza de la razón y con la razón de la fuerza. Tenemos el derecho a defender y la obligación de defender a nuestros ciudadanos y además tenemos el Derecho primario, que da garantía y vitalidad a la norma jurídica que nos damos.

Somos más fuertes pero más vulnerables. O reaccionamos pronto, o, pronto, pronto, asistiremos, junto a debates estériles, a más minutos de silencio y a más manifestaciones solidarias.

  Jörg Leichtfried (S&D). - Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Sie haben in Ihrer Rede gemeint, Sicherheit ist Garantie für demokratische Gesellschaften – das ist richtig, und Terroristen attackieren diese Sicherheit. Aber Terroristen attackieren auch andere Grundbestandteile demokratischer Gesellschaften, nämlich die Freiheit, die Rechtsstaatlichkeit. Bei allen Maßnahmen, die zu ergreifen sind, die notwendig sind, muss man immer wieder mit bedenken, dass diese Balance zwischen Sicherheit und Bewahrung unserer Freiheit, Bewahrung unserer Rechtsstaatlichkeit eine unglaublich schwierige ist.

Wenn Sie jetzt glauben, wir brauchen mehr Daten – ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob das notwendig ist –, und wenn Sie glauben, wir brauchen Passagierdatenabkommen, Passagierdatenrichtlinien, dann müssen Sie eine vorschlagen, Herr Kommissar, und zwar eine, die den Entscheidungen des Europäischen Gerichtshofs, den Grundrechten entspricht. Dann kann man darüber diskutieren. Ich bin mir immer noch nicht sicher, ob das notwendig ist. Bei den letzten Ereignissen war es nicht so, dass zu wenig Daten da waren, da waren zu wenig Polizisten da, die diese Daten ausgewertet haben, und zu wenig Polizisten auf der Straße. Vielleicht sollte man darüber auch einmal diskutieren. 15, 20 Jahre Sparpolitik haben in Wahrheit auch unsere Polizei ruiniert, und sie ist nicht mehr in der Lage, darauf zu reagieren. Darüber muss man auch einmal diskutieren. Vielleicht brauchen die mehr Geld und nicht mehr Überwachung derjenigen, die sowieso unschuldig sind. Geschätzte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir müssen da wirklich vorsichtig sein.

Die sozialdemokratische Fraktion ist für vernünftige Aktionen, um Terrorismus zu verhindern, sie ist aber nicht für blinden Aktionismus, der nichts bringt und unsere Freiheit immer mehr einschränkt und unseren Rechtsstaat abbaut. Den Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die jetzt nach Grenzkontrollen rufen, sei gesagt: Grenzkontrollen hätten diese Anschläge nicht verhindert, aber sie hätten vielleicht diesen Mann daran gehindert, nach Paris zu kommen, der diese sechs Menschen gerettet hat. Darüber sollte man auch einmal nachdenken, ob das dann Sinn gehabt hätte.

  Helga Stevens (ECR). - In Zuid-Europa wordt slechts in het allerbeste geval een marginale veiligheidscontrole uitgevoerd op inkomende vluchtelingen met papieren. Maar vluchtelingen zonder papieren worden anders gescreend. Ook sommige EU-burgers vormen een veiligheidsrisico. Ik denk bijvoorbeeld aan terugkerende strijders.

Er is daarom nood aan frequentere, gerichte, maar niet systematische controles aan de buitengrenzen van Europa. Ik heb namelijk de indruk dat bijvoorbeeld de buitengrens met Turkije in de praktijk veel te poreus is. Om dit aan te pakken moeten - als eerste stap - gemeenschappelijke risico-indicatoren worden ontwikkeld. Voor mij zijn dat absoluut prioriteiten die nog onvoldoende worden aangepakt.

  Lorenzo Fontana (NI). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, devo dire la verità: purtroppo ho sentito un po' poco da parte del nostro Commissario. Mi sarebbe piaciuto sentire anche un po' di autocritica perché, credo che, se sta succedendo quello che sta succedendo, in parte la colpa è anche delle istituzioni europee. Mi piacerebbe, per esempio, sentire qualcosa riguardo quello che ha fatto l'Europa negli anni passati riguardo alla Libia, all'Iraq, o anche quanto ha fatto recentemente riguardo alla Siria o quanto non ha fatto, ad esempio, nei confronti di paesi come l'Arabia Saudita, che di sicuro non è uno dei paesi più tolleranti al mondo.

È un fallimento dell'Europa, un fallimento delle politiche di integrazione: non possiamo pensare che l'integrazione consista nel permettere a qualcuno di venire qui in Europa e di dire o fare quello che vuole. Quando ci sono delle persone in Europa che dicono che vogliono applicare la sharia, queste persone devono essere semplicemente espulse. Ed è anche un fallimento delle politiche di immigrazione: è notizia di ieri che l'Isis, dalla Libia, dice che vuole infiltrare dei terroristi che poi arriveranno, magari con i barconi, attraverso l'immigriamone clandestina, in Europa.

Quindi, servono controlli più rigorosi alle frontiere e soprattutto che quei clandestini che ci sono vengano rimpatriati.

  Michał Boni (PPE). - Mr President, Europe needs security which means it needs stronger counterterrorism actions and the new policy. It is important to avoid losing time at the political stage so the idea of a pact on counterterrorism among key political groups in Parliament is very much expected. I want to emphasise some points.

One: we should start common work with the Commission on the renewal of the European internal security strategy. We need clear pillars for this strategy, a holistic approach and a fast track. Two: it is important that work starts again on PNR as a common framework for 28 Member States, taking fully into account personal data protection, responding to the problem of retention indicated by the Court, based on real evidence of how this solution could be effective and ensure that those data which are really needed are processed.

Three: we need fast work on the NIS Directive. It is important for strengthening cooperation among Member States. The key point is to have useful cooperation among all the institutions which can contribute in the area of anti-terrorism actions (also responsible for the security of our external borders).

Four: we need proper legislation, adjusted to the terrorism challenges but which on the other hand protects differentiation in cultural, ethnic and religious views. Also with respect to privacy and encryptions by default in devices. This is the key goal – to finalise work on the whole privacy package.

Five: the last point, we need a good balance between freedom and security. Freedom and security are the two sides of the same face of the European citizen.

  Claude Moraes (S&D). - Mr President, like the Commissioner, I will be going to Riga at 5 p.m. to have the honour of representing Parliament in the negotiations. Listening to some of the contrasting views, it might be thought that this will be a very difficult task. In fact, I would suggest it is not as difficult as colleagues would think. The chair of my political group and other colleagues have actually said that if, notwithstanding the views of Mr Albrecht, they believe that PNR is something which can be justified by the Commissioner, that PNR is not objectionable in principle, in terms of proportionality and necessity, and that we have the requisite safeguards – with, as Ms Hohlmeier said, actual solidarity, and the civil liberties that my colleague Ms Sippel talked about – then together we can achieve this.

However, I would say to the Commissioner, on behalf of the Parliament and of my own group, that we have to build trust. The way to do this is to point out that PNR is not the only component of this strategy and road map against terrorism. This is about radicalisation and about Europol getting all the necessary leads against terrorism, as the Commissioner said. Fighting terrorism is about the causes of terrorism, and it is about a whole range of things – as many speakers have said today – because, if it is not about these things, then we cannot unite here in Parliament against terrorism, which is such a complex issue.

We should unite but we should not fool our public by pretending this is not a complex issue. We should work together with the Commission and the Council, in a sophisticated and compassionate way, to achieve our objectives while safeguarding civil liberties and ensuring that component is taken seriously in the Council meetings. I hope my colleagues will help us and help, with the Council and the Commission, in these discussions.

  Anders Primdahl Vistisen (ECR). - Hr. formand! Når man både hører den debat, der var på LIBE-Udvalgets møde i denne uge, og den debat, nogle af kollegerne har her i salen, så får man det indtryk, at man her i Europa-Parlamentet sidder i en osteklokke, hvor man fuldstændig ignorer de meget fornuftige ordninger, som regeringerne i medlemslandene ønsker - de meget fornuftige ordninger, som en stor del af borgerne i Europa ønsker. Man kører sig selv op på nogle principper, som lyder godt, og som der også skal tages hensyn til - altså hensynet til, at man ikke registrerer for meget, hensynet til, hvordan man registrerer - men man gør det på en så fundamentalistisk måde, at man bliver ved med at sætte hindringer i vejen for at få en ordentlig anti-terror-beskyttelse i Europa.

Hvis det fortsætter på denne måde, så er det helt klart mit indtryk, at regeringerne bare skal fortsætte uden om dette parlament. Hovedpointen må være at beskytte de europæiske borgere, ikke at beskytte forfængeligheden i nogle medlemmer af dette parlamentet, der ønsker at blokere PNR af hvilken som helst grund.

  Harald Vilimsky (NI). - Herr Präsident! Wann immer terroristische Gefahr droht auf unserem Kontinent oder jetzt auch tatsächlich leider konkreten Ausdruck gefunden hat, ist immer das selbe Reaktionsmuster Ihrerseits zu verzeichnen: Sie rufen nach einer Aushöhlung der bürgerlichen Grundrechte und sie rufen nach einer Implementierung von noch mehr Überwachungstechnologien. Ich frage mich, wieviel mehr Telefone wollen Sie noch überwachen, wieviel mehr an Internetverkehr wollen Sie noch überwachen, wieviel mehr an biometrischen Daten wollen Sie noch absaugen?

Sie müssen endlich auch die Stirn besitzen und den Mut, zu sagen, dass die Gefahr von einer ganz klaren Richtung ausgeht, und das ist der Islamismus. Man muss hier auch die richtigen politischen Reaktionsmuster darauf setzen. Man muss klarmachen, dass Zuwanderung aus dem islamischen Bereich künftig tunlichst unterbunden werden soll, weil Zuwanderung aus dem islamischen Bereich heißt, dass diese als Trägerwelle für politischen Islamismus gebraucht wird. Man muss klarmachen im Bereich Asyl, dass Asylbetreuung tunlichst auf dem Kontinent jener Menschen, die Schutz und Hilfe suchen, stattzufinden hat, wie es der deutsche Innenminister de Maizière auch verlangt hat. Und man muss auch jedem, der zu uns gekommen ist, klarmachen, dass unser Kontinent einer ist, der auf christlichen und abendländischen Wurzeln fußt, und dass jeder, der damit Probleme hat, wieder auf seinen Ursprungskontinent zurückgehen soll.

Meine Damen und Herren, ich fordere eine Null-Toleranz-Politik gegenüber jeglichem politischen Extremismus und gegenüber religiösem Fundamentalismus, und ich fordere, dass Sie endlich diesem Problem mutig und ehrlich in die Augen blicken und die richtigen Handlungen setzen, anstatt hier nur herumzureden.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, vorrei dire che, alla luce di quanto ha anche detto il Commissario – e cioè il rischio che fare tante dichiarazioni che non sono seguite dai fatti, aumenti la sfiducia dei cittadini – è quasi difficile intervenire su questo tema. Gli occhi saranno puntati molto sull'incontro di Riga, così come saranno puntati anche sull'incontro informale dei Capi di Stato e di Governo.

Io credo che noi abbiamo bisogno di concretezza. Non voglio ripetere le misure cui hanno già fatto riferimento i miei colleghi. Ho molto apprezzato l'intervento della collega Hohlmeier. Penso che quello di cui abbiamo bisogno, tutti quanti qui, è di lasciare a casa le nostre ideologie, di smetterla di essere o "buonisti" o "allarmisti". Dobbiamo metterci vicino ai nostri cittadini, che in questo momento ricevono una marea di informazioni, anche dissonanti e contrastanti che aumentano l'allarme.

Perché, ad esempio, nel mio paese un ministro degli Esteri prima dice che c'è la possibilità di infiltrazioni attraverso l'immigrazione, poi lo smentisce; poi però arriva comunque – come è stato ricordato anche da Marine Le Pen – l'allarme dalla Libia. Sappiamo che la Libia, territorio dal quale parte quella marea di disperati, è sempre più nelle mani dell'Isis e non possiamo tollerare che i nostri cittadini – e le parlo in particolare a nome dei miei concittadini che sono gli italiani – si sentano in trincea, si sentano in prima linea e vedono che noi continuiamo a perderci in chiacchere, continuiamo a filtrare la realtà attraverso visioni più o meno ideologiche mentre hanno assolutamente bisogno che noi acceleriamo sulle misure concrete esistenti e soprattutto che superiamo quella mancanza di fiducia che c'è tra Stati e, alle volte, tra diversi corpi delle forze dell'ordine, che superiamo anche quelle gelosie e invidie che stanno bloccando un sistema già in campo, al quale dobbiamo dare respiro e forza perché credo che la sicurezza sia uno dei principali diritti di un cittadino e sicuramente uno dei principali doveri. Credo addirittura che sia la ragion d'essere di uno Stato, uno dei principali motivi per cui gli Stati esistono. Quindi, mi affido a lei Commissario, affinché diate veramente concretezza alle parole.

  Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR). - Mr President, I wonder what scale of atrocity it would take before all Members of this Parliament understand that strong security measures, exercised with proper oversight by our democratically-elected governments – possibly assisted in limited areas by the European Union – are necessary to combat a serious terrorist threat.

I must say that I am astonished by some of the views that have been expressed today. In relation to the terrible terrorist attacks in Paris, one of our colleagues remarked that the perpetrators were known. So what would he have done? I suspect he would be the last person that would see the logical conclusion from what he has just said, and that is that all these suspects should be locked up. That would be the conclusion from what he has just said.

In these times of heightened terrorist threat our intelligence and security services need the ability to penetrate the black hole that parts of the Internet have become and to identify the patterns of behaviour that might enable terrorists to be identified. We need PNR, but it is just one of many measures that need to be taken.

Let us also, by the way, avoid exploiting yet another crisis in order just to give the EU more powers and competence. It is about being effective in our Member States.

  Marcel de Graaff (NI). - West-Europa gaat gebukt onder terreur, onder aanslagen, moorden, verkrachtingen. Jihadisten en wapenhandelaren reizen vrij rond in de Europese Unie. Turkije, Saoedi-Arabië en Quatar betalen imams om haat te prediken. In Europese madrassa's worden kinderen opgeleid voor oorlog tegen de ongelovigen, tegen de Europese normen en waarden, tegen ons, tegen u en ik.

Onze burgers zijn het zat. Zij gaan massaal de straat op in Milaan, in Dresden en in Parijs. En wat doet de Europese Commissie? Zij pleit voor meer immigratie uit moslimlanden, meer immigratie uit achterlijke culturen, meer Turkije. Genoeg is genoeg! Schengen moet stoppen, immigratie moet stoppen, islamisering moet stoppen. Jihadisten eruit, haatpredikers eruit, terroristen eruit! Ik eis van de Europese Commissie onmiddellijk de immigratie te stoppen en de binnengrenzen te herstellen.

  Axel Voss (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Europa braucht eine neue Antiterrorstrategie und auch eine verbesserte Strategie für die innere Sicherheit, denn der derzeitige Zustand kann nicht beruhigen bei diesen Bedrohungen, und die Kommission und Sie, Herr Arramopoulos sind da auf dem richtigen Weg. Wir sollten hier auch den Opfern und Hinterbliebenen und unseren Bürgern zeigen, dass wir in der Lage sind, hierauf zu reagieren, und wir sollten auch entschieden darauf reagieren, ansonsten haben wir schon verloren.

Manche von uns – und das regt mich richtig auf in dieser Debatte – wollen einfach manche Realitäten nicht zur Kenntnis nehmen. Unsere Freiheiten sind für die Terroristen Anlass genug, uns umzubringen. Und wenn Sie jetzt alle auf den Grabsteinen sehen wollen. Aber eure Daten waren sicher, dann beruhigt das keinen! Natürlich brauchen wir eine Balance zwischen Sicherheit und Freiheit hier in diesem Bereich. Dafür braucht man aber auch den politischen Willen, das hinzubekommen, und vielleicht sollte man dann eben auch mal zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass uns die Experten seit vier Jahren erzählen, dass man aus den Fluggastdaten besondere Erkenntnisse herausbekommt, die eben mit anderen Daten nicht zu gewinnen sind. Der Berichterstatter hat in diesen Jahren enorme Anstrengungen gemacht und ist Ihnen entgegengekommen, und vielleicht sollte man da einfach auch mal anfangen, die politische Verantwortung zu übernehmen.

Wenn hier immer von Aktionismus gesprochen wird – ich wäre ja froh, wenn Sie überhaupt mal in Aktion kommen würden, anstatt immer nur gegen alles zu sein – seit vier Jahren puzzeln wir daran herum und die bessere Koordinierung ist eben auch so ein Punkt. Wir hatten im NSA-Bericht vom März letzten Jahres vorgeschlagen, die geheimdienstlichen Informationen auch entsprechend zu koordinieren. Es wurde von Ihnen abgelehnt! Vielleicht kann man da jetzt mal einen Schritt weiterkommen. Vielen Dank.

  Gerolf Annemans (NI). - Als Vlaming en dus voorlopig als onderdaan van het Belgische koninkrijk wil ik verontschuldigingen aanbieden aan alle slachtoffers van islamterrorisme. België is vandaag specifiek in een Youtube filmpje door IS bedreigd met autobommen en onthoofdingen, tezamen met Frankrijk. België wordt "het kleine zusje" van Frankrijk genoemd, erg genoeg.

De wapens van Koulibaly, van de gebroeders Kouachi werden hier twee kilometer verderop gekocht, in de wijk van het Brusselse zuidstation. Diverse terroristencellen kwamen de afgelopen dagen op Belgisch grondgebied in beeld. Er is een verband tussen dit terrorisme en de wijze waarop de immigratie hier in België is verlopen, de immigratiepolitiek van de socialistische partijen, decennia lang, van België. En van hun politieke bondgenoten, die de grenzen van dit land openzetten. Jarenlang Belgische papieren overhandigen zonder voorwaarden te stellen en zonder beperkingen op te leggen heeft een monster gebaard. Ik herhaal: ik verontschuldig mij in hun plaats bij alle slachtoffers van terrorisme.

  Presidente. - (rivolgendosi all'onorevole Buonanno, che chiede di poter intervenire per una mozione di procedura) Onorevole Buonanno, la prego di dar prova di rispetto dell'Aula. Mi dica a quale articolo del regolamento si richiama.

  Gianluca Buonanno (NI). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, mi richiamo all'articolo 186 del regolamento: la mozione di procedura. In assenza della signora Mogherini, vorrei sottolineare questo argomento così importante, perché noi siamo in guerra contro il terrorismo islamico. Sono vestito da soldato per ricordarvelo, perché voi dormite in piedi. Bisogna affrontare questo tema a Strasburgo, tenendo una seduta apposita per un'intera giornata. Quindi chiedo una mozione di procedura con la signora Mogherini presente. Signor Presidente le chiedo questo perché su temi molto più cretini state qua delle giornate e su temi così importanti non fate parlare nessuno. … questa è l'Europa davvero dei "dormi in piedi".

  Presidente. - Onorevole, ho capito perfettamente il richiamo al regolamento: è un tema che deve essere sollevato dai gruppi in occasione delle riunioni della presidenza.

  Gianluca Buonanno (NI). - Signor Presidente, mi scusi, parlate sempre di aria fritta, le cose serie sono queste. Signor Presidente, è inutile fare il Presidente e poi essere ... (Il Presidente ritira la parola all'oratore)

  Teresa Jiménez-Becerril Barrio (PPE). - Señor Presidente, Señorías, pasado mañana se cumple un nuevo aniversario del asesinato de mi hermano y su mujer a manos de la organización terrorista ETA. Hace pocas semanas tres terroristas sembraron el terror en París matando a doce inocentes y aterrorizando a millones de europeos. A mi hermano lo mataron fanáticos nacionalistas; a los periodistas, fanáticos religiosos. A todos les digo que no hay tierra ni dios que valga la vida de una persona inocente. Por eso, hoy aquí no hablo solo como víctima del terrorismo, sino como una ciudadana europea y defendiendo a aquellos que tienen el derecho de vivir sin miedo.

Necesitamos una política terrorista coherente y continua, no intermitente, que actúa solo bajo la onda emocional, pero que cuando nos quitamos la pegatina volvemos a la hipócrita indiferencia. Y sí, claro que soy partidaria del PNR, y de tenerlo ya, porque la urgencia, señores, no está reñida con la responsabilidad de proteger a nuestros ciudadanos. Basta ya de afrontar el terrorismo de modo ideológico, porque a quienes nos matan no les importa nada si nosotros somos de derechas, de izquierdas, verdes, del GUE, socialistas o populares. Si ellos, los muertos, pudieran hablar, seguro que nos pedirían que nos uniéramos y defendiéramos el más importante de todos los derechos, que es el derecho a la vida. Porque sin el derecho a la vida no podemos ejercer ninguno de los demás, y tampoco el más importante, que es el de la libertad y por el que han muerto todas las víctimas del terrorismo.

Procedura catch-the-eye

  Alessandra Mussolini (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, mi auguro che il Commissario abbia le idee molto chiare. Perché all'inizio ero ottimista, quando ho sentito l'intento di trovare un'unione tra di noi, tra le forze politiche, un'unione di questa Europa, dal momento che il terrorismo trae spunto, trae l'humus vitale e alimento, proprio attraverso le nostre divisioni.

Da un lato, si sente parlare della possibilità di chiudere le frontiere, di abbandonare Schengen, e quindi tornare ad uno stato feudale. Dall'altro si parla di ricacciare gli islamici dall'Europa: ma già sono in Europa. Sono bastate tre persone. Si chiamano "lupi solitari", per creare quello che è successo: tre persone.

Allora, mettiamoci d'accordo, pur con le dovute differenze su quelle che sono le misure! Ancora, il PNR europeo. Ma il PNR alcuni lo vogliono, altri meno, altri dicono no al PNR tra i paesi europei. Ma non lo vuole neanche il Garante per la protezione dei dati. Quindi è importante avere un'unica voce, un'unica voce per combattere una battaglia difficile. Ho sentito parlare di tolleranza – è giustissimo – ma non di reciprocità. Gli islamici vogliono anche poter costruire moschee ma distruggono le nostre chiese. Quindi, reciprocità e rispetto.

  Ana Gomes (S&D). - Mr President, why do we keep talking about foreign fighters and not recognise that the main threat is indeed home-grown, coming from EU nationals such as those who carried out attacks in Madrid, in London, in Brussels and lately in Paris. Why do Member States, instead of waving PNR as a magic bullet, not adequately finance national information and security services and those at EU level, namely Europol, Eurojust, Frontex, in order to equip them with expertise in Arabic and other language skills, as well as in human intelligence to monitor social media, to draw up shared lists of terrorism suspects, spend resources on targeted instead of mass surveillance, on protecting critical infrastructure and on fighting effectively cybercrime and financing of terrorism?

Why do Member States and the EU tolerate the proliferation of competing services and crisis centres, even at EU level as well as at national level, which compete with each other instead of cooperating and sharing information? Why do they not invest in a single crisis and information centre at EU level to serve all the EU institutions and communicate with Member States? And of course, instead of the austerity that fosters social disintegration, why do they not finance programmes to prevent radicalisation and de-radicalise the young people from our communities who are being drawn into these horrendous activities?

  Kazimierz Michał Ujazdowski (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Wobec takiego zjawiska jak terroryzm trzeba działać w sposób spójny i szybki. Pani Hohlmeier wzywała do spójności, ale mam takie wrażenie, że bardzo szybko jedność została rozbita. Jeśli brać na poważnie głosy lewicy, zielonych, to bardzo wyraźnie powiedziano, „nie chcemy nowych instrumentów do walki z terroryzmem”, a bardziej inteligentnie i miękko mówią to socjaliści, także pan Verhofstadt dążył w tym samym kierunku. Ale jeszcze bardziej niepokoi mnie to żółwie tempo komisarza Avramopoulosa – zapowiedź, że w maju będziemy mieć dopiero program walki z terroryzmem, że wtedy ukształtuje się definitywnie agenda programowa, to jest niezwykle wolne tempo. Nie można też cały czas powtarzać formuły: „chcemy skutecznej walki i chcemy respektu dla praw podstawowych”. Trzeba pokazać konkretne instrumenty i mam nadzieję, że pan komisarz w ostatnim słowie po pierwsze przyśpieszy kalendarz, po drugie powie o tym zdecydowanie bardziej konkretnie niż na początku.

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). - Señor Presidente, sí a la seguridad para proteger la integridad de la ciudadanía europea y sí a una seguridad que garantice los derechos fundamentales, con medidas acordes a nuestros estándares democráticos.

La primera herramienta contra el desafío al que nos enfrentamos es la inteligencia. Necesitamos una coordinación de objetivos e información a nivel europeo y un aprovechamiento eficiente de todos los recursos técnicos y humanos. Y nada menos inteligente que aprovechar el viaje para restar, marginar a instituciones competentes en la materia y dispuestas a sumar. Nada peor que limar libertades. Las ideas no delinquen, delinque la radicalidad, que las convierte en instrumentos de odio contra el otro. Y no olvidemos que apostar por la paz incluye eliminar la fractura social en la que el extremismo tiene su mejor caldo de cultivo.

  Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL). - A prevenção e o firme combate ao terrorismo não podem jamais ser um pretexto para impor medidas de caráter securitário, limitadoras das liberdades, dos direitos e das garantias dos cidadãos, como aliás já vimos com o Patriot Act. Não aceitaremos também medidas de cooperação judicial em matéria penal que ponham em causa princípios constitucionalmente e democraticamente consagrados pelos povos de cada país. Têm, sim, que ser adotadas medidas de combate sério ao financiamento do terrorismo, venham de offshore, venham da venda de recursos energéticos e também medidas de combate ao tráfico de armas e, dizer: terrorismo é sempre terrorismo, em qualquer canto do mundo.

A União Europeia e outras forças não podem apoiar e financiar organizações que são ligadas à Al-Quaeda e ao Estado Islâmico e depois querer combatê-las quando estão ao pé das nossas casas e o terrorismo tanto acontece em Paris, como é praticado nos territórios ocupados da Palestina ou através dos drones que os Estados Unidos usam para combater populações indefesas. É terrorismo em todo o lado.

  Ignazio Corrao (EFDD). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Commissario Avramopoulos, da un lato, abbiamo questa richiesta di sicurezza; dall'altro, abbiamo i diritti civili e le libertà. Quando si mettono sulla bilancia queste due cose, si rischia che, in nome del pericolo del terrorismo, si mettano in discussione conquiste civili, il raggiungimento delle quali ha richiesto tanti anni. Allora, cerchiamo di analizzare storicamente cosa è successo ogni volta che si è messo in mezzo un pericolo del genere: stiamo attenti a non mettere in discussione delle libertà civili importanti.

Ha ragione il collega Albrecht nell'affermare che gli strumenti già esistono e dovrebbero essere utilizzati meglio. Ad esempio, in tema di sicurezza c'è poca cooperazione tra i servizi segreti dei singoli Stati membri. Cerchiamo di scambiarci le informazioni e agire meglio da questo punto di vista, invece di evocare un mostro e rischiare di fare passi indietro.

Non riesco a capire il senso delle affermazioni della collega Le Pen quando dice di ripristinare i confini e rifare, non lo so, la politica colonialista di cento anni fa. Cerchiamo di capire che il mondo è cambiato e che su certe conquiste non si può tornare indietro, come Schengen non si può mettere in discussione.

  Krisztina Morvai (NI). - Mindenki, akinek van szíve, megdöbben attól, hogyha a terrorizmus következtében ártatlan emberek meghalnak. De aki egyszerre használja a szívét és az eszét, az azt is átlátja, hogy nagyon ki lehet használni a terrorizmussal összefüggő természetes félelmét az embereknek arra, hogy olyan intézkedéseket vezessenek be, amelyek egyre többet elvesznek az emberek szabadságából és jogaiból, és egy kicsi, átláthatatlan, ellenőrizhetetlen, óriási hatalommal rendelkező csoportnak adjanak a kezébe ellenőrzést a polgárok felett – ezt nyilvánvalóan nem akarjuk.

Ugye, ne felejtsük el, hogy a terror elleni háború, vagy a terrorizmus elleni háború jegyében vezette be a nyugati világ az internetes kommunikáció fölötti totális ellenőrzést, a lehallgatásokat. Ennek jegyében kínoznak még mindig Guantánamón bírói döntés nélkül és vádemelés nélkül foglyokat. Ennek jegyében indítottak két igazságtalan és indokolhatatlan háborút, amelynek következtében százezrek haltak meg, civil lakosság. Mindezek az intézkedések nem megelőzték, hanem még veszélyesebbé tették... (Az elnök megvonta a szót a képviselőtől.)

  Csaba Sógor (PPE). - Mr President, the global nature of recent terrorist violence demands that we redouble our efforts to provide a genuine area of security, and that we integrate the internal and external aspects of the fight against terrorism. Many of the instruments have already been put in place, and in such cases we need only to consolidate or better apply rules, or to exercise trust among Member States.

A European security policy would probably have more respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights principles than the current patchwork of individual Member State solutions. Fighting for more security should never jeopardise the other objectives of freedom and justice. This is what must always differentiate us from the people we try to protect ourselves from. However, all security policy measures must go hand in hand with introspection as to the causes of radicalisation and with an effort to develop more social cohesion and inclusiveness in our societies.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). - Señor Presidente, quiero unirme a quienes en este debate nos han recordado que el enemigo no es el Islam, sino el fanatismo criminal de quienes están dispuestos a matar y a morir matando y a quienes recuerdan que el atentado terrorista más sanguinario de los últimos años no lo perpetró un musulmán: se llamaba Anders Breivik y era un racista de extrema derecha cargado de odio contra el Islam y contra el pluralismo religioso e identitario.

Me sumo también a quienes recuerdan que la batalla, que debe garantizar un equilibrio entre libertad y seguridad, no la podemos librar traicionando el ADN de la Unión Europea, que es el respeto a los derechos fundamentales y fundamentalmente de la privacidad de los europeos y a quienes nos recuerdan también que la batalla incluye la lucha por los valores, contra la exclusión social y contra la marginalidad, en la que anida el fanatismo psicótico.

Y, finalmente, por supuesto que me sumo también a los que recuerdan la importancia de legislar contra el discurso del odio, porque en la legislación penal española hemos conseguido distinguir la libertad de expresión del enaltecimiento del terrorismo, la glorificación del terrorismo, la apología del terrorismo y la humillación de las víctimas.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). - Безспорно ислямският фанатизъм и радикализъм е най-голямото предизвикателство пред западната цивилизация в момента. Безспорно на тази религия се гледа като на политика и нейните вдъхновители чертаят и следват една-единствена политическа цел – да превземат целия свят от името на тяхната гледна точка. Ние имаме два избора, или да се съпротивляваме, или да загубим тази борба. Но тази борба не се води с декларации, уважаеми г-н Председател и колеги. Тази борба може да се води единствено със силна държава, с граници, с разузнаване, с национална сигурност. Това, което ние можем и трябва да правим като Европейски парламент, е да използваме нашите политически инструменти. И един политически инструмент, г-н Комисар, е това, да бъде наложена санкция на държава, която подкрепя тероризма, например Турция; държава, която ползва европейски фондове; държава, която организира трафик на хора; държава, която финансира, организира и лекува бойците на ISIS или на ИДИЛ, или както искате ги наречете; държава, която застрашава съседните като България и Гърция, прехвърляйки десетки нелегални мигранти. Това можем и това трябва да правим и тези санкции трябва да бъдат поискани от вас.

  Marielle de Sarnez (ALDE). - Monsieur le Président, nous ne sommes pas dans des temps ordinaires. La menace intérieure et extérieure est réelle et bien là, c'est pourquoi la volonté politique doit s'exprimer vite. L'Europe doit faire la démonstration de sa capacité à agir dans le cadre naturel de son état de droit.

Évidemment, il faut améliorer le partage des renseignements, renforcer le SIS et Europol, mettre en œuvre un PNR européen intelligent. De même, il faut décider de contrôler systématiquement les frontières aériennes, maritimes et terrestres de Schengen pour montrer que Schengen est efficace. Il faudra, de même, renforcer Eurojust et – pourquoi pas? – nous doter d'un procureur européen.

Enfin, il faudra, sur le long terme, avoir une stratégie réelle pour nos prisons, qui sont aujourd'hui trop souvent, dans nombre d'États membres, une école pour le crime et le terrorisme.

Nous devrons aussi mener une politique étrangère responsable, je pense en particulier à la Turquie. Nous devons, en collaboration avec elle, repenser – pourquoi pas? – à une politique de visas temporaires.

Enfin, il faudra avancer sur l'Europe de la défense. Faisons tout cela ensemble, alors nous démontrerons que nous sommes enfin à la hauteur des défis.

(Fine della procedura catch-the-eye)

  Dimitris Avramopoulos, Member of the Commission. - Mr President, honourable Members, first of all allow me to express my thanks to all of you for your contributions to this very interesting and important debate. In the face of the monstrous attacks this month, and in responding to the ongoing threat of terrorist attacks, Europe must remain strong and united in its response. Do not have any doubt that the Commission will do its part to support the response at EU level, and we will work hand in hand with Parliament and, obviously, with Member States in our common goal of keeping Europe open and secure.

On EU PNR, since many Members of this Parliament referred to that, I want to clarify once again that our position remains unchanged. The Commission is committed to working together with the co-legislators to achieve a legal instrument which is both effective and fully in line with fundamental rights. We are very carefully assessing all options regarding how the Commission can best help the European Union legislators to reach a quick and effective result on the EU PNR proposal. Allow me to thank the rapporteur, Mr Kirkhope, for the work he is currently doing. We will be next to him.

On the implementation of existing measures: this is indeed a priority for us. The Commission is expecting responses by 15 March from all Member States.

On Schengen now: yes, I agree with Mr Verhofstadt. Schengen is not a problem, it is part of the solution, and I explained in my opening remarks how we need to make the maximum use of the existing possibilities, and the best use of this tool.

I would like to thank you again for this very timely debate. I have received one important message out of this which is that we should be united; work together here, but also with all the institutions. The Commission is committed to working with you for the benefit of all citizens, to defend their rights and their security, to work with you in trust and in unity.

  Presidente. - La discussione è chiusa, la votazione avrà luogo nella prossima tornata.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)

  Jonathan Arnott (EFDD), in writing. – I am disappointed to hear references in today's debate to the European Arrest Warrant, a pernicious piece of legislation which allows UK citizens to be extradited without the case ever being heard by a British court to weigh up whether the evidence is sufficient to warrant extradition. Even more disturbingly, the British Conservative Party chose to opt back into this legislation when it had the opportunity to do so and stifled the Westminster Parliament in the process. We need strong national security and borders to counter terrorism; let us by all means share best practice with our European neighbours but security must be sovereign.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. – Teroristinės atakos Paryžiuje visai Europai skaudžiai priminė, jog pernelyg ilgai gyvenome, tikėdami apgaulingu saugumu ir pernelyg ilgai ignoravome signalus, kurie šiandien jau pasireiškė ypatingo smurto ir destrukcijos forma. Jau 2003 m. Europos saugumo strategijoje buvo įvardinti pagrindiniai saugumo iššūkiai, kaip antai terorizmas, regioniniai konfliktai , organizuotas nusikalstamumas, tačiau šiandieninio terorizmo šaknys kyla iš dešimtmečiais vykusių visuomeninių pokyčių tiek mūsų visuomenėje, tiek ir iš nesugebėjimo rasti ilgalaikius taikos ir stabilumo sprendimus, ypač konfliktinėse arabų šalyse. Jei prieš daugiau nei dešimtmetį kalbėjome apie terorizmo grėsmę iš trečiųjų šalių, tai šiandien susiduriame su dar sudėtingesne problema, kai teroristines atakas vykdo ES gimę ir augę mūsų piliečiai. Manau, kad į saugumo klausimą turi būti žiūrima kompleksiškai ir peržiūrint veiksmus migracijos politikos, išorės sienų apsaugos ir organizuoto nusikalstamumo srityse. Tikiuosi, kad valstybės narės ir visa Europa rimtai vertina iškilusias saugumo grėsmes, ir bus rasta politinė valia priimti sudėtingus, tačiau saugumo užtikinimui neišvengiamus sprendimus.

  Dominique Bilde (NI), par écrit. – Votre déclaration afin de lutter contre le terrorisme au niveau européen ne semble être qu’un nouvel artifice assorti de "mesurettes" afin de faire bonne figure après les tragiques évènements qui ont touché la France. Peut-être la Commission pourrait-elle aussi accompagner ses mesures d’un site internet "stop-djihadisme" comme celui créé dernièrement par le gouvernement français, comble de l’absurde face à cette menace ? Malheureusement, elle réussit presque à s’en approcher puisque dans sa déclaration, mention était faite des possibilités de l’Union européenne pour "lutter contre les discours de haine". Il est évident que cela résoudra les problèmes de sécurité au niveau européen… Ce triste constat d’impuissance face au terrorisme n’est que le résultat d’années de politiques laxistes de la part de l’Union européenne et de la plupart des gouvernements des États membres dont le mien, la France, qui préfèrent se voiler la face. Seule une politique volontariste permettra de résoudre clairement la situation. Les bonnes intentions ne suffiront pas, il faut dès à présent stopper l’adhésion de nouveaux pays à l’Union européenne, notamment la Turquie ou les pays des Balkans, ou encore suspendre immédiatement les accords de Schengen. Enfin, il devient urgent d’établir, comme cela se pratique aux États-Unis, un contrôle des dossiers de données passagers (PNR).

  Alain Cadec (PPE), par écrit. – Les attentats de Paris ont prouvé une fois de plus que l'Europe est la cible de groupes terroristes organisés. Des jeunes de nos pays partent à l'étranger, dans des régions en difficulté, où ils sont formés au combat par des mouvements extrémistes, puis ils reviennent frapper l'Europe en plein cœur. La réponse au terrorisme est l'unité et la solidarité des Européens et non le repli sur soi ou l'individualisme comme certains le prônent. La solution se trouve dans l'Europe. Nous devons mettre en place un PNR européen. Les socialistes doivent comprendre que nos concitoyens ont besoin de se sentir en sécurité. Nous devons repenser Schengen au regard des récents évènements. Nous avons pour obligation d'améliorer la surveillance aux frontières de l'Union. Pour cela, il nous faut augmenter les moyens financiers de Frontex. La coopération entre les polices et la coopération entre les États membres sont les directions à suivre. Mais avant tout, nous devons éduquer nos jeunes aux valeurs européennes pour que, dès le plus jeune âge, ils ne soient pas tentés par des discours prônant la haine et la destruction.

  Nicola Caputo (S&D), per iscritto. – Non possiamo nasconderlo: in Europa la minaccia del terrorismo è seria e le istituzioni comunitarie non possono che rispondere con fermezza. Tuttavia, credo che, dopo i fatti di Parigi, il termine che deve accompagnare l'azione dell'UE debba essere: "equilibrio". Equilibrio tra la necessità di mettere in campo azioni immediate e l'obbligo di pensare a soluzioni di lungo periodo; equilibrio tra la raccolta dati, l'uso di strumenti di intelligence ed il diritto alla privacy, ma soprattutto equilibrio tra sicurezza e libertà, i due pilastri sui cui si basa la nostra democrazia.

Si acceleri dunque la discussione sulla direttiva per lo scambio dati dei dati PNR ma venga anche garantita ai cittadini europei la tutela delle loro informazioni personali. Si intensifichi il controllo sugli spostamenti dei foreign fighters ma senza arrivare a una limitazione delle libertà europee, a cominciare dalla chiusura delle frontiere aperte da Schengen.

Non possiamo infatti accettare che la minaccia terroristica intacchi il modello di società europeo e i valori ad esso associati. Infine, è cruciale che l'Unione si doti di una politica di sicurezza comune, che preveda una condivisione totale di informazioni tra i 28 Stati membri, caratteristica fondamentale per poter iniziare a parlare di una vera intelligence europea.

  Carlos Coelho (PPE), por escrito. – Não me oferece dúvidas que temos de combater o terrorismo que ameaça cidadãos inocentes e pretende subverter os nossos valores e as nossas sociedades. Mas, ao fazê-lo, temos de rejeitar leituras simplistas e discursos políticos demagógicos. Não é verdade que se possa associar acriticamente terrorismo a emigração. Parte dos terroristas, como se viu agora em Paris, mas já se viu no passado em Espanha e na Irlanda, são cidadãos europeus. Não é verdade que precisemos de novos instrumentos e novas leis, minando a privacidade dos europeus. O que temos de fazer é tirar partido dos instrumentos que já possuímos, otimizando a cooperação judicial e policial (incluindo a partilha de informação produzida pelos serviços secretos), sermos eficazes no combate ao tráfico de armas e pôr em prática, sem demoras, o novo Sistema de Avaliação de Schengen. Temos de identificar os problemas e resolvê-los. Clamar por mais medidas securitárias e diminuir as liberdades é ceder vitória aos terroristas. É reprovável e não podemos deixar de condenar as formas de fazer política que exploram o medo e o sentimento de insegurança.

  Tanja Fajon (S&D), pisno. – Dogodki v Parizu so šokirali Evropo in svet. Ljudje so prestrašeni, pričakujejo ukrepe. Zagotoviti moramo varnost, ampak ne za ceno varnosti naših svoboščin. Naše družbe morajo ostati odprte, svobodne. Odgovor na grožnje o terorizmu v Evropi ne smejo biti strah ali nesorazmerni varnostni ukrepi, odgovor mora biti krepitev vrednot, kot so svoboda, demokracija, solidarnost. Evropejci se moramo z ramo ob rami boriti proti vsem oblikam ekstremizma. Evropske vlade ne smejo izgubiti razsodnosti. Ne smemo uvajati množičnega nadzora nad evidenco podatkov o letalskih potnikih (EU PNR) brez ustrezne analize. Zanima nas, kakšni bodo pogoji hrambe podatkov, kdo jih bo uporabljal in v kakšnih primerih. Nimamo predsodkov, ampak potrebujemo jamstvo o zaščiti podatkov in zasebnosti Evropejcev. Države članice EU premalo uporabljajo obstoječe instrumente. Te moramo bolj izkoristiti, kot je Schengenski informacijski sistem, ne pa uvajati novih. Okrepiti moramo sodelovanje med evropskimi pravosodnimi organi, izmenjavo informacij, potrebujemo obveščevalne službe, ki delujejo skupaj. Socialisti in demokrati ne bomo pristali na spreminjanje schengenskih pravil in omejevanje svobode gibanja. Prav tako ne bomo dovolili omejevanja svobode na spletu. V Evropi moramo zagotoviti spoštovanje temeljnih pravic in vladavine prava, razpravo pa usmeriti v izobraževanje, deradikalizacijo mladih v Evropi in mirno sožitje različnih kultur in ver.

  José Inácio Faria (ALDE), por escrito. – Os trágicos eventos de Paris, de Verviers e, mais recentemente, os do Hotel Corinthia colocaram-nos novamente perante a necessidade de encontrar resposta para prevenir e combater o terrorismo, o radicalismo e o novo desafio dos terroristas homegrown. Estes combates e o reforço da segurança não se confinam meramente às fronteiras dos Estados-Membros. São problemas transfronteiriços que exigem soluções conjuntas, assentes na confiança mútua. Não podemos, no entanto, desvirtuar os nossos objetivos, legislando a quente com base na emoção. Devemos avaliar o conteúdo e a eficácia dos instrumentos de que já dispomos e promover a sua plena aplicação antes de equacionar a sua alteração. Estes atos hediondos atentam contra vidas humanas, mas também contra os princípios fundadores da União: o respeito pela vida, a defesa da liberdade, mas também a solidariedade para todos aqueles que, por motivos económicos e políticos, procuram refúgio nas nossas fronteiras. Termino, lembrando-vos que celebramos hoje o dia europeu da proteção de dados, dia mundial da privacidade. É nossa obrigação assegurar que a perda de direitos, como a privacidade, não seja vista como inevitável. A recolha e partilha de informação necessária para a prevenção e a repressão do terrorismo deve ser qualitativa e não quantitativa!

  Eugen Freund (S&D), schriftlich. – Das Allerwichtigste im Kampf gegen den Extremismus und Terrorismus ist, die Ursachen dafür zu erkennen und danach vorzugehen. Wir haben in Europa schon mehrfach und in vielen Ländern Terroranschläge erlebt, die wir in den Griff bekommen haben. Die Italiener werden sich an den Kampf der Brigate Rosse gegen das politische Establishment in ihrem Land erinnern, die Deutschen an die Rote Armee Fraktion, die auch viele Opfer jenseits der eigentlichen Zielpersonen, damals waren es Wirtschafts-, Bank- und Industriekapitäne, gefunden haben. In Spanien hat die ETA zugeschlagen, in Nordirland gab es jahrzehntelange Auseinandersetzungen, die uns als Religionskrieg verkauft wurden, die aber in Wirklichkeit soziale Dimensionen hatten. Und genau da müssen wir auch jetzt wieder ansetzen. Die Täter sind nicht in erster Linie radikale Islamisten, sondern von der Gesellschaft ausgegrenzte Menschen, die in dem Land, in dem sie aufgewachsen sind, keine Anerkennung, keine soziale Integration gefunden haben. Entsprechende Ausbildung und danach befriedigende Arbeitsplätze nehmen dem Extremismus den Wind aus den Segeln. Und dann muss die Europäische Union sich auch stärker diplomatisch dafür einsetzen, dass die Krisenherde am Rande Europas eingedämmt werden – all diese Maßnahmen bilden die Basis für eine bessere Integration –, darauf müssen wir hinarbeiten.

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D), par écrit. – En considérant les récentes et abominables attaques terroristes à Paris, les autres actions terroristes en Europe, les nombreuses tentatives de mener des attaques terroristes en Europe déjouées par les agences de sécurité et de renseignement des États membres de l'Union européenne, il pourrait être temps pour les institutions de l'Union d'analyser la possibilité de mettre en place un service de renseignement antiterroriste de l'Union européenne. Je sais qu'il y a toujours une réticence de la part de certains pays de l'Union à suivre un tel projet, mais l'Europe est attaquée et nous devons répondre de manière appropriée, afin de protéger nos citoyens, nos institutions, nos valeurs, notre liberté, la liberté de penser, de parler, d'agir, d'écrire, selon notre guise. La première étape vers la réalisation d'un tel projet devrait être la création d'un département du renseignement spécial qui intègre les services de renseignement des États membres, des États-Unis, et des autres partenaires, afin que nos institutions de sécurité agissent au moment opportun, pour contrer les possibles attentats terroristes en Europe. Un corps pour mieux partager les informations pertinentes avec l'Union européenne et avec le renseignement des autres États et les organes de sécurité. Je vous invite à analyser et à travailler sur ces propositions, dans l'intérêt de nos citoyens.

  Kinga Gál (PPE), írásban. – A párizsi terrortámadás megrázta egész Európát, amire a belügyminiszterek rögtön reagáltak, kivételes ülést tartva a támadás utáni napokban. Fontosnak látom, hogy meghatározták a legfontosabb teendőket: a külföldi harcosok kezelése, a radikalizálódás elleni fellépés, az illetékes tagállam és nemzetközi hatóságok közötti együttműködés és információcsere megerősítése. Szerintem mindemellett a külső határokon is meg kell erősíteni a biztonságot, ugyanakkor tiszteletben kell tartani a zökkenőmentes határforgalom fenntartását, az alapvető szabadságjogokat, a biztonsági előírásokat. Ugyanakkor ezek a lépések nem veszélyeztethetik az uniós vívmányok egyik legfontosabbikát, a mozgás szabadságát, a schengeni rendszer működését. Együttes fellépésre van szükség, koherens választ kell adnunk a terrorizmusra.

Nem szabad megengedni, hogy gyűlöletet szítsanak, félelmet, megosztást keltsenek társadalmainkban. Ez magába foglalja a radikalizálódás elleni fellépést is. Aggodalomra ad okot, ezért fel kell lépni az internet gyűlöletkeltésre és erőszakra való felbujtásra való mind gyakoribb használata miatt – ebben a legnagyobb internetes szolgáltatók partnersége lényeges. A fiatalok radikalizálódása mögötti okok kezelése nagy kihívást jelent. A párizsi események azt is megerősítették, hogy égető szüksége van Európának e kihívásokra gyorsan reagálni tudó rendőrképzésre, ami nem összevonható a Hágában működő Rendőri Hivatallal, az Europollal. Jelenleg a CEPOL működéséről szóló jelentés parlamenti felelőseként dolgozom azon, hogy biztosítsuk ennek a fontos intézménynek a biztos alapokon álló jövőbeli szabályozását.

  Beata Gosiewska (ECR), na piśmie. – Tragiczne wydarzenia sprzed trzech tygodni w Paryżu oraz próby zamachów w Belgii dowodzą, że obywatele Unii Europejskiej nie mogą czuć się bezpiecznie w swoich krajach. Dlatego teraz musimy podjąć działania, które zapewnią skuteczną walkę z terroryzmem. Obecnie na poziomie unijnym nie mamy przepisów, które umożliwiałaby wykorzystanie danych pasażerów. Taka dyrektywa może pomóc w walce z organizacjami terrorystycznymi pod warunkiem, iż zapewni ona najwyższe standardy ochrony danych osobowych. Obywatele UE maja prawo wiedzieć kto, w jakim celu i na jak długo będzie przechowywał ich dane. Oczywiście znalezienie odpowiedniej równowagi pomiędzy bezpieczeństwem naszych obywateli a wolnością jednostki nie będzie łatwe, ale jestem przekonana, że jest możliwe. Bardzo się cieszę, że sprawozdanie to trafiło w ręce mojego kolegi z grupy Europejskich Konserwatystów i Reformatorów, pana Kirkhope’a. Myślę, że wspólnymi siłami jesteśmy w stanie przywrócić naszym obywatelom poczucie bezpieczeństwa.

  Philippe Juvin (PPE), par écrit. – Qu'il s'agisse des victimes des attentats de Paris, des chrétiens d'Orient martyrisés ou des otages décapités qu'ils soient français, anglais, américains ou japonais, c'est à l'humanité toute entière que l'Islam radical a déclaré la guerre. Il constitue une menace durable, extrêmement violente, très organisée et qui prend aujourd'hui des visages multiples, notamment ceux de jeunes hommes et de jeunes femmes, nés et élevés en Europe, et capables de tuer d'autres Européens. Ainsi, il est urgent d'agir de manière méthodique et implacable pour éradiquer le terrorisme islamiste au sein même de l'Union, mais aussi dans le monde. Nous devons, chaque État membre, faire de la lutte anti-terroriste une priorité. Nous devons renforcer notre coopération en matière de renseignement, mettre en place un PNR européen, réformer l'espace Schengen pour améliorer les contrôles aux frontières et mettre en place un plan européen de lutte contre le trafic d'armes à feu. Nous devons également lutter contre l'apologie du djihad sur internet et évaluer d'urgence nos outils de prévention contre la radicalisation. Enfin, nous devons engager une action extérieure commune, forte et coordonnée, notamment sur le plan militaire afin de lutter contre l'État islamique et Al-Qaïda.

  Tunne Kelam (PPE), in writing. – The underlying point now is that we cannot wait any longer to put in place adequate counter-terrorism measures. The EPP Group has always stressed the need for a Passenger Name Record (PNR) system and has emphasised that need in its strategy for counter-terrorism, as presented on 28 January 2015. Credit card and telecoms companies are already obliged by law to keep their data for up to six months. Why should it be different when it comes to PNR data?

Up to this point, the EU has focused on securing data protection and privacy, leaving security aside. The deteriorating security situation and the radicalisation around us are clear proof that privacy and security have to complement one another. Preventing radicalisation and terrorist attacks should be the core aim. There should be close cooperation with social network companies to restrict access to terrorist material online and remove any terrorist propaganda. One effect of such action would be to help curb hate speech, and that needs to be addressed in laws across Europe.

Cutting off the means of propaganda alone is not enough: tracking down and disabling the financing of terrorism is another important pillar. We need a terrorist finance tracking system. To back up the establishment of an EU black list of European jihadists and terrorism suspects, we need to put in place an EU smart border system and to cooperate closely with third countries.

  Gabrielius Landsbergis (PPE), raštu. – Šie metai prasidėjo ypatingai dideliais sukrėtimais tarptautinei bendruomenei: teroristų atakos Paryžiuje, tebesitęsiantis karas Ukrainoje, žiaurūs, ne kitaip nei teroro aktais vadintini išpuoliai prieš civilius Mariupolyje. Pasaulio santvarka ir galių pasiskirstymas nuolat išbandomas naujais iššūkiais. Vakarų demokratinės vertybės vis dar nėra priimtinos agresoriams, kokiu pagrindu jie begrįstų savo atakas – religiniu, tautiniu ar bet kokiu kitu – tai yra nusikaltimai žmoniškumui, kurie negali tęstis. Pritariu, kad Taryba, Komisija, valstybės narės turi keistis informacija, vykdyti konsultacijas dėl antiteroristinių priemonių su suinteresuotomis šalimis. Tačiau norėčiau atkreipti dėmesį, kad antiteroristinių priemonių šiandien privalu imtis ne tik po išpuolių Paryžiuje, bet ir po išpuolių Mariupolyje. Terorizmas kaip niekad arti – ES viduje ir prie jos sienų, ir kaip niekad skaudu pripažinti, kad šiandien Ukrainoje vyksta nuolatinis karas su neprognozuojamu agresoriumi, o Ukrainos žmonės kovoja sunkią kovą už savo valstybę kasdien – nuo pat 2013 m. lapkričio. Taigi, apibendrindamas, su gilia užuojauta ne tik sakau „Je Suis Charlie“, bet ir „Je Suis Mariuopol“, „Je Suis Valnovakha“.

  Светослав Христов Малинов (PPE), в писмена форма. – Във време, когато говорим за трансгранична престъпност, радикализация, международни терористични мрежи, сигурността не може да се ограничи до националната държава. Ето защо, европейските страни трябва да се обединят в посока оптимално прилагане на наличните инструменти на Общността за сътрудничество в тази сфера, а, при необходимост, да въведат и нови. Правата и свободите на гражданите са фундаментът на Европейския съюз. Когато обаче е застрашено правото на живот, всички останали права и свободи стават доста илюзорни. Смятам, че в момента нямаме много голямо пространство за дискусия. Днес ние виждаме, че в миналото бяха допускани грешки точно по посока на осигуряване на повече сигурност за нашите граждани. Категорично съм за общ поименен регистър на регистрационните данни на пътниците; предложение, което в предишния мандат на Европейския парламент беше отхвърлено с гласовете на левицата и либералите. Трябва да има сътрудничество с интернет-доставчиците, особено когато става дума за откровено радикални сайтове, рекрутиращи членове на терористични организации. Не на последно място, наред с непосредствените мерки, нека не забравяме, че най-добрият начин за противодействие на екстремизма е утвърждаването на демократичните ценности чрез гражданско образование. Само така ще се гарантира, че няма да позволим да израснат вътре в рамките на Европейския съюз хора, склонни към насилие и тероризъм.

Ramona Nicole Mănescu (PPE), în scris. – Salut identificarea și stabilirea următoarelor măsuri de combatere a terorismului: adoptarea și aplicarea unei legislații europene corespunzătoare, implementarea Directivei privind spălarea banilor și combaterea finanțării terorismului și a crimei organizate. Atrag atenția asupra faptului că actuala amenințare teroristă este reală, majoră și fără precedent în istoria Uniunii Europene. În acest sens, pentru funcționarea eficace a măsurilor propuse în legătură cu combaterea terorismului, este necesară implicarea statelor membre și a organismelor competente pentru a aplica o politică externă coordonată și pentru a realiza un schimb eficient de informații între statele membre, între instituțiile europene, între serviciile de informații ale statelor membre și agențiile de combatere a terorismului.

Schimbul de informații și cooperarea între serviciile abilitate vor avea ca finalitate posibilitatea ca autoritățile competente să identifice în timp util orice risc și să prevină orice acțiune teroristă. Consider că este deosebit de important să acordăm atenție și cauzelor, nu numai efectelor amenințărilor teroriste, și să identificăm măsuri concrete, eficiente și imediat aplicabile în legătură cu prevenirea și combaterea radicalizării cetățenilor europeni, și nu numai, care reprezintă potențiali susținători sau luptători ai grupărilor extremiste. Dupa identificarea motivelor care îi determină pe foarte mulți cetățeni europeni să devină adepți ai grupărilor extremiste, vom avea posibilitatea să aplicăm măsuri concrete și eficiente pentru combaterea terorismului.

  Luigi Morgano (S&D), per iscritto. – I tragici fatti di Parigi hanno dimostrato non solo come siano fragili le nostre democrazie, ma come di fronte alla reale minaccia del terrorismo di matrice islamica l'Europa e gli Stati membri debbano dotarsi di strumenti di intelligence più efficaci. La soluzione per combattere il terrorismo non è chiudere le frontiere, sospendere Schengen, come evocato in queste settimane, da alcuni esponenti populisti. Al contrario, occorre rafforzare il sistema di informazioni Schengen, la cooperazione tra le forze di polizia e potenziare Europol ed Eurojust. È necessario stabilire misure che, sotto il controllo dell'autorità giudiziaria, permettano di monitorare quei "combattenti" europei che tornano da campi di addestramento di morte; dobbiamo poter oscurare gli "accattivanti" siti jihadisti che con allarmante facilità reclutano tanti, troppi giovani, non solo quelli appartenenti a sacche di disagio sociale e di emarginazione. Irrinunciabile quindi, l'impegno sul versante culturale, educativo e sociale. Anche L'approvazione della direttiva sul Passenger name record (PNR), per la registrazione dei passeggeri sui voli nell'area Schengen, potrebbe essere una misura necessaria, ma è imperativo trovare il giusto equilibrio tra sicurezza e adeguato rispetto della privacy. Solo una risposta unitaria a livello UE può essere realmente efficace per combattere contro il terrorismo.

  Κωνσταντίνος Παπαδάκης (NI), γραπτώς. – Η απερίφραστη καταδίκη των εγκληματικών επιθέσεων στο Παρίσι πρέπει να συνοδεύεται από το βασικό κριτήριο για την αναζήτηση των στόχων και των επιδιώξεων των ενεργειών αυτών, δηλαδή πρέπει να αναζητηθεί ποιός ωφελείται από αυτές. Τα ευρωενωσιακά όργανα και οι πολιτικές δυνάμεις του κεφαλαίου στο Ευρωκοινοβούλιο κρύβουν ότι οι λεγόμενοι "τζιχαντιστές" είναι δημιούργημα των ΗΠΑ, της ΕΕ και των συμμάχων τους, που τους εξόπλισαν, ενίσχυσαν, οργάνωσαν και τους χρησιμοποίησαν σαν δύναμη κρούσης στις ιμπεριαλιστικές επεμβάσεις και σχεδιασμούς τους στην ευρύτερη περιοχή της Νοτιοανατολικής Μεσογείου. Τώρα, όπως και σε ανάλογες περιπτώσεις στο παρελθόν, αξιοποιούν μεθοδικά τους τζιχαντιστές, ως το βολικό πρόσχημα, για να προωθηθεί ακόμη μεγαλύτερη ένταση της καταστολής και των μηχανισμών της, που βασικό στόχο έχουν το χτύπημα του εργατικού-λαϊκού κινήματος και της δράσης του. Το ΚΚΕ είναι ριζικά αντίθετο σε όλο αυτό το πλέγμα καταστολής και βέβαια στη λήψη νέων μέτρων ενίσχυσής του, όπως το γενικευμένο φακέλωμα και η παρακολούθηση των πάντων, οι σχεδιασμοί για δημιουργία μυστικής υπηρεσίας της ΕΕ, η ενίσχυση των μυστικών υπηρεσιών και των κατασταλτικών μηχανισμών, ο περιορισμός και κατάργηση βασικών λαϊκών ελευθεριών και δημοκρατικών δικαιωμάτων. Το ΚΚΕ καταδικάζει τη λήψη μέτρων για ακόμη πιο άγριο κυνήγι των μεταναστών και προσφύγων με τους μηχανισμούς των «έξυπνων συνόρων», της Σέγκεν, των Κανονισμών Δουβλίνο ΙΙ και ΙΙΙ.

  Pina Picierno (S&D), per iscritto. – È inutile dire che i nostri cittadini si aspettano che i propri governi e l'Unione europea garantiscano loro la sicurezza. Si aspettano risposte concrete ed efficaci contro il terrorismo fondamentalista, che vadano a sconfiggere azioni imminenti ma allo stesso tempo che vadano alla radice del problema. Gli assassini che hanno seminato il terrore a Parigi, come i sospettati arrestati in Belgio e in Germania, sono tutte persone nate e cresciute in Europa, che hanno frequentato le nostre scuole.

Non si può quindi prescindere dal prendere misure che vadano ad agire là dove ci sono povertà, ghettizzazione, ignoranza e assenza di diritti. Dall'altro lato lo scambio d'informazioni tra i nostri servizi d'intelligence e le nostre magistrature è fondamentale per prevenire nuovi attacchi, come pure una più forte politica estera comune. Possiamo naturalmente discutere della riforma del PNR ma certamente ciò va fatto senza mettere in discussione principi fondamentali come la libertà personale e la privacy.

Altrettanto naturale è rafforzare i controlli alle frontiere esterne dell'area Schengen che, contrariamente a quello che dicono populisti e gli xenofobi, non è il problema bensì la soluzione, se utilizzato con spirito di cooperazione tra gli Stati membri.

  Емил Радев (PPE), в писмена форма. – След терористичните атаки във Франция са обсъждани редица предложения за подобряване сътрудничеството на европейско и международно ниво в борбата срещу тероризма. Истината е, че това няма да е единствената атака от такъв вид в Европа и всички държави членки, включително България, трябва да са готови да предотвратят множество други. Близостта на България до конфликта в Сирия, както и фактът, че стотици европейци преминават през българска територия, за да се присъединят към Ислямска държава, е достатъчна причина българските служби да работят още по-усилено за предотвратяването на терористични атаки. Те трябва да участват активно в европейските мрежи за сътрудничество в борбата срещу тероризма и да продължат да извършват засилен контрол по българо-турската граница. В същото време другите държави членки трябва да предоставят повече информация за хора, за които се подозира, че ще преминат през България към Турция на път за Сирия, за да могат българските служби да имат пълна картина върху пътникопотока през южната ни граница. Вярвам, че задържаният по подозрение за тероризъм френски гражданин е положителен пример за европейско сътрудничество. Борбата срещу тероризма е непрекъснат процес, който изисква постоянни усилия, и е наше задължение да я спечелим в името на европейската и българската сигурност.

  Christine Revault D'Allonnes Bonnefoy (S&D), par écrit. – Les attentats en France ont entraîné un véritable sursaut citoyen en Europe pour la défense de nos valeurs communes. Face aux activités terroristes qui frappent notre continent, notre réponse ne peut être qu'européenne, transversale et intégrée, pour assurer le droit à la sécurité des personnes dans le plein respect des libertés fondamentales. La lutte contre la radicalisation, aux causes multiples et complexes, passera par plus d'éducation, plus d'inclusion sociale. Nous devons aussi avancer sur d'autres axes déterminants: l'amélioration de l'échange d'informations entre les États membres, grâce aux possibilités du système d'information Schengen. L'adoption du PNR européen, qui aidera à améliorer le suivi des candidats européens au djihad, en offrant plus de garanties pour la protection des droits fondamentaux. La bonne application des règles de Schengen, grâce à des contrôles plus efficaces aux frontières extérieures. Le développement d'un message alternatif et de sensibilisation face à la propagande terroriste, tout en ciblant davantage les discours de haine qui circulent sur internet. Mais aussi l'élaboration d'une réelle politique extérieure commune pour l'Europe. À tout moment, il nous faudra rester unis et solidaires, en défendant tant nos libertés que notre sécurité, qui prises ensemble contribuent de façon essentielle au bon fonctionnement de notre démocratie.

  Pavel Svoboda (PPE), písemně. – V současné situaci zvýšených bezpečnostních rizik je jistě správné se důsledně věnovat hledání možnosti, jak zvýšit bezpečnost občanů EU. V kontextu schengenské spolupráce se domnívám, že je třeba se zasadit o efektivní využívání všech nástrojů spolupráce, které jsou v současné době v oblasti justice a vnitra k dispozici všem členským státům. Řešením jistě není demontáž schengenského prostoru, ale naopak využití všech nástrojů, které jsou součástí schengenské spolupráce. V této souvislosti tedy vítám postoj PPE, která se důrazně postavila za zachování základních principů Schengenu.

  Tibor Szanyi (S&D), írásban. – A terroristák által végrehajtott brutális támadások sokkoló hatással bírnak. Amellett, hogy ezekre a támadásokra megfelelő választ kell adnunk és valóban hatékony – azaz nem csak látszatintézkedések – szükségesek, fontos lenne azt sem elfelejteni, hogy a tagállami rendőrségek és nemzetbiztonsági szolgálatok számos ilyen aljas cselekményt akadályoznak meg. Nekünk, választott képviselőknek, erre is fel kell hívnunk a figyelmet. Mindemellett az ilyen cselekmények arra is felhívják a figyelmünket, hogy az európai rendőrképzés és rendőri együttműködés milyen fontos szerepet tölt be. Világos, hogy a jövőben már csak ezért is erősíteni kell azon szervezetek, mint például a CEPOL szerepét, melyek a határokon átnyúló együttműködésre ösztönöznek a bűnözés leküzdése, valamint a közbiztonság, a jog- és közrend fenntartása érdekében.

  Igor Šoltes (Verts/ALE), pisno. – Teroristični napadi, ki so se zgodili pred časom v Franciji, so dodatno povečali strah Evropejcev pred napadi. Evropska unija za boj proti terorizmu uporablja številne različne mehanizme. Vprašanje, ki se pri tem postavlja, pa je, ali so ti instrumenti ustrezni. Na trenutke se namreč zdi, da so nekoliko zastareli in s tem niso več kos sodobnim pristopom, ki jih uporabljajo teroristi. Za zaščito demokracije in državljanov Evrope pa niso dovoljena vsa sredstva, še posebej tista, ki posegajo v človekovo svobodo na prekomeren način. Ravno zaradi dileme, kaj je sorazmeren in kaj prekomeren ukrep, potrebujemo jasne zaveze in pravila, ki jih mora sprejeti Evropski parlament. Nevarno je, če začnemo uvajati ukrepe, ki se jih ne da več nadzorovati in so nezakoniti. S tem namreč uničujemo lastne vrednote, ne pa terorizma. Dolgoročno moramo znati odpravljati vzroke za porast terorizma, ki se začne z dialogom, analizo stanja in ustreznim načrtovanjem. Vsekakor pa mora boj za preprečevanje terorizma zajemati tudi načrtovanje emigracijske politike, socialne vključenosti in ustreznega informiranja, ki lahko zagotovi preventivno delovanje. Vse skupaj pa je potrebno obvladovati tudi s pravno podlago, ki preprečuje in omejuje zlorabe sistema zaščite varnosti in boja proti terorizmu.

  Dubravka Šuica (PPE), napisan. – Svi se slažemo da teroristi ne znaju za državne granice, a u posljednje vrijeme nam se dogodio napad na temeljna ljudska prava. Potrebno je brzo reagirati i očekuje se snažan i ujedinjeni odgovor Europske unije. Kako bismo to postigli potrebna je solidarnost među svim tijelima Europske unije, a i među državama članicama. Moramo odgovoriti cjelovito, ciljano i provedivo, a to možemo postići samo ako izgradimo međusobno povjerenje.

Postojeće mjere i zakone treba provoditi, ali uvoditi i neke nove, naravno stalno vodeći računa i o slobodi i o sigurnosti. To nije jednostavno, ali se moramo opredijeliti konkretno na registar putnika u zrakoplovima (PNR-a). Premda kontroverzan, potreban nam je, ali to je samo jedan od alata na raspolaganju. Tu je potrebna i dobra suradnja s Europolom, Eurojustom te suradnja i koordinacija obavještajnih službi. Osiguranje vanjske granice Schengenske zone treba pojačati i sve aktivnosti koordinirati s jasnim vremenskim okvirom. Do sada se pokazalo da nedostaje procjena rizika, ali do sada se djelovalo a posteriori što nije najbolja metoda.

Treba detektirati uzroke, potrebno je uspostaviti međukulturološki dijalog, ali i unaprijediti integracijsku politiku na razini lokalnih zajednica. Svi imamo razloga za zabrinutost i svi smo suodgovorni, i dužni pronaći rješenja kako naši građani ne bi živjeli u strahu i kako nas belgijski vojnici ne čuvali u zgradi ovoga parlamenta.

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – Le retrait de nationalité, c'est aussi populiste que con. Il ne s'agit de rien d'autre que d'une déresponsabilisation, tout le contraire de la réponse à donner au terrorisme et à l'intolérance! Enfin, et surtout, le retrait de nationalité est aussi débile que de renvoyer son gamin à l'orphelinat à 16 ans parce que son comportement ne nous convient pas... La Belgique et les polices européennes déjouent énormément d'attentats. Ils ne communiquent guère sur ce sujet pour ne pas provoquer de panique, mais c'est en même temps rassurant. En France, le haut responsable de la cellule antiterrorisme a été très clair: nous n'avons pas besoin de plus de données, nous en avons déjà trop. Nous avons besoin de plus de policiers. C'est aussi mon point de vue: si nous perdons des libertés individuelles au profit de la sécurité, nous perdrons l'un et l'autre. Et l'abandon de ces libertés individuelles au profit d'une soi-disant plus grande sécurité, c'est une victoire des terroristes. Ce qu'il faut donc, c'est ne pas baisser les effectifs policiers (sous Sarkozy, les effectifs ont diminué cinq fois en cinq ans de quinquennat) et augmenter les échanges d'informations entre les polices européennes.

  Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE), par écrit. – Après les attaques terroristes qui se sont déroulées à Paris, l'Union européenne doit être solidaire envers la France. Ces évènements regrettables nous rappellent l'importance des mesures d'intervention et de prévention qui permettent d'assurer la sécurité de nos citoyens. La PSDC constitue une partie importante de ces mesures, et par conséquent ne peut être négligée. Le climat politique actuel souligne la nécessite de développer la PSDC pour qu'elle puisse atteindre son potentiel. Le problème de sous-équipement de la PSDC pourrait être en partie soulagé par les deux porte-hélicoptères classe Mistral dont la vente à la Russie a été suspendue. Les évènements récents montrent clairement qu'il serait irresponsable de fournir ces bateaux à un pays qui est en train de soutenir des attaques terroristes contre les citoyens de son pays voisin.

  László Tőkés (PPE), írásban. – Végighallgatva Dimitrisz Avramopulosz biztos terrorizmusellenes intézkedésekről szóló, egyoldalú előterjesztését, az komoly hiányérzettel tölt el, mivel az egész komplex kérdéskört merő technikai, szakmai és biztonságpolitikai ügyként kezeli, s ennek megfelelően intézkedési javaslatai sem terjednek túl a személyi adatvédelem és a jobb információcsere, a megfelelő infrastruktúra vagy a kifogástalan utasnyilvántartás körén. A bűnelkövetés közvetlen megakadályozására és büntetésére szorítkozva egyetlen szót sem szólt viszont a terrorizmus társadalmi hátteréről és erkölcsi dimenziójáról. A párizsi merényletet feltétel nélkül elítélve és az áldozatok iránti teljes együttérzést tanúsítva, azt is látnunk kell, hogy liberális társadalmi berendezkedésünk, valamint elhibázott bevándorláspolitikánk milyen szerepet játszik a jelenlegi helyzet kialakulásában, és hogy nem csupán a terroristákat, hanem egész törvényhozásunkat és jogrendszerünket is súlyos felelősség terheli a történtekért.

A szabad véleménynyilvánítás joga nem jelentheti mások hitének és emberi méltóságának a szabad gyalázását. A mozgásszabadság nem jelentheti a terroristák mozgásának az akadálytalan szabadságát. Ezekkel szemben a lelkiismereti és vallásszabadság is olyan európai értékek, melyeket más szabadságjogok gyakorlása nem sérthet. Következésképpen olyan jogi rendezésre van szükség Európában, mely nem csupán a terrorista önbíráskodást bünteti, hanem a hitgyalázásnak és az istenkáromlásnak, más szóval a szabadságjogokkal való visszaélésnek is gátat vet. A hitükben sértettek terrorcselekményeinek ez is egyik hatékony ellenszere és megelőző eszköze lehetne.

  Traian Ungureanu (PPE), in writing. – Maybe it is not surprising that the first thing one could hear after the attacks in Paris was a warning against our anti-Islamic response. This is already a media and political ritual. Each massacre is followed by appeals to calm, addressed to people who are portrayed as potential fanatics. The more innocent citizens pay with their lives, the more sophisticated excuses are produced for murder. This is simply a denial of reality. We should name names and know where the threat comes from. Reality cannot be supressed and eventually it will catch up with us.

What I propose to the European Parliament is to defend European values by speaking the truth before it is too late. The massacre in Paris was followed by two huge rallies – one in Paris, the other in Grozny, the capital of Chechnya, where 500 000 people expressed their support for Islamism and rejected Western freedom of expression. The rally was described as spontaneous, but under Ramzan Kadyrov, the Chechen authorities are nothing more than a Putin puppet regime. The rally was organised with obvious Soviet-style choreography. It should remind the EU that Putin’s regime is using every form of overt and covert operation to undermine European values and unity.

  Miguel Viegas (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – A prevenção e o firme combate que deve ser travado contra o terrorismo não se confunde nem pode ser pretexto para novas vagas de medidas de caráter securitário, limitadoras das liberdades, dos direitos e das garantias dos cidadãos. Consideramos que devem ser liminarmente rejeitadas quaisquer ideias que se manifestem, no plano nacional ou da União Europeia, de avançar para leis de exceção que, à semelhança do famigerado Patriot Act norte-americano, se pudessem traduzir na preterição de direitos fundamentais. Consideramos essencial a adoção de mecanismos de combate sério ao financiamento do terrorismo, através dos offshore e de práticas menos transparentes envolvendo Estados e instituições financeiras, bem como a adoção de mecanismos de combate rigoroso ao tráfico de armas, de recursos energéticos e de matérias-primas que possam reverter em benefício de organizações terroristas. O combate ao terrorismo implica a rejeição das políticas de ingerência, invasão, ocupação e guerra que, como se verifica nos exemplos do Iraque, da Síria ou da Líbia, só conduzem ao aparecimento de grupos terroristas. Reiteramos ainda a nossa convicção de que o combate ao terrorismo não pode ser encarado como um combate entre civilizações ou entre religiões, nem dar lugar a estigmatizações racistas e xenófobas.

  Jarosław Wałęsa (PPE), in writing. – Mr President, it must be noted that we cannot address anti-terrorism measures without a broader European strategy for the security and stability of the region. In order to achieve our long-term goals, the instruments adopted must provide for both preventive measures and fast-reaction procedures. In particular, areas such as the monitoring of national counter-terrorism policies, the sharing of best practices among Member States and the reinforcement of our information exchange and of cooperation on criminal justice should be improved.

We should also address the threat at its roots by preventing social exclusion and the growth of extremism, and by fighting relevant types of crime: corruption, drug, human and weapons trafficking and cybercrime. High-security issues such as terrorism transcend the distinction between internal and external security. Realising that means we must also improve the stability of our geopolitical surroundings through collaboration with a variety of state and non-state actors. Especially, we need to reinforce our cooperation with third-party states that might be incubators or logistics and transit bases for violent extremists.

Moreover, our conflict-prevention tools must not neglect the promotion of human rights and democracy, external assistance in relation to governance, the rule of law, policing and law enforcement, and well-tailored aid.

  Milan Zver (PPE), pisno. – Po terorističnih napadih v Parizu je Evropa še vedno v šoku. Želim si, da bi ti dogodki služili kot streznitev za evropsko varnostno politiko, ki ni učinkovita. Varnostni položaj v EU se dodatno slabša zaradi ruske agresije v Ukrajini ter negotovosti, ki jo je prinesla zmaga ekstremne Sirize v Grčiji. EU se mora na poslabšano varnostno situacijo nemudoma odzvati - celovito! 1. Najprej morajo DČ okrepiti lastne sisteme varnosti, zagotoviti sodelovanje z drugimi članicami (kot je na primer izmenjava relevantnih obveščevalnih podatkov); 2. Na ravni EU moramo okrepiti skupne institucije (kot sta Eurojust in Europol) in dejavnosti (na primer nadzor nad zunanjimi mejami). Zaokrožiti moramo tudi pravni okvir, vključno z direktivo PNR. 3. Predvsem pa potrebujemo politični protiteroristični pakt! Teroristom lajšamo položaj, ker vedo, da smo na tej točki razdeljeni. Zato apeliram na enotnost!

PRÉSIDENCE DE MME Sylvie GUILLAUME
Vice-présidente