Relato integral dos debates

Quinta-feira, 5 de Julho de 2018 - Estrasburgo

1. Abertura do período de sessões

PRÉSIDENCE: Sylvie GUILLAUME
Vice-présidente

(La séance est ouverte à 9 h 02)

2. Crise migratória e situação humanitária na Venezuela e nas suas fronteiras (propostas de resolução apresentadas): Ver Acta

3. Participação das pessoas com deficiência nas eleições europeias (debate)

  La Présidente. – L’ordre du jour appelle le débat sur la déclaration de la Commission sur la participation des personnes handicapées aux élections européennes (2018/2647(RSP)).

  Věra Jourová, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you for tabling this issue on the agenda of the plenary of the European Parliament. We often discuss the European elections these days and this debate gives us the opportunity to emphasise that the right to vote, both in law and in reality, should be enjoyed by everyone. This was clearly spelled out in the European Disability Strategy for the years 2010-2020. In addition, in the 2017 Citizenship Report, the Commission prioritised the promotion of citizens’ participation in the democratic life of the EU, including that of vulnerable groups, such as persons with disabilities.

The data available shows that, given the opportunity, people with disabilities actively participate in politics. Let me recall from the outset that the practical organisation of elections in the EU Member States, including the rules that apply to people with disabilities, falls within the competence of each Member State in compliance with EU law. For its part, the Commission actively promotes the identification and exchange of best practices in order to enhance the participation of persons with disabilities in elections. The Commission also highlighted this issue in its recent recommendation on enhancing the European nature and efficient conduct of the 2019 European elections.

Let me also refer to the Commission’s 2018 report on local elections, which examined the policies of the Member States to support turnout among under—represented groups, including persons with disabilities. Good practices include Braille templates for the ballot paper, audio recorders at polling booths and the possibility of early voting, as well as voting in retirement homes and hospitals. The Commission will continue to use its network of Member State experts in electoral matters to identify and promote best practices in this area, as it did in April this year. The Commission has also launched a study on remote voting solutions. In addition, the Commission has given funding to several EU—level disability organisations in order to collect information on barriers to voting, including the experiences of persons with intellectual disabilities.

I very much look forward to this debate.

  Agnieszka Kozłowska-Rajewicz, w imieniu grupy PPE. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Udział w wyborach – zarówno bierny, jak i czynny – jest jednym z kluczowych aktów demokracji i podstawowym prawem obywatelskim. Obowiązkiem każdego demokratycznego państwa jest zapewnienie, by wszyscy obywatele uprawnieni do głosowania, bez względu na stopień sprawności, mogli w wyborach uczestniczyć. Niestety mimo upływających lat i rozwoju technologii niepełnosprawność bardzo często wiąże się z pośrednim ograniczeniem praw obywatelskich, bo z powodu braku dostępności do lokali wyborczych lub braku procedur, które ułatwiają dotarcie do lokali lub odczytanie kart do głosowania, udział w głosowaniu staje się utrudniony albo niemożliwy. W Polsce rząd Platformy Obywatelskiej w 2011 r. wprowadził zmiany w ordynacji wyborczej, które oprócz obowiązku zapewnienia dostępności lokali i różnych ułatwień dla osób z niepełnosprawnościami – na przykład przygotowania nakładek Braille’a – umożliwiły też głosowanie korespondencyjne. Myślano przede wszystkim o osobach starszych i niepełnosprawnych, ale ostatecznie ta forma głosowania została udostępniona wszystkim, którzy jej potrzebują i odpowiednio wcześnie zgłoszą. Obecnie ta możliwość głosowania korespondencyjnego jest ograniczona tylko do grupy osób z niepełnosprawnościami, co znacznie komplikuje system i stygmatyzuje korzystających z tej formy głosowania.

Pani Komisarz! W Unii Europejskiej przynajmniej w 20 krajach dostępne jest głosowanie korespondencyjne. Korzysta z niego duża część populacji głosujących, w tym osoby niepełnosprawne. Potrzebujemy jednak o wiele szerszych zmian i chciałabym przede wszystkim bardzo podziękować za te wszystkie inicjatywy, o których Pani wspomniała na początku debaty. Ważne jest, żebyśmy pracowali nad tym zagadnieniem, i chciałabym zapytać, jakimi narzędziami dysponuje Komisja, żeby wpływać na kraje członkowskie, tak aby wybory były bardziej włączające nie tylko w sensie wykonania prawa, ale też jeżeli chodzi o to, jak szeroko prawo obejmuje obywateli uprawnionych do głosowania.

  Soledad Cabezón Ruiz, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, el 51 % de las personas con discapacidad manifiesta querer participar en la vida política, frente al 48 % de las personas que no tiene discapacidad. El 82 % de las personas con discapacidad que puede ejercer el derecho al voto lo hace, frente al 51 % de la población sin discapacidad. Esto ocurre con cientos de miles de personas con discapacidad en la Unión Europea que tienen limitado y no pueden ejercer este derecho al voto por su incapacitación legal.

Solo siete Estados miembros garantizan el derecho al voto en todos los casos a las personas con discapacidad y solamente ocho Estados miembros tienen estrategias definidas para promover la participación de las personas con discapacidad en la vida política. Todo ello en contra del artículo 12 y el artículo 29 de la Convención de las Naciones Unidas, que pide que eliminemos todas las barreras físicas y también legales y que se garantice el derecho de estas personas a participar en la vida pública.

Por lo tanto, le pido a la Comisión Europea que promueva medidas concretas para que los Estados miembros adapten sus respectivas legislaciones a la Convención de las Naciones Unidas.

  Helga Stevens, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, mensen met een beperking kunnen enkel ten volle deelnemen aan de maatschappij, wanneer zij ook kunnen deelnemen aan het politieke leven zoals elke andere EU-burger. Er leven in de EU ongeveer 80 miljoen mensen met een beperking, maar waarom zie je hen zo weinig in politieke functies?

Mensen met een beperking krijgen nog steeds geen gelijke kansen. In de meerderheid van de lidstaten verliezen mensen met een beperking hun recht om te stemmen wanneer zij handelingsonbekwaam worden verklaard. Vijftien EU-lidstaten ontzeggen mensen met een beperking die onder voogdij staan, automatisch hun recht om te stemmen. Ook zijn er grote belemmeringen om te stemmen, omdat kiesbureaus vaak gewoon niet toegankelijk zijn. Slechts in 12 van de 28 lidstaten zijn er toegankelijkheidsvereisten voor alle kiesbureaus en waar er al toegankelijkheidsvoorwaarden zijn, focussen die meestal enkel op de fysieke toegankelijkheid. Ook de informatie die personen met een beperking kunnen krijgen, is vaak zeer beperkt. Verkiezingsprogramma's, debatten en bijeenkomsten zijn nog steeds nauwelijks toegankelijk. In een democratische samenleving moet iedereen het recht hebben om een geïnformeerde keuze te kunnen maken.

Vergis u niet, er is wel degelijk een sterk juridisch kader dat de EU en de lidstaten verplicht ervoor te zorgen dat mensen met een beperking kunnen deelnemen aan het politieke leven op gelijke basis zoals iedere andere burger. Helaas is de realiteit gewoon teleurstellend. Het is hoog tijd dat daar eindelijk verandering in wordt gebracht.

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, en nombre del Grupo ALDE. – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, las instituciones europeas están vinculadas con los contenidos de la Convención de las Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad, y los Estados signatarios también.

Nos toca, ante las próximas elecciones, estar a la altura de los compromisos y promesas que surgieron el pasado diciembre del Cuarto Parlamento Europeo de las Personas con Discapacidad. Se solicitó más decisión y liderazgo para convertir en realidad derechos que están claros sobre el papel y sobre los que no hay oposición entre partidos y organizaciones; dependen, en definitiva, de la voluntad política para liderar el compromiso de asignar medios y recursos, y del esfuerzo de cambiar culturas que contradicen los contenidos de la Convención.

Cabe recordar que, en su artículo 29, la Convención garantiza a las personas con discapacidad los derechos políticos y la posibilidad de gozar de ellos en igualdad de condiciones con los demás. Para ello, establece compromisos respecto a la participación plena y efectiva en la vida política en igualdad de condiciones y, por supuesto, el derecho y la posibilidad de las personas con discapacidad a votar y ser elegidas.

Las próximas elecciones europeas deben ser un ejemplo en materia de adaptación de los procedimientos, las instalaciones y los materiales electorales a las necesidades de las personas con discapacidad. Deben marcar un hito en materia de accesibilidad y animar un movimiento para que en las listas electorales se estimule la presencia de más y nuevos representantes de la discapacidad.

De acuerdo con los datos existentes, una de cada seis personas de más de quince años padece en la Unión algún tipo de discapacidad. Su diversidad funcional los hace distintos, pero no desiguales; tienen mucho que enseñarnos. Y no hay mejor manera de trabajar esta necesaria empatía que tenerlos cerca, escucharles cada día y aprender que lo que consideramos muchas veces normal —una escalera, un grifo, una combinación de colores— para muchos europeos es una verdadera muralla.

  Tilly Metz, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, je vais effectivement vous parler de la participation et du droit de vote des personnes atteintes de handicap.

D’après la convention de l’ONU, les personnes handicapées sont des personnes qui ont une déficience à long terme du point de vue physique, psychique, cognitif, mental ou sensoriel. La possibilité de participer à la vie politique est au cœur de ce qui définit une Europe démocratique. Or, trop souvent, des obstacles juridiques et administratifs empêchent les personnes atteintes de handicap d’accéder aux informations. D’ailleurs, au sein de l’Union européenne, une personne sur six présente un handicap. Par conséquent, cela les empêche de prendre activement part à la vie en société.

Je tiens à mettre ici en évidence quelques éléments favorisant la participation de tous les citoyens. Il faut bien sûr garantir l’accessibilité au bureau de vote, c’est-à-dire prévoir des rampes, des ascenseurs et, si besoin, des accompagnants. Mais avant cela, il faut rendre les programmes politiques accessibles à tous, c’est-à-dire les traduire en braille pour les personnes malvoyantes, les traduire en langage simplifié avec des pictogrammes pour les personnes ayant des troubles de déficience cognitive et, lors d’un discours, garantir systématiquement une traduction en langue des signes pour les personnes malentendantes – d’ailleurs je suis nouvelle ici et j’espère qu’il y en a une.

Un autre problème est celui de la mise sous tutelle. En principe, les personnes mises sous tutelle n’ont pas le droit de voter et je me permets de citer Josef Schovanec, personne autiste, écrivain et philosophe: «Il est complètement anormal de devoir saisir la justice pour avoir le droit de mettre un bulletin dans l’urne quand on voit le vote de certaines personnes censées être saines d’esprit». La «conception pour tous» doit aussi s’appliquer aux élections européennes. Autrement dit, il faut garantir à tous l’accessibilité et l’attractivité de la politique. Cela signifie aussi qu’il faut aller à la rencontre de toutes les électrices et de tous les électeurs, et ne pas attendre qu’elles ou ils viennent vers vous.

Un dernier aspect important, dans le cadre du mouvement de l’autonomisation des personnes atteintes de handicap, est de les encourager à s’engager elles-mêmes dans la politique, afin de faire évoluer la situation vers une société beaucoup plus inclusive. Ainsi, nous cesserions définitivement de parler au sujet des personnes atteintes de handicap pour parler davantage avec elles.

  Ángela Vallina, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señora presidenta, en la Unión Europea hay unos setenta millones de personas que sufren algún tipo de discapacidad. La Convención de las Naciones Unidas sobre los derechos de las personas con discapacidad prevé, en su artículo 12, el reconocimiento igual ante la ley y, en el 29, la participación en la vida pública de las personas discapacitadas, lo que incluye el derecho a votar y a ser elegidas y elegidos.

Debemos garantizar la no discriminación de estas personas, tanto en las elecciones europeas como en las elecciones de cada uno de nuestros Estados miembros. En España, por ejemplo, han llovido críticas de varias organizaciones e instituciones, ya que, como las propias Naciones Unidas han constatado, existen aún graves carencias en la aplicación de la Convención, en especial con respecto a las personas que tienen discapacidad psíquica.

Por tanto, pido que avancemos a todos los niveles y en todas las administraciones, adaptando los sistemas jurídicos, eliminando barreras administrativas y facilitando los mecanismos de reclamación para poder votar. Solo así podremos dar pasos efectivos hacia una verdadera igualdad de derechos.

  Isabella Adinolfi, a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, il tema della partecipazione delle persone con disabilità alle elezioni europee è di grande importanza. Ma c'è ancora tanto da fare per rendere effettivi i diritti di chi è stato meno fortunato ed è affetto da una disabilità.

Al di là delle dichiarazioni di principio, servono azioni concrete, altrimenti si rischia che i diritti sanciti dalle costituzioni dei vari Stati membri e dalla Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell'Unione europea rimangano lettera morta. Tutti i cittadini sono uguali e hanno pari dignità.

Colgo quest'occasione per lanciare una proposta: essendomi occupata di democrazia elettronica e dell'uso degli strumenti digitali, credo che i tempi siano maturi per implementare forme di partecipazione elettronica, come per esempio il voto online, che agevolerebbero grandemente la partecipazione politica delle persone affette da disabilità.

A questo riguardo mi chiedo se la Commissione ha già predisposto delle iniziative concrete che vanno in questa direzione, magari prendendo spunto da alcuni Stati membri che sono particolarmente all'avanguardia, come ad esempio l'Estonia. Sono convinta che l'utilizzo degli strumenti elettronici possa essere un elemento di aiuto per chi voglia partecipare attivamente alla vita politica e sia affetto da una disabilità.

Le elezioni europee del prossimo anno rappresentano un'occasione da non sprecare per l'Unione europea, per dimostrare che la garanzia e l'implementazione effettiva dei diritti delle persone con disabilità costituiscano una priorità. Dal canto mio, continuerò a battermi con forza affinché questi diritti vengano garantiti nella pratica.

  Gilles Lebreton, au nom du groupe ENF. – Madame la Présidente, les personnes handicapées ont droit à la participation politique. Ce droit est garanti par plusieurs instruments juridiques, dont la convention des Nations unies relative aux droits des personnes handicapées. Il faut donc que ce droit à la participation puisse s’exercer aussi aux élections européennes.

Plusieurs mesures doivent être prises, il faut notamment veiller à l’accessibilité des bureaux de vote, ce qui est loin d’être effectif à l’heure actuelle. De façon plus générale, il faut sensibiliser le public et les administrations à la nécessité de tout mettre en œuvre pour garantir aux handicapés une égalité réelle en matière électorale. Cette égalité implique qu’un handicapé doive pouvoir, non seulement voter, mais aussi se présenter aux élections, s’il le souhaite.

Je ne souhaite pas en revanche qu’on institue un système de quotas, comme la Tunisie vient de le faire pour les élections municipales. La Tunisie exige que chaque liste de candidats comporte au moins un handicapé. Un tel système peut paraître généreux, mais il est contraire à l’égalité devant le suffrage. Par ailleurs, il est susceptible d’entraver la démocratie en empêchant des candidats de se présenter aux élections dès lors qu’ils n’auraient pas réussi à persuader un handicapé de se joindre à eux.

Il faut tout faire pour assurer l’égalité, mais dans le strict respect de la démocratie.

  Ádám Kósa (PPE). – Elnök Úr! Az Európai Parlamentben 2009-ben választottak meg első siket képviselőként. Azóta is szívügyem, hogy minél több fogyatékossággal élő ember tudjon élni a szavazati jogával, legyen ez bármilyen típusú választás. Egyúttal pedig minél több fogyatékossággal élő embert választanak be a politikai testületekbe. Ennek kereteit olyan választójogi szabályozásokkal kell megadni, amelyek összhangban vannak a fogyatékossággal élő személyek jogairól szóló ENSZ-egyezménnyel.

Büszke vagyok arra, hogy hazám, Magyarország, a 2013-ban elfogadott új választójogi szabályozással teljesen akadálymentesítette a választásokat, legyen szó akár vakokról, akár siketekről, akár éppen mozgássérültekről. Magyarország az egyetlen ország az Európai Unión belül, ahol az Országgyűlésbe és az Európai Parlamentbe is siket képviselőket választottak be. Ezt a lehetőséget azonban csak egyetlen párt, a Fidesz–KDNP biztosította a fogyatékossággal élő személyeknek, illetve politikusoknak.

Itt az idő, hogy ne csak a jogszabályok, hanem a tettek útján is bizonyítsunk. Ezúton szólítom fel az európai parlamenti választásokon induló összes pártot az EU 27 tagállamában, hogy adjanak érdemi lehetőséget a fogyatékossággal élő személyeknek. Köszönöm!

  Olga Sehnalová (S&D). – Paní předsedající, paní komisařko, často si stěžujeme na nízkou volební účast a nezájem lidí o volby. Existují přitom občané, kteří by přišli k urnám vyjádřit svůj názor rádi, ale z nejrůznějších důvodů to pro ně není možné. Jsou to lidé se zdravotním postižením. V Evropské unii žije 80 milionů občanů s postižením, přesto nejsou téměř vůbec zastoupeni ve veřejném životě a příliš na ně nemyslí ani programy politických stran.

Pro umožnění jejich plné účasti ve volbách přitom nestačí pouze zajistit přístupnost volebních místností. Pro zodpovědnou volbu je také nutné mít dostatek informací. Materiály politických stran a jejich programy však bohužel většinou nejsou dostupné ve formátech, které by člověk s postižením mohl přečíst, což omezuje nejen jeho právo volit, ale i možnosti, jak se aktivně zúčastnit politického života.

Volební právo je pro lidi s postižením stejně důležité jako pro všechny ostatní a měli bychom se proto zasadit o to, aby nebyli občany druhé kategorie ani při příštích volbách do Evropského parlamentu, ani při jakýchkoliv dalších.

  Anthea McIntyre (ECR). – Madam President, last month I was honoured to lead a delegation from the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL) of this Parliament to the United Nations in New York for the 11th session of the Conference of State Parties to the Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The EU is officially represented in the CRPD by the Commission, so this was the first time that Members of the European Parliament, the directly elected representatives of citizens across Europe, participated in the event.

I was particularly pleased to listen to my EMPL colleague, Ádám Kósa, make a powerful speech about the participation of people with disabilities in the political process. In this session entitled ‘Nothing about us without us’, we also learned about the practical steps that some countries are taking to ensure that everyone can vote – mobile polling stations, taking the election to the voter in hospital, portable polling booths that can enable a wheelchair user to cast their vote in private.

As signatories to the Convention, the EU has a responsibility to ensure that everyone can participate in the electoral process.

  Κωνσταντίνα Κούνεβα (GUE/NGL). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, κάθε πέντε χρόνια μετά τις ευρωεκλογές ερχόμαστε αντιμέτωποι με το ίδιο αποτέλεσμα: όλο και μικρότερη συμμετοχή των πολιτών στις ευρωεκλογές. Μετά εμφανίζονται οι αναλύσεις για το δημοκρατικό έλλειμμα στην Ευρώπη. Όλοι ξέρουμε ότι η Ένωσή μας απογοητεύει με πολλούς τρόπους τους πολίτες, αλλά τα άτομα με αναπηρία δεν απογοητευόμαστε απλά, ουσιαστικά αποκλειόμαστε από τις ευρωεκλογές και είμαστε τουλάχιστον το 10% του εκλογικού σώματος.

Τι δημοκρατία είναι αυτή που στερεί στον τυφλό, στον κωφό, στον παραπληγικό το δικαίωμα να ενημερωθεί με κατάλληλο και κατανοητό τρόπο, το δικαίωμα να ψηφίζει ή να είναι υποψήφιος; Είναι μια ανάπηρη δημοκρατία. Κύριοι της Επιτροπής, πριν μερικούς μήνες, ως Επιτροπή Αναφορών σας θέσαμε συγκεκριμένο ερώτημα για τα μέτρα που θα πάρετε από τις επόμενες κιόλας ευρωεκλογές, για να μη στερηθεί κανένας ανάπηρος πολίτης το δικαίωμα να εκλέγεται και να εκλέγει. Ομολογώ ότι όσα άκουσα μέχρι τώρα δεν είναι και πολύ ενθαρρυντικά.

Η συμμετοχή των αναπήρων στις εκλογές πρέπει να γίνει κριτήριο ποιότητας της δημοκρατίας μας και να αρχίζει να μετριέται από τις ερχόμενες ευρωεκλογές. Έχουμε όλα τα τεχνολογικά μέσα. Ναι, θα κοστίζει. Πράγματι, η δημοκρατία είναι ακριβό σύστημα, αλλά είναι το καλύτερο που διαθέτουμε.

  Marek Plura (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowna pani komisarz! Drodzy koledzy! Cieszę się, że podejmujemy dziś kwestię dostępności wyborów europejskich, i wierzę, że będziemy kontynuować debatę na ten ważny temat. Konwencja ONZ o prawach osób niepełnosprawnych zobowiązuje do zapewnienia warunków umożliwiających pełne uczestnictwo osób z niepełnosprawnościami w życiu politycznym i społecznym na równych prawach z innymi.

Niestety w wielu krajach rzeczywistość odbiega od zapisów konwencji. Dyskryminacja ze względu na niepełnosprawność jest sprzeczna z zasadami, na których zbudowana jest Unia Europejska, i nie tylko przynosi nam wstyd, ale także stanowi marnotrawienie ogromnego potencjału społecznego i ekonomicznego 80 milionów Europejczyków.

Podczas tej kadencji Parlament Europejski pracował nad wieloma regulacjami mającymi umożliwić osobom niepełnosprawnym korzystanie z ich praw. W grudniu mieliśmy zaszczyt gościć Europejski Parlament Osób Niepełnosprawnych, na który przybyło kilkaset przedstawicieli z całej Europy. Usłyszeliśmy wiele niezwykle poruszających świadectw o naruszaniu praw tych osób, a także manifest skierowany do liderów europejskich, aby wybory europejskie były powszechnie dostępne i niedyskryminujące. Jest to zobowiązanie, które ja, moi koledzy z Disability Intergroup, a także inni posłowie z przewodniczącym Antoniem Tajanim na czele traktujemy bardzo poważnie.

Drodzy koledzy! Nie wystarczy deklaracja, że osoby niepełnosprawne mają prawo głosować i kandydować w wyborach. Trzeba stworzyć warunki, aby mogły z tego prawa korzystać. Konieczne jest skierowanie odpowiednich, konkretnych wytycznych do państw członkowskich oraz wymiana dobrych praktyk. Proponuję więc rozpoczęcie cyklu roboczych spotkań mających służyć ich wypracowaniu i deklaruję moje pełne zaangażowanie w takie działania.

  Marlene Mizzi (S&D). – L-Artikolu 29 tal-Konvenzjoni tan-Nazzjonijiet Uniti dwar il-Persuni b’Diżabilità jinsisti li kull persuna b’diżabilità għandha tiġi mogħtija d-dritt li tipparteċipa fi kwalunkwe elezzjoni billi tivvota jew billi tkun kandidat.

B’hekk qed nappella lil din il-Kamra biex sabiex verament tħaddan dak kollu li tgħid il-Konvenzjoni billi jkollna Elezzjonijiet Ewropej aktar aċċessibbli. Għaldaqstant għandna jkollna materjal li jifhem kulħadd u dibattiti li jirriflettu l-bżonnijiet tal-persuni b’diżabilità. Ukoll hemm bżonn li jkun hemm stazzjonijiet tal-votazzjoni aktar aċċessibbli għal kull tip ta’ diżabilità fiżika. Iċ-ċittadini għandhom id-dritt li jħossuhom indipendenti u parteċipi daqs kulħadd. Apparti minn dan, għandu jkollna elezzjonijiet li jissarrfu f’aktar parteċipazzjoni politika tan-nies b’diżabilità għax bl-għajnuna tagħhom nistgħu noħolqu liġijiet li jinkludu lil kulħadd. Irridu nisimgħu u rridu nifhmu lilhom biex inkunu nafu d-diffikultajiet li jiltaqgħu magħhom u b’hekk naddattaw liġijiet li verament jirriflettu soċjetà inklużiva. B’dan il-mod biss jista’ jkollna Parlament li jirrappreżenta lil kulħadd u li jirrispetta l-kapaċitajiet u d-drittijiet ta’ kull ċittadin Ewropew. Hekk biss jista’ jkollna Ewropa aktar aċċessibbli, Ewropa aktar inklużiva.

  Jana Žitňanská (ECR) – Hoci právo osôb so zdravotným postihnutím, voliť a byť volený, je zakotvené v Dohovore OSN o právach osôb so zdravotným postihnutím, ku ktorému sa prihlásila nielen Európska únia, ale aj jednotlivé členské štáty, toto právo ešte stále nie je všade samozrejmosťou.

Veľmi sa teším, že Ústavný súd na Slovensku minulý rok priznal aj ľuďom pozbaveným spôsobilosti na právne úkony právo voliť. U niektorých týchto ľudí však pretrvávajú obavy, či sa k volebnej urne aj dostanú a budú sa môcť slobodne rozhodnúť, kto im pri uplatňovaní ich volebného práva bude asistovať. Aj napriek tomuto pozitívnemu kroku, sa ešte stále mnohí ľudia so zdravotným postihnutím nedostanú do volebnej miestnosti kvôli bariéram. Z rovnakých dôvodov nemôžu byť členmi volebných komisií. Taktiež nie je samozrejmosťou, že predvolebné debaty či volebné programy sú dostupné pre ľudí so sluchovým či zrakovým postihnutím, že materiály sú dostupné, ľahko zrozumiteľné a použiteľné.

Je dôležité búrať nielen fyzické bariéry, ale aj psychické. Tak, aby aj ľudia so zdravotným postihnutím, ktorí sa rozhodnú kandidovať, mali šancu byť zvolení. Ich aktívna prítomnosť pri politickom rozhodovaní je dôležitá, prínosná a obohacujúca, a najmä je ich základným právom.

  Martina Anderson (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights demands human rights without discrimination. The Equality and Human Rights Commission recently echoed the views of the UN and stated that persons with disabilities continue to face an onslaught against their rights in Britain and in the north of Ireland. This includes the right to participate in public life. In order to uphold this right, elections have to be accessible. Member States need to ensure that election registration and all communications are totally accessible: polling stations need to be equipped to facilitate persons with reduced mobility; postal and proxy votes should be available everywhere; and every impediment to disabled candidates putting themselves forward for election should be removed. The EU should focus on this, and not on transnational list nonsense or undemocratic thresholds.

Brexit makes matters worse for us. Brexit will mean the loss of the EU representation and rights for persons with disability and threatens funding for support services, infrastructure and carers.

GUE/NGL and Sinn Féin will continue to fight for a rights-based society, and on a separate note, that includes the rights of the interpreters who are on strike around us here.

  Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Paní předsedající, paní komisařko, je nepochybné, že se všichni shodneme na tom, že aktivní a pasivní volební právo pro osoby se zdravotním postižením zaručují mnohé mezinárodní úmluvy, byl zde citován článek 29 úmluvy OSN.

Také se nepochybně shodneme, jak vyplývá z diskuze, že by členské státy měly především přijmout opatření, která usnadní všem osobám se zdravotním postižením vykonávat svá politická práva na té, řekněme, přiměřené úrovni, která zaručí tu dostupnost tohoto práva. Jedná se zejména o úpravu volebních procedur, jedná se o dostupnost volební místnosti. Samozřejmě také o dostupnost materiálů, které jsou spojeny s výkonem toho volebního práva ve vztahu právě k vnitrostátním volbám, ale samozřejmě i volbám do Evropského parlamentu.

Klíčové je slovo bezbariérovost. Takže mluvili jsme již o volebních místnostech, které by měly být samozřejmě přístupné všem osobám se zdravotním postižením. Také volební postupy včetně hlasování na dálku by měly být osobám se zdravotním postižením dostupné a plně srozumitelné. Potom jsou to opatření, která se týkají členských států a politických stran. Dostupnost předvolebních materiálů ve znakové řeči, v těch dalších pomůckách, které prostě usnadňují těmto osobám dostupnost těchto materiálů, je, myslím, velmi podstatná a byla zde již také zmíněna.

Také volební debaty by měly být tímto způsobem tlumočeny pro osoby se zdravotním postižením. Byly zde již zmíněny rovné kvóty, to bych se chtěl také vyjádřit. Já nejsem pro uplatňování kvót, nicméně je nepochybné, že členské státy by měly motivovat politické strany kandidující na jejich území, aby i tyto osoby zařadily na volitelná místa kandidátky.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – Madam President, the European Disability Forum, representing the voices of people with disabilities across Europe, has adopted a manifesto for the participation of persons with disabilities in the European elections. The manifesto gives recommendations that would ensure that people with disabilities can enjoy their right to vote and stand for election. I invite colleagues from all political groups to read the manifesto and answer the call by integrating the recommendations into their election campaign commitments and pledges.

Meanwhile, the constant effort to improve the participation of people with disabilities in political and civil life should not limit itself to election periods. The active citizenship of all citizens must remain a priority in our increasingly fragile democracies. The most efficient way to ensure equal opportunities, accessibility, non-discrimination and social justice for all is to maintain a human rights approach, as well as to further involve civil society and those directly affected in the decision—making processes. In that respect, I call on the Commission to reinstate the funding for the European Network on Independent Living.

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η συμμετοχή στον δημοκρατικό βίο της Ένωσης πρέπει να διασφαλίζεται σε όλους τους πολίτες, και ιδίως στο πλαίσιο των ευρωεκλογών. Κι αυτό ισχύει πολύ περισσότερο για τα άτομα με αναπηρίες. Άλλωστε η Σύμβαση του ΟΗΕ, στα άρθρα 12 και 29, καθορίζει ότι τα άτομα με αναπηρία οφείλουν και πρέπει να έχουν τα ίδια δικαιώματα με τους υπόλοιπους πολίτες. Φυσικά, η διαδικασία συμμετοχής σημαίνει, πέραν των άλλων, ότι τα άτομα με αναπηρία θα πρέπει να έχουν τη δυνατότητα συμμετοχής κατά τη διαδικασία της ίδιας της ανταλλαγής απόψεων στο πλαίσιο των ευρωεκλογών. Δεύτερον, να έχουν πρόσβαση στα πολιτικά προγράμματα των κομμάτων. Τρίτον, να υπάρχει δυνατότητα να υπάρχουν να έχουν αυτή την πρόσβαση με ειδικό τρόπο, όπως είναι το σύστημα Μπράιγ.

Επιπλέον, πρέπει να διασφαλιστεί ότι θα υπάρχει πρόσβαση των ΑΜΕΑ στα ίδια τα εκλογικά κέντρα για να μπορούν να ψηφίσουν. Αυτό προϋποθέτει επίσης ότι έχουν ακώλυτη πρόσβαση στα μέσα μαζικής μεταφοράς. Γνωρίζουμε μια σειρά χώρες, λόγω των αναφορών που έχουν έρθει στην Επιτροπή μας, όπου δεν υπάρχουν οι δυνατότητες κυκλοφορίας, μεταφοράς των ατόμων, ιδίως με τον σιδηρόδρομο. Όλα αυτά είναι σημαντικά θέματα που πρέπει να λάβουμε υπόψη. Να αξιοποιηθεί επίσης η ηλεκτρονική δημοκρατία για να μπορούν να ψηφίζουν μέσω Διαδικτύου, όπως επίσης και η πρακτική της επιστολικής ψήφου.

  Cécile Kashetu Kyenge (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, la ringrazio per queste risposte che oggi più che mai risultano importanti.

L'Europa dell'uguaglianza, della non discriminazione, dell'accessibilità e della tutela dei diritti umani, valori fondanti delle nostre istituzioni, parte dall'elezione dei rappresentanti di questo Parlamento e parte dal modo in cui metteremo in atto misure volte a sensibilizzare e incentivare una rappresentanza diretta delle persone con disabilità all'interno delle nostre istituzioni.

Questo percorso deve necessariamente passare per un miglioramento della capacità di fornire informazione accessibile a tutti.

Rimane purtroppo un problema di fondo: la grande difficoltà a eliminare le barriere architettoniche, che ancora oggi troppi cittadini con disabilità devono fronteggiare ogni giorno. Dobbiamo parlare non solo di garanzie di accesso autonomo al voto, ma anche di garanzie che consentano nella vita quotidiana di superare barriere che ledono, non solo l'autonomia, ma anche la dignità dei singoli e che negano loro di esercitare appieno il loro diritto di voto.

  Michela Giuffrida (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in quest'Aula discutiamo oggi di due diritti fondamentali per ogni paese che voglia davvero definirsi civile: quello alla partecipazione democratica e quello di uguaglianza delle persone con disabilità, principi che l'ONU riconosce ma che, ciononostante, noi siamo qui a chiedere.

Siamo qui a chiedervi quale sia lo stato di quello che da più legislature è un cammino ad ostacoli. Perché non si tratta soltanto di barriere fisiche in molti casi, ma anche di barriere ideologiche, comunicative, burocratiche. Alla vigilia delle prossime elezioni europee, constatiamo che ancora, in alcuni Stati membri di quest'Europa, le persone con disabilità sono praticamente escluse dal diritto di voto.

Signora Commissaria, non c'è più tempo per discutere: è urgente una legislazione uniforme, misure immediate, correttivi efficaci per applicare ogni passaggio della strategia europea sulla disabilità. Noi ve lo chiediamo a viva voce: è un dovere politico, etico e morale.

  Monika Beňová (S&D) – Nielen pre účasť či hlasovanie v eurovoľbách platí, že ľudia so zdravotným postihnutím neočakávajú našu ľútosť. Potrebujú konkrétne kroky, ktoré im uľahčia prekonávanie prekážok, s ktorými sa dennodenne stretávajú.

Ľudia so zdravotným postihnutím sú plnohodnotnou súčasťou našej spoločnosti. V otázkach týkajúcich sa nadchádzajúcich volieb a zvýšenia účasti handicapovaných spoluobčanov v nich pritom nejde len o možnosť voliť, ale aj o aktívne využitie ich práva byť volený. Európska Komisia musí v tomto prípade preto myslieť aj na ľudí so zdravotným postihnutím. Mali by ste pripraviť rozsiahlu motivačnú kampaň, aby mohli v prípade záujmu jednoduchšie kandidovať a priamo sa uchádzať o hlasy občanov. Mali by ste mať k dispozícii dostatočné množstvo informačných materiálov, prispôsobených internetových stránok, či špecializovaných tlačovín. Tie musia byť voľne dostupné v rozličných formátoch a musia byť aj zrozumiteľné a ľahko čitateľné, napríklad aj v Braillovom písme.

Je veľmi dôležité, aby sme našich spoluobčanov – a zvlášť handicapovaných – zapojili čo najaktívnejšie do bežného života, aj vrátane ich účasti vo voľbách.

  Κώστας Μαυρίδης (S&D). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, το δικαίωμα συμμετοχής των προσώπων με αναπηρία σε όλη την πολιτική διαδικασία που καταλήγει στο δικαίωμα του εκλέγειν και εκλέγεσθαι είναι θεμελιώδες δικαίωμα για όλους τους πολίτες σε μια δημοκρατία. Άτομα με κινητική αναπηρία, με μειωμένη ορατότητα, με ψυχοκοινωνικές αναπηρίες, άτομα τα οποία βρίσκονται υπό κηδεμονία, που βρίσκονται περιορισμένα και κλειδωμένα, αυτά βεβαίως στερούνται του δικαιώματος να ψηφίσουν, αλλά ακόμη περισσότερο στερούνται και του δικαιώματος να συμμετέχουν αποτελεσματικά σε μια δημοκρατία. Γι’ αυτό και, εάν τόσα εκατομμύρια στερούνται αυτού του θεμελιώδους δικαιώματός τους, σημαίνει ότι η δημοκρατία η ίδια είναι ανάπηρη.

Γι’ αυτό, λοιπόν, καταλήγω με μια φράση, η οποία νομίζω παρουσιάζει το θέμα στην ουσία του: το δικαίωμα συμμετοχής σε όλη την εκλογική διαδικασία του εκλέγειν και εκλέγεσθαι σε μια δημοκρατία είναι και ζήτημα αξιοπρέπειας.

Interventions à la demande

  Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowna pani komisarz! Koleżanki i koledzy! Osoby niepełnosprawne, które stanowią niemal 20% wszystkich obywateli Unii Europejskiej, napotykają szereg barier, zarówno fizycznych, psychicznych, jak i regulacyjnych, które sprawiają, że często nie decydują się one uczestniczyć w wyborach. Czas najwyższy to zmienić. Unia Europejska jako sygnatariusz konwencji ONZ o prawach osób niepełnosprawnych zobowiązała się dbać o włączenie osób niepełnosprawnych w życie społeczne i ich aktywną partycypację. Aby wprowadzić realną zmianę i dać wszystkim osobom niepełnosprawnym możliwość głosowania w przyszłym roku, potrzeba podjęcia zdecydowanych kroków wśród wszystkich decydentów nie tylko na poziomie europejskim, ale także krajowym i lokalnym. Zapewnienie dostępności lokali wyborczych czy możliwości głosowania korespondencyjnego bądź online to ważne kwestie, które jednak muszą zostać zrealizowane w obrębie państw członkowskich. Unia Europejska powinna jednak monitorować, wspierać, koordynować i dostarczać odpowiedniego know-how, aby usprawnić realizację tych zadań.

  Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, un famoso cantautore italiano, Giorgio Gaber, affermava un concetto straordinario nella sua semplicità e verità: la libertà è partecipazione.

La possibilità di prendere parte alla vita politica costituisce un elemento centrale per tutti coloro che vivono in una società democratica. Il segnale più forte che l'Europa possa dare ai cittadini disabili, in questo senso, è quello di adottare già dalla prossima tornata elettorale misure concrete di inclusione, che non si limitano alle attività di sensibilizzazione ma vadano a comprendere e risolvere gli ostacoli che i disabili incontrano nella partecipazione alla vita pubblica.

Bisogna partire dai materiali informativi sui programmi politici, che devono essere disponibili in braille, passando per i requisiti di accessibilità dei seggi, fino ad arrivare alle procedure di votazione per chi vive in un istituto o è impossibilitato a muoversi.

Ma ancora più urgente è costruire una forma di rappresentanza attiva dei disabili qui in Parlamento, incoraggiando quei cittadini disabili che rappresentano i valori della propria comunità a candidarsi e a portare con sé in Europa la propria esperienza ma soprattutto altre priorità.

  Csaba Sógor (PPE). – Az utóbbi években az európai és a tagállami parlamentekben is egyre többször szereztek mandátumot valamilyen fogyatékossággal élők. Ezeket különböző politikai pártokba való integrálódásuknak, vagy függetlenként valamelyik párt által történő jelölésüknek köszönhették.

Örömteli fejlemény, hogy a különböző pártok – politikai és ideológiai hovatartozásuktól függetlenül – igyekeznek helyzetbe hozni a fogyatékkal élőket, lehetőséget adva a speciális szükségletű állampolgárok képviseletére, illetve, hogy ezek a szükségletek egyre több esetben jelenjenek meg a pártprogramokban is.

Remélem, hogy az Európai Bizottságnak is sikerül olyan intézkedéseket javasolni, amelyekkel támogathatja a fogyatékossággal élő személyeket a szavazással járó akadályok leküzdésében.

Ahhoz azonban, hogy a témát ne csak szimbolikusan karolja fel a politika, több olyan intézkedésre volna szükség, ami megkönnyíti a fogyatékossággal élők mindennapjait. Európai szinten ilyen intézkedés lehetne a fogyatékossági besorolások kölcsönös elismerése például. Köszönöm.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisar, vă felicit pentru că ați făcut această declarație și ați spus că este necesar să avem exemple de bună practică pe care să le împărtășim. Până la urmă, problema integrării persoanelor cu dizabilități este problema tuturor, a tuturor statelor membre. Nu ducem lipsă de reglementări. Sigur, avem Convenția ONU. Avem constituțiile statelor membre. Problema este la aplicare.

Sunt un om care a lucrat cu Asociația persoanelor cu dizabilități. Sunt persoane responsabile, de multe ori mult mai implicate civic decât celelalte persoane și este absolut incorect și imoral să le punem o barieră. Cred că este foarte important să vedem cum putem să simplificăm participarea pentru că, de foarte multe ori, din cauza infrastructurii inadecvate, persoanele nu pot participa.

S-a vorbit aici și de tutelă. Poate vă gândiți, doamnă comisar, la o modificare și a acestei reglementări, pentru că, de foarte multe ori, am întâlnit și am avut discuții concrete: persoane cu dizabilități sub tutelă sunt aproape în sclavie. Își arogă drepturi asupra vieții lor, nelăsându-le și nepermițându-le să participe la viața civică. Eu sper să avem o participare corectă a persoanelor cu dizabilități.

(Fin des interventions à la demande)

  Věra Jourová, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I would like to thank the honourable Members for their contributions and dedication in promoting the rights of people with disabilities. Let me react on several questions and comments.

First, on legal questions. Both the EU and its Member States are parties to the United Nations Convention, which has to be implemented according to their respective competencies. Council Directives 93/109/EC and 94/80/EC on the electoral rights of mobile EU citizens apply the principle of equality and non-discrimination between nationals and non-nationals in the exercise of the electoral rights associated with EU citizenship.

The Directives as such do not presuppose complete harmonisation of Member States’ electoral systems, which, to a large extent, remain governed by national laws. Also, the Court of Justice confirmed that it is up to EU countries to regulate aspects of European Parliament electoral procedure not harmonised at EU level by the Electoral Act. However, they must respect EU law, including the Charter on Fundamental Rights and the general principles of EU law, which include equality of treatment and non-discrimination.

In saying that the electoral law and the rules fall under the competence of the Member States, the Commission is not declaring that this is not something which we want to work on and which we do not want to support.

You asked, rightly, about what the Commission did, what it does and what it will do. I can only repeat here what I indicated at the beginning – the Commission’s actions support and supplement national policies and programmes to promote political participation and the exercise of the electoral rights of under-represented groups, including persons with disabilities.

The Commission remains committed to enhancing in future reports its assessment of existing election procedures in this area among the Member States. We have already started working on the new strategy after 2020, because I think that it is important to have a proper, solid strategic paper which will cover this very important topic.

Also, last year, the Commission adopted its third report on EU citizenship. It envisages that this year we should promote best practices which help citizens vote and stand in EU elections, including citizens with disabilities. This year, in April, I met the electoral commissioners of all the Member States and we discussed how best to promote the electoral rights of under-represented groups. We didn’t speak about general stuff. We didn’t speak about the use of proclamations. We spoke about those concrete actions and the needs of people with disabilities, which you have mentioned here as well.

This was the first step and this debate with the electoral commissioners will feed into this November’s Colloquium on Fundamental Rights, because we will organise this high-level event on democratic participation with a special focus on increasing the participation of young people and vulnerable and under-represented groups.

As I said, this debate will take place in the framework of the Fundamental Rights Colloquium dedicated to democracy. We organise this colloquium every year. It is open to the public, it is web-streamed. We have very good feedback from the widest possible society. This is not just one of those events where we speak with the same group of people within some bubble. This is a very open event and I very much hope that this will be the right place where we will discuss the possible sharing of best practices, including the possibilities of using digital voting tools and some other concrete measures which the Member States could and should introduce into their system to enable people to take part in the electoral process.

I can assure you that the Commission shares the commitment to promoting the political participation of people with disabilities. I will look into the possibility of using the European Social Fund and some other funding possibilities because I really want this money to serve the best purpose and this is a very important matter. We should also be able to help civil society, helping and working with people with disabilities to open the door to the voting rooms and help them to take part in it.

That was about the right to vote. Now let me touch just briefly upon the right to be voted. I think that we are all members of political parties and we should take it as our homework as well, our personal homework, to go to our political parties and to speak about the need for more diversity.

I am personally involved in several campaigns enhancing the participation of women and the participation of representatives of minorities. I am personally mentoring several very promising young Roma politicians and I think that we have to do the same in our political parties to raise this topic and help people with disabilities get onto candidate lists. I think that diversity, as I said, is very important and we can all do something very concrete, something which can be done today, tomorrow, in our political groups so as to have more people with disabilities participating actively in the elections.

  La Présidente. – Le débat est clos.

Déclarations écrites (article 162)

  Rosa Estaràs Ferragut (PPE), por escrito. – La participación política es un derecho de ciudadanía reconocido a todas las personas. Por lo tanto, las personas con discapacidad no tendrían que encontrar ningún impedimento a la hora de ejercer tanto su derecho a participar en la vida política como su derecho a votar. Estos derechos están reconocidos en diversos tratados internacionales de derechos humanos, tales como la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas, el Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos y la Convención de las Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad. Por tanto, desde la Unión Europea, y en nuestro caso desde este Parlamento, debemos trabajar para garantizar estos derechos, concretamente el derecho a la información, el derecho a voto en sí, el derecho a la participación del proceso y el derecho de ejercicio en condición de igualdad. Es nuestra la responsabilidad de hacer valer estos derechos a todas las personas, sin que nadie cuente con obstáculos para ejercerlos, y este es el objetivo por el que debemos trabajar.

  Laura Ferrara (EFDD), per iscritto. – La disabilità non può e non deve rappresentare una limitazione per l'esercizio del diritto di votare e di candidarsi in qualsiasi tipo di elezioni, comprese quelle europee. Bisogna andare oltre le dichiarazioni di principio già contenute nella Convenzione delle Nazioni Unite sui diritti delle persone con disabilità ed individuare azioni e strumenti in grado di rimuovere gli ostacoli che di fatto impediscono l'effettiva partecipazione alle elezioni dei soggetti particolarmente vulnerabili, come i disabili. In questa direzione, un contributo significativo, per non lasciare indietro nessuno, potrebbe arrivare da tecnologie concepite e progettate anche in occasione di eventi elettorali ed usate al fine di rendere piena la partecipazione da parte di tutti. L'innovazione, la tecnologia e le buone pratiche, supportate da appropriate basi giuridiche ed iniziative anche a livello europeo e nazionale, possono aiutare a realizzare elezioni inclusive ed accessibili per tutti gli aventi diritto.

  Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE). – As Vice-President of the European Parliament’s Disability Intergroup, and having been President of the Estonian Union of Persons with Mobility Impairment for four years, I am acutely aware of the obstacles faced by persons with disabilities in their everyday lives. For instance, even a couple of steps in the wrong place can become a significant hurdle if you are in a wheelchair. When it comes to elections, be it European elections or any elections for that matter, we must do our utmost to make the procedures accessible to all persons, including those with disabilities, no matter what kind of impairment they have. It is imperative that these people are not disenfranchised and prevented from exercising their fundamental right of having a say in the democratic process. Since it is not always obvious for everyone to foresee all the accessibility arrangements that need to be made, I recommend to the relevant authorities turn to the organisations representing disabled people, in case of any doubt. It is also important that a sufficient number, if not all of the polling stations are made accessible, especially in countries where online voting is not available, otherwise there is still a risk of a discriminatory effect.

4. Debate sobre casos de violação dos direitos humanos, da democracia e do Estado de direito (debate)

4.1. Crise política na Moldávia, na sequência da anulação dos resultados das eleições municipais em Chisinau (debate)

  La Présidente. – L’ordre du jour appelle le débat sur six propositions de résolution concernant la crise politique en Moldavie suite à l’invalidation des élections locales à Chisinau (2018/2783(RSP)).

  Cristian Dan Preda, autor. – Doamnă președintă, grupul meu politic a propus dezbaterea de azi despre criza politică de proporții pe care o traversează Republica Moldova după abuziva anulare a scrutinului de la Chișinău. Acest abuz slăbește un stat de drept care era, și așa, foarte fragil.

(Vorbitorul este întrerupt de președintă, care anunță că sunt probleme cu traducerea)

Democrația moldovenească este în pană. Mă bucur să văd că grupurile politice, în majoritatea lor, au susținut inițiativa PPE și, așa cum se vede în rezoluția comună pe care o vom vota azi, au înțeles gravitatea situației.

Din păcate, atunci când, în ultimul an, am avertizat că în Moldova se petrec lucruri grozave, am fost ignorat. Grupul socialist a reușit prin diverse manevre să ascundă realitatea din Republica Moldova aici, la Strasbourg, sau la Bruxelles. În spatele acestor manevre stă Partidul Social Democrat de la București, care face jocurile oligarhului Plahotniuc.

Este neîndoielnic că Plahotniuc și partidul său sunt autorii deciziei de a anula scrutinul local ce a avut loc la Chișinău. Decizia nu a fost luată de instanța de judecată, ci de oligarh. Anularea scrutinului ne arată, încă o dată, că statul este acaparat de o persoană și că, la Chișinău, justiția este azi folosită pentru a regla dispute politice. Asta e ceva cu adevărat grav. Moldova este un stat capturat de un oligarh, care nu dorește ca afacerile sale și ale clanului său din Chișinău să fie puse în pericol de venirea la primărie a lui Andrei Năstase. Năstase, primarul ales, care este astăzi cu noi, în tribuna oficială, este unul dintre liderii opoziției proeuropene, care a făcut din lupta împotriva corupției și a oligarhiei un obiectiv politic. Cetățenii l-au susținut, oligarhul l-a blocat.

În acest context, denunț, în numele grupului PPE, anularea rezultatelor scrutinului din Chișinău, făcută în mod netransparent și din rațiuni pur politicianiste. Îmi exprim solidaritatea cu toți cetățenii capitalei Republicii Moldova, care au ieșit în număr mare în stradă pentru a-și apăra votul. E bine să o facă în continuare, pentru a arăta că voința poporului nu poate fi călcată în picioare.

Trebuie să acționăm și noi. Evenimentele ne-au demonstrat încă o dată că precondițiile pentru acordarea asistenței macrofinanciare sunt departe de a fi îndeplinite. Așadar, orice fel de plată de acest tip către Republica Moldova trebuie suspendată. Mai mult decât atât, solicit și oprirea sprijinului european pentru bugetul de stat. Cred că niciun euro nu trebuie să mai fie trimis la Chișinău, până nu sunt îndeplinite următoarele condiții: validarea alegerilor locale de la Chișinău, organizarea de alegeri parlamentare credibile, investigarea fraudei bancare cunoscute ca „furtul miliardului” și revenirea la un stat de drept și demararea unor reforme credibile în domeniul justiției.

  Charles Tannock, author. – Madam President, the decision to annul the results of the second round of the mayoral elections in Chișinău, as upheld by the Moldovan Supreme Court, is questionable, to say the least. International and local observers alike have testified to the fact that fundamental freedoms during the elections were fully observed, prompting concern as to the motivation of this curious move.

Andrei Năstase, who won with nearly 53% of the vote, has been involved during the past few years in a number of efforts to uncover corruption and cases of abuses of power at the highest level of office in the state. Concerns that this decision, which could prevent him from taking his elected, rightful office, is politically motivated are not to be easily dismissed – unfortunately. Coming at a time when the country is looking towards parliamentary elections later this year, its implications are of particular concern to this House.

In my Group, I therefore support the calls in this resolution to withhold any future disbursements of macro-financial assistance to Moldova under the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) until we have seen the passage of parliamentary elections in line with recognised international standards. I support, of course, Moldovan Euro—Atlantic aspirations, but the country must observe democracy and the rule of law.

  Rebecca Harms, Verfasserin. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, sehr geehrte Frau Mogherini! Nach den Gesprächen, die wir in dieser Woche mit Opposition und Regierungsvertretern aus Chişinău, aus der Republik Moldau geführt haben, gehe ich davon aus, dass auch am Wochenende in Chişinău wieder große Proteste stattfinden werden. Ich möchte als Erstes an Behörden und Regierung appellieren: Schützt das Recht auf friedlichen Protest! Wir haben in den letzten Wochen in Armenien und in Georgien ähnlich starke Protestwellen erlebt, und die Regierungen Armeniens und Georgiens haben in beispielhafter Weise gezeigt, dass sie Bürgerrechte, dass sie ihre Bürgerinnen und Bürger respektieren, und wir im Europäischen Parlament erwarten sähnlich beispielhaftes demokratisches Verhalten in der Republik Moldau. Rechtsstaatlichkeit, Rechte der Opposition, Rechte der Anwälte der Opposition, Meinungsvielfalt müssen in der Republik Moldau respektiert werden.

Die Proteste sind unserer Meinung nach berechtigt. Die Annullierung der Wahl von Chişinău war ein wirklicher Schock – nicht nur für die Bürger in Chişinău, sondern auch für uns. Ich würde empfehlen, dass diese Wahl so schnell wie möglich wiederholt wird.

Ich teile die Entscheidung der Mehrheit der Kollegen, die über die Entschließung verhandelt haben, dass die Europäische Kommission die Auszahlung der makrofinanziellen Unterstützung aussetzen sollte. Die Regierung der Republik Moldau sollte endlich die Empfehlungen der Venedig-Kommission und von OSZE/BDIMR ernst nehmen. Wir sollten abwarten, ob die angekündigte Parlamentswahl im Herbst nach guten demokratischen Regeln durchgeführt wird. Und wir sollten zusammen mit der Regierung Moldaus den Bankenskandal, diesen riesigen Betrug, auch endlich aufklären. Der Premierminister hat mir gesagt, zu 80 % wisse man heute, wo das Geld, das verschwunden ist, sei. In Zusammenarbeit mit europäischen Polizeibehörden müssen diese Assets zurückgewonnen werden für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger Moldaus. Das sollte eine weitere Bedingung für die makrofinanzielle Unterstützung sein.

  Knut Fleckenstein, Verfasser. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Năstase, der heute hier ist, ist mit über 52 % zum Bürgermeister von Chişinău gewählt worden. Ich gratuliere ihm zu seiner Wahl. Es ist unmöglich, absolut unmöglich, wie mit ihm umgegangen worden ist.

Nun mögen wir das nicht so gerne mit der Richterschelte. Deshalb ist es auch klugerweise anders aufgeschrieben worden mit „concern“. Aber in einer Debatte muss man es sagen dürfen: Das ist ein Skandal. Was dort passiert ist, ist weit weg von jeder Verhältnismäßigkeit und deshalb nicht akzeptabel. Und wenn jemand oder eine Gruppe dahinter steht, die das auch noch befördert hat: Falls das so ist, muss das aufgeklärt werden, und diejenigen – wenn es so ist –, die das getan haben, haben nicht nur der Demokratie Schaden zugefügt, sie haben ihr Land verraten, das eigentlich meiner Meinung nach auf einem ganz guten Weg war.

Deshalb stimmt es auch, was Rebecca Harms gesagt hat: Diejenigen, die dort protestieren, müssen nicht nur geschützt werden, solange sie friedlich sind, sondern sie müssen wissen, dass dieses Parlament in Wirklichkeit gedanklich neben ihnen auf der Straße steht.

Eines allerdings – und da unterscheiden wir uns – mögen wir nicht, nämlich, den Finanzhahn zuzudrehen, weil ich fest davon überzeugt bin: Das ist etwas, was dem Land und den Bürgern des Landes schadet. Und das will in Wirklichkeit keiner. Deshalb werden wir uns enthalten. Dem Anliegen aber entsprechen wir völlig.

  Petras Auštrevičius, author. – Madam President, in my capacity as a standing rapporteur and as a real friend of Moldova, I must confess that I am standing here feeling totally disillusioned and very sad.

Moldova, once called a frontrunner associated partner of the European Union, was the first to receive a visa-free regime and to initiate sizeable reforms in a number of fields. Today, the label that sticks to Moldova is that of a captured state, ruled by a non—transparent political elite, a sort of private company.

The judiciary – captured: the court decision on the Chișinău elections is a real ‘theatre of the absurd’, with the call to ‘get out the vote’ suddenly being outlawed.

The electoral system – captured: election laws have been twisted and adapted to guarantee seats only to some parties and eliminate others.

The banking sector – captured: EUR 1 billion disappears and no genuine effort is made to recover the funds and bring those responsible to justice.

Media – captured: the concentration of the media in the hands of only few players, results in a lack of pluralism and in manipulation and disinformation. The free media are struggling for their very existence.

All in all, this can only mean that a pro-European Moldova is still just a vision, a long way from reality. I sincerely believe in the EU-Moldovan partnership, as a means of bringing a better future for Moldovans, who deserve our firm support and cooperation.

  Helmut Scholz, Verfasser. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Hohe Vertreterin! Bereits Tag 31 des Arbeitskampfes unserer Dolmetscherinnen und Dolmetscher, dafür muss auch Zeit sein, das zu benennen.

Man könnte sich fragen, was eigentlich mit dem Musterland der Ost-Nachbarschaft geschehen ist. Meine Antwort ist klar: nichts. Die moldauischen Eliten agieren wie immer mindestens in den letzten zehn Jahren. EU-Diplomaten schätzen das Land als failed state ein, Länderspezialisten charakterisieren es als captured state. Beiden Einschätzungen ist gemein: In Chișinău herrschen Oligarchen-Cliquen, deren Weltbild davon ausgeht, nicht nur die Wirtschaft, sondern jede staatliche Institution habe ausschließlich ihnen privat zu dienen, und jeder Aspekt des gesellschaftlichen Lebens müsse sich ihren Interessen unterordnen.

Das Ergebnis sehen wir jeden Tag: Wahlergebnisse werden wie in Chișinău nach Belieben annulliert, Wahlgesetze bedarfsgerecht geschneidert, politische Opponenten kriminalisiert, deren Anwälte strafrechtlich bedroht oder gar ins politische Asyl in EU-Staaten gedrängt. In Moldau gehen die Verletzungen fundamentalster Menschenrechte, Korruption, Amtsmissbrauch und Willkür der Justiz Hand in Hand mit dem Diebstahl von Milliarden Euro öffentlicher Gelder, dessen Vertuschung und der staatlichen Nichtbereitschaft zur Aufklärung. Seit zehn Jahren immer das gleiche Spiel.

Nennen wir endlich Ross und Reiter: Plahotniuc, Filat, Shor, Platon, Usatii. Benennen wir das System Moldau, wie es funktioniert. Wenige bereichern sich grenzenlos, während viele in Armut leben und ihre Arbeits- und Zukunftschancen im Ausland suchen müssen. Täglich wird ihnen von Medienmonopolen der Oligarchen erzählt, das alles sei ohne Alternative. Nein, es gibt eine Alternative, und deshalb sollten wir mit sofortiger Wirkung die Makrofinanzhilfe einfrieren und die Kommission und der Rat auffordern, die Diebe und Manipulatoren persönlich zu sanktionieren.

  Siegfried Mureşan, în numele grupului PPE. – Prin decizia de anulare a alegerilor democratice de la Chișinău se distruge tot fundamentul relației dintre Republica Moldova și Uniunea Europeană. Eu vreau ca Moldova să vină în Europa, alături de România și alte țări civilizate, însă autoritățile au dus Republica Moldova la situații de urgență, alături de Burundi și Somalia.

Astăzi, majoritatea covârșitoare a Parlamentului European va adopta o decizie prin care spunem: nu putem acorda autorităților de la Chișinău 100 de milioane asistență macrofinanciară. Această decizie înseamnă că există zero încredere în autoritățile de la Chișinău. Europa nu se va preface că lucrurile merg bine în Republica Moldova. Vom spune lucrurilor pe nume, adică: autoritățile de la Chișinău sunt o piedică în dorința Uniunii Europene de a-i ajuta pe cetățenii Republicii Moldova.

Rezoluția pe care o vom adopta astăzi este una extrem de critică. Niciodată, în ultimii ani, situația din Republica Moldova nu a fost atât de gravă, iar Europa vede și știe acest lucru. Vom spune lucrurilor pe nume și vom fi alături de cetățeni. De aceea, oamenilor care demonstrează pentru valori europene, le spun foarte clar: vă vedem. Suntem alături de voi. Nu vă fie frică. Nu sunteți singuri.

[Vorbitorul a acceptat să răspundă unei întrebări adresate în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru” (articolul 162 alineatul (8) din Regulamentul de procedură.)]

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D), întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Spuneați, stimate coleg, domnule Mureșan, că ar trebui să fim alături de cetățenii Republicii Moldova. Dar cum să fim alături de cetățenii Republicii Moldova, atunci când noi vom vota ca acești 100 de milioane să nu ajungă în Republica Moldova? Acești bani nu sunt pentru guvernul Republicii Moldova și pentru administrația Republicii Moldova. Ei sunt pentru cetățenii Republicii Moldova și, dacă ei, într-adevăr – și ăsta este adevărul – fac parte istoric, etnic, din toate punctele de vedere, cultural, din sud-estul european, noi trebuie să îi susținem pe cetățenii Republicii Moldova, în primul rând. Nu credeți?

  Siegfried Mureşan (PPE), răspuns la o întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Doamnă președintă, îmi face mare plăcere să mai vorbesc încă 30 de secunde despre cetățenii Republicii Moldova. Cetățenii Republicii Moldova vor valori europene, vor democrație, vor alegeri libere, de aceea ies în stradă. Vor stat de drept. Vor o justiție care să facă dreptate și văd că aceste autorități nu fac ceea ce cetățenii Republicii Moldova așteaptă: nu reformează Republica Moldova, nu îmbunătățesc drumurile, nu îmbunătățesc școlile, nu îmbunătățesc spitalele. De aceea, oamenii – și dacă ați discuta cu oamenii, ați ști, domnule Frunzulică – oamenii spun foarte clar: puneți presiune pe acest Guvern, să facă, în sfârșit, ceea ce noi așteptăm. Pentru asistența macrofinanciară există condiții. Banii vor veni când condițiile vor fi îndeplinite.

  Victor Boştinaru, în numele grupului S&D. – Doamnă președintă, doamnă Înalt Reprezentant, vreau să fie explicit: anularea alegerilor de la Chișinău, confirmată de trei instanțe din Republica Moldova, reprezintă un caz profund îngrijorător de nerespectare a voinței electoratului și aruncă o nemeritată umbră asupra evoluțiilor democratice din această țară.

Dar să spui fără dovezi, precum PPE, că decizia a fost rezultatul intervenției politicului în justiție și, mai ales, să ceri politicului să intervină și să schimbe decizia instanței este contrar statului de drept. Guvernul a oferit imediat amendarea legislației până în luna septembrie, pentru a garanta că alegerile parlamentare viitoare vor fi libere, democratice și transparente. Acum, PPE propune blocarea finanțării europene pentru această țară, riscând să facă, de fapt, jocul lui Dodon și al Rusiei.

Mă adresez, în final, opoziției și majorității de la Chișinău. Nu dați foc țării! Pentru că, după alegerile parlamentare, va trebui să construiți împreună un guvern de coaliție proeuropean.

  Anna Elżbieta Fotyga, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, I really appreciate the security policy and, in particular, the transatlantic orientation of the current Government of Moldova. Yet, with all my political experience, I have to raise my voice in defence of Moldovan society and condemn the invalidation of two rounds of mayoral elections in Chișinău.

I think the decision was taken on political grounds with clear influence by the oligarchs. That is a matter of concern. In relation to the changes of electoral law, we warned that it was improper. I think that it was the right and proper time to eradicate potential weaknesses in this law, but not to orient it towards achieving political gains.

  Renate Weber, în numele grupului ALDE. – Doamnă președintă, dreptul este arta binelui și a echității, spuneau romanii, iar știința politică ne spune că votul popular este fundamentul unei democrații și legea este garantul acestui fundament. Din păcate, sistemul de justiție din Moldova a încălcat voința populară exprimată prin vot, interpretând abuziv legea electorală și anulând votul populației din Chișinău. Nici binele și nici echitatea nu s-au regăsit în deciziile tribunalelor, iar sistemul de justiție a făcut pur și simplu jocuri politice.

Andrei Năstase, câștigătorul categoric al alegerilor din Chișinău, a făcut ceea ce face fiecare dintre noi în ziua alegerilor: invităm oamenii să își exercite dreptul civic de a vota. Năstase nu a menționat în favoarea cui să voteze. Asta nu este campanie sau propagandă electorală, la care se referă formula „agitație electorală” din legea moldovenească. De fapt, speriată de victoria opoziției, puterea reală din Moldova, adică Vladimir Plahotniuc și acoliții săi, s-a bazat pe un aliat de nădejde: justiția controlată. Iar aceasta a apelat la interpretări absurde, cu un singur scop: să anuleze voința populară.

O putere politică și o justiție care își disprețuiesc profund propriul popor – Uniunea Europeană nu poate asista nepăsătoare la o astfel de batjocorire a votului popular. Este momentul unei decizii ferme, chiar dacă dureroase: suspendarea tranșelor din fondul de asistență macrofinanciară, până după organizarea corectă a alegerilor parlamentare.

  Heidi Hautala, Verts/ALE-ryhmän puolesta. – Arvoisa puhemies, vain muutama vuosi sitten Moldova oli malliesimerkki siitä, miten hienosti maa kehittyy kohti demokratiaa. Puhuttiin siitä, että se on edelläkävijä itäisessä kumppanuudessa. Mutta nyt on tietenkin aivan selvää, että maa on parlamentaarinen valtiokaappaus ja että siellä useampikin puolue, myös ehkä pääasiassa sosiaalidemokraattien sisarpuolueen johdolla, on ottanut oligarkin käsiin kaiken vallan. Seuraus on sitten se, että oikeusvaltiota romutetaan, mikä näkyy Chișinăun pormestarinvaalin mitätöimisessä.

Me emme voi suhtautua tähän välinpitämättömästi. Tähän on ehdottomasti puututtava, koska eurooppalaiset arvot murenevat nyt myös Euroopan unionin sisältä. Meillä on ongelmia Puolassa, josta olemme keskustelleet tällä viikolla, ja meillä on syviä ongelmia Unkarissa. Me emme voi sallia sitä, että eurooppalaisia arvoja kohdellaan tällä tavalla. On toimittava ja silloin makrotaloudellista tukeakin pitää harkita.

  France Jamet, au nom du groupe ENF. – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, il est évident que depuis l’invalidation des élections municipales du 3 juin dernier à Chisinau, une crise politique grave déstabilise la Moldavie.

À cheval entre l’Union européenne et proche de la Russie par sa situation géographique, son histoire et sa culture, ce pays se trouve dans une situation géopolitique particulièrement fragile. Une fois de plus, je constate que Bruxelles s’immisce dans les affaires d’un pays tiers. Il se trouve que l’immense majorité de la population russophone est prorusse. Il se trouve que Bruxelles n’en finit plus de vouloir régler son compte à la Russie. Cette tentative d’ingérence de la Commission n’est, ni plus ni moins, qu’un déni du droit des peuples à disposer d’eux-mêmes. Tout comme la Commission l’a démontré à l’égard de la Pologne, de la Hongrie ou de l’Italie. Mais, ce qui est plus grave, c’est qu’en attirant coûte que coûte cette région vers la Roumanie, elle va prendre le risque de déclencher une crise avec la Russie et l’Ukraine.

La Commission va semer le chaos en Moldavie et souffler sur les braises d’une potentielle guerre civile par dogmatisme, par aigreur, par erreur, pour régler ses comptes avec la Russie, tout simplement.

  Dobromir Sośnierz (NI). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Wzywacie Państwo w tej rezolucji do spełnienia przez rząd w Kiszyniowie pewnych warunków, które mają obejmować uznanie wyników wyborów w Kiszyniowie oraz zreformowanie sądownictwa i mianowanie nowych sędziów tak, aby nie dopuścić do tego, by wymiar sprawiedliwości ingerował w proces wyborczy. Jeszcze nie wybrzmiały echa tego, gdy w tej Izbie kilka dni temu strofowano Polskę za to, że mianuje nowych sędziów, by wpływać na sąd, że nie respektuje wyroków sądów, a teraz wzywacie rząd w Mołdawii, żeby zrobił coś dokładnie odwrotnego – to znaczy przeszedł do porządku dziennego nad wyrokiem sądu i uznał wyniki wyborów.

Do czego tak naprawdę wzywacie? Do tego, żeby mianowano sędziów po to, żeby orzekali zgodnie z waszą linią? Pokazujecie swoją hipokryzję. Czego innego wymagacie od Polski, czego innego od Mołdawii. Może ktoś mi to wytłumaczy? Pan kolega Boni przemawia po mnie, to może wytłumaczy mi, na czym polega ta schizofrenia? Co się dzieje, że w Polsce należy bezwzględnie przestrzegać wyników sądów, a tutaj nie?

  Michał Boni (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Będę mówił po polsku. Różnica polega na tym, że w Polsce kadencja Sądu Najwyższego jest przerywana w trakcie jej trwania – o czym w tej rezolucji nikt nie mówi – i nie łamie, nie proponuje zmiany zasad demokratycznych. Jeszcze kilka lat temu Mołdawia była krajem zmierzającym względnie prostą drogą w kierunku Unii Europejskiej, akceptującym reguły jednolitego rynku, jak i europejski kręgosłup wartości. Widoczna jednak korupcja polityczna, nieprzejrzystość funkcjonowania mediów publicznych i prywatnych, zmiany w prawie wyborczym budujące nieuprawnioną przewagę niektórych, podważane przez Komisję Wenecką, stawiają przyszłość Mołdawii pod wielkim znakiem zapytania. Ostatnie zdarzenia, kiedy po wygranych w uczciwej demokratycznej walce wyborach na burmistrza Kiszyniowa sąd ni stąd, ni zowąd anulował wynik wygranego, a w ostateczności podtrzymał to orzeczenie Sąd Najwyższy, jasno pokazują chorobę, jaka toczy dziś Mołdawię. To pełne upolitycznienie sądownictwa – przeciwko czemu jesteśmy w Polsce – którego istotą powinna być niezależność. To podważanie zasad państwa prawa. To oligarchizacja demokracji. Trzeba radykalnymi decyzjami powstrzymać to, co złe w mołdawskiej polityce. Zróbmy to dzisiaj, by przyszłość Mołdawii otworzyć na nowo w dobrym kierunku.

(Mówca zgodził się odpowiedzieć na pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki (art. 162 ust. 8 Regulaminu))

  Anna Elżbieta Fotyga (ECR), pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Panie Pośle! Za czasów rządu pańskiej opcji odbyła się konsultacja Państwowej Komisji Wyborczej w Moskwie. Wówczas protestowano w Polsce kilka tygodni później, ponieważ fałszowane były wyniki wyborów. Jak Pan by się do tego odniósł?

  Michał Boni (PPE), odpowiedź na pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – (początek wystąpienia poza mikrofonem) ... nigdy nie były sfałszowane wyniki wyborów i nie ma na to żadnego dowodu poza pomówieniami rządzącej obecnie partii. Niefortunne konsultacje Państwowej Komisji Wyborczej dotyczyły wprowadzenia systemu elektronicznego, co zostało zresztą przez instytucje rządowe zablokowane. A niezależna Komisja Wyborcza zrobiła to niestety sama z siebie. Natomiast zagrożeń dla przejrzystości systemu wyborczego, pani poseł, nie było. Proszę się z tego nie śmiać. To dzisiaj są zagrożenia dla przejrzystości systemu wyborczego, jeśli Sąd Najwyższy, tak jak w Mołdawii, będzie pod presją polityczną.

(Mówca zgadza się odpowiedzieć na pytanie zadane zgodnie z procedurą niebieskiej kartki (art. 162 ust. 8 Regulaminu)). 

  Dobromir Sośnierz (NI), pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Nie odpowiedział pan na pytanie, jak rząd w Kiszyniowie ma zrealizować warunek polegający na uznaniu wyników wyborów, skoro zapadł prawomocny wyrok sądu. Jak ma to zrobić? Kadencja sędziów ma być przerwana, ponieważ tam nie ma w tej chwili planowanych wyborów.

  Michał Boni (PPE), odpowiedź na pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – W treści rezolucji są rekomendacje i sugestie dotyczące powrotu do systemu, który pozwoli na przejrzystość dokonywania wyborów. Nie odczytuję treści tej rezolucji jako złamania systemu sądowniczego, który miałby być niezależny, tylko jako powrót do niezależnego systemu sądowniczego. Proszę dokładnie wczytać się w tekst rezolucji.

  Andi Cristea (S&D). – Madam President, we are discussing Moldova today because the latest developments in Chișinău require our greatest attention. The non-transparent invalidation of the mayoral elections in Chișinău is an issue of the gravest concern for this House and for all of those who have this country and its people close to their heart. Free and fair elections are the foundation of any democracy and so is the fulfilment of all democratic electoral and constitutional procedures and fundamental democratic commitments. We have to think strategically, act rationally and acknowledge that the solution is not decoupling the Moldova wagon from the EU train, or derailing it.

High Representative, this is the reason why a decision on our part to suspend budget support – I am not referring to the macro—financial assistance – would be as wrong as invalidating the elections, and would simply add one mistake on top of another.

  Bas Belder (ECR). – Voorzitter, het is duidelijk dat Brussel politiek de rug moet rechten tegenover machtsmisbruik in Chișinău. We moeten ook vaststellen dat de Hoge Vertegenwoordiger, mevrouw Mogherini, en Commissaris Hahn dat heel duidelijk hebben gedaan: de rug rechten tegenover politiek machtsmisbruik in Chișinău.

Echter, tegelijkertijd wil ik ook beklemtonen dat we Europees engagement, ik denk dan met name aan humanitair engagement, bijvoorbeeld een Nederlandse kerkorganisatie die kinderen uit zwakke, arme gezinnen te hulp komt met onderwijsbegeleiding, veiligheid, voedsel, dat we dit Europees engagement niet in de steek mogen laten met al onze kritiek op het machtsmisbruik dat plaats vindt in Moldova. Dat machtsmisbruik gaat immers allereerst over de ruggen van de Moldavische burgermaatschappij heen en laten we die vooral vasthouden. Ik reken op de wijsheid en ook de inzet van de Europese instellingen om dit humanitaire aspect in deze politieke crisissituatie niet uit het oog te verliezen.

(De spreker gaat in op een "blauwe kaart"-vraag (artikel 162, lid 8, van het Reglement))

  Maria Grapini (S&D), întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Doamnă președintă, stimate coleg, cred că toată lumea este de acord că a fost un abuz de putere. Toată lumea este de acord că nu trebuiau invalidate alegerile. Dar credeți că putem corecta o greșeală făcută față de candidatul Năstase - pe care îl respect și știe, că m-am întâlnit în perioada de campanie cu dumnealui - cu altă nedreptate? Să tăiem fondurile? Trebuie să confundăm cetățenii cu liderii de partid? Trebuie să îi dăm apă la moară lui Dodon, să poată să se laude: iată, ce v-a făcut Europa și să mai câștige un mandat? Nu credeți că nu trebuie să suspendăm fondurile, ci trebuie să supraveghem cum se aplică statul de drept în Republica Moldova?

PRZEWODNICTWO: BOGUSŁAW LIBERADZKI
Wiceprzewodniczący

  Bas Belder (ECR), "blauwe kaart"-antwoord. – Geachte collega, dan hebt u mijn speech niet begrepen. Ik vind namelijk dat je dingen niet tegen elkaar moet uitspelen. Het moet duidelijk zijn dat we onze normen, onze principes moeten vasthouden en tegelijkertijd naar de wijsheid moeten zoeken om de burgermaatschappij daar niet het slachtoffer van te laten worden. Dan zullen we toch moeten samenwerken met de Moldavische autoriteiten.

  Udo Voigt (NI). – Herr Präsident! Seit 1991 erleben wir, dass die NATO und die europäischen Staaten eine starke Einkreisungspolitik Russlands betreiben. Moldau gehört dazu, Georgien und die Ukraine – alle diese Länder sollen dem Einfluss Russlands entrissen werden.

Ich wundere mich schon sehr, wo hier in diesem Haus die Ehrlichkeit bleibt. Wo waren denn die Aufrufe, als im Jahre 2017 der erste direkt gewählte Präsident Moldaus, Dodon, durch das Verfassungsgericht abgesetzt worden ist? Wann hat man da Kredite sperren oder Zuweisungen zurückhalten wollen? Heute heißt doch die Souveränität Moldaus nichts anderes, als um Kredite bei der EU, das heißt im Westen, betteln zu müssen. Wo ist denn die eine Milliarde Dollar geblieben, bei drei Milliarden, bei drei moldauischen Banken? Alle diese Dinge sind bis heute noch nicht aufgeklärt. Die EU täte gut daran, das Prinzip der Nichteinmischung in die inneren Angelegenheiten eines anderen Staates auch in Moldau umzusetzen.

  Jaromír Štětina (PPE). – Mr President, as a Member of the European Parliament, I would like to underline that the courts’ decision to annul the results of the mayoral elections in the city of Chișinău bear all the signs of political motivation. If that is true, this would be an alarming indication that the state of democracy in Moldova is weakening. It may jeopardise the country’s ambitions for further integration with the European Union.

The massive protests against nullification of the election results show how deeply Moldova’s citizens are afraid for its future. This sentiment has been strengthened by widespread corruption and lack of implementation of much-needed reforms. It is high time to consider personal accountability of Moldova’s officials.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))

  Cristian Dan Preda (PPE), Întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Domnule Štětina, dragă coleg, ce părere aveți despre faptul că, în Moldova, avem un guvern-marionetă controlat de oligarhul Plahotniuc, la fel ca și într-un stat membru, unde guvernul de la București e condus de o marionetă, doamna Dăncilă, controlată de Liviu Dragnea, condamnat de două ori la închisoare? Cum vi se pare această situație?

  Jaromír Štětina (PPE), odpověď na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty. – Děkuji Cristianovi za tuto otázku. Náhoda to není, je to obecný trend. Vezměte si oligarchii v Rusku, vezměte si oligarchii v Gruzii, vezměte si oligarchii v Moldavsku a je to všechno způsobené onou imperiální politikou, o které mluvil před chviličkou pan kolega po mé levici. Já si myslím, že to je prostě součást obecného vývoje v postsovětském prostoru.

Zgłoszenia z sali

  José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Alta Representante, começo por cumprimentar o Presidente da Câmara de Chișinău, hoje aqui presente (não sei onde é que ele está). As eleições municipais em Chișinău, em Balti, foram encaradas como um teste para as eleições parlamentares moldavas do próximo mês de novembro.

A invalidação pelo Supremo Tribunal da vitória do candidato pró-europeu Andrei Năstase, em Chișinău, gerou acusações de interferência do Partido Democrático no sistema judiciário, desencadeou na capital uma onda de protestos e desgastou ainda mais a credibilidade das regras do jogo democrático, muito abalada já em 2017, quando o sistema proporcional foi substituído por um sistema misto, que beneficia claramente os partidos do governo e discrimina as forças políticas mais pequenas e sem assento parlamentar.

Caros colegas, a transparência, a imparcialidade e o respeito pelos resultados dos processos eleitorais são parte integrante da tradição democrática da Europa e da União Europeia, que deve continuar os esforços de associação política e de integração económica, incluindo a assistência macrofinanceira, no respeito escrupuloso desses princípios e na efetiva implementação da reforma do sistema judiciário e da luta contra a corrupção, prevista no acordo de associação com a Moldávia.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamnă Înalt Reprezentant, stimați colegi, nu putem să ne jucăm cu soarta unor state. Nu putem să ne jucăm cu o țară care a ales un drum proeuropean. Este șansa noastră acum.

Da, sunt de acord cu o rezoluție, dar nu cu formulări neclare, să introducem chiar noi știri false aici sau neclarități. Ce înseamnă asta, să scrii într-o rezoluție, la punctul 1, că sunt lucruri dubioase? Noi trebuie să fim foarte exacți și preciși când propunem ceva unui guvern.

Încă o dată, repet: sunt absolut de acord că nu trebuiau anulate, dar nu putem noi să tăiem această asistență financiară pentru cetățeni. Ne gândim la cetățenii Republicii Moldova sau ne gândim la o persoană anume? De aceea, nu voi vota această rezoluție și vă rog să înțelegeți că, prin votarea rezoluției, de fapt, întoarcem drumul Republicii Moldova dinspre Europa spre Rusia.

  Daniel Buda (PPE). – Domnul președinte, ceea ce s-a întâmplat în Republica Moldova prin invalidarea alegerilor pentru primăria municipiului Chișinău este inacceptabil, fie chiar și pentru o democrația în curs de formare. Vox Populi, Vox Dei sau „voința poporului este voința lui Dumnezeu”. Din păcate, forțele rusofile sunt incapabile să accepte că Andrei Năstase a fost alesul poporului, invalidând alegerile pentru motive inexistente.

Solicit astfel tuturor instituțiilor europene – Comisiei Europene, Consiliului, dar și Parlamentului European – ca, mai departe, să intervină de îndată, în limitele competențelor legale, pentru ca voința poporului să fie respectată în Republica Moldova. Uniunea Europeană are nevoie de o Republică Moldova puternică, în care drepturile și libertățile fundamentale ale omului sunt respectate. Parcursul european al acesteia nu trebuie frânt de cei care nu înțeleg să respecte democrația, cu valorile și principiile acesteia.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – I have spent some time in the beautiful city of Chișinău, and I know that its citizens want a better society. Therefore, the recent court ruling to invalidate the mayoral elections in Chișinău is very worrying. None of the candidates had complained about the results of the elections but they were cancelled nevertheless, because of a minor offence punishable by a small fine. The court ruling deprives the Moldovan people of their elected candidate and puts democracy in danger.

The lack of transparency regarding the decision is also very worrying as it calls into question the independence of the judiciary in Moldova. Moldovan people want to live in a democratic country and they should not be deprived of their right to political participation. As a close partner of Moldova, the European Union should support Moldovan civil society and citizens, and call for the court ruling to be cancelled.

  Cristian-Silviu Buşoi (PPE). – Domnule președinte, respectul cetățenilor moldoveni față de valorile europene este invers proporțional cu cel al autorităților care conduc astăzi Republica Moldova, care folosesc, mai nou, tertipuri legislative ca unealtă împotriva exercitării democrației. Consecințele acestei acțiuni se răsfrâng, ca de obicei, asupra dezvoltării economice a Republicii Moldova și asupra viitorului european al tinerilor moldoveni din țară și de peste hotare.

Cetățenii moldoveni au nevoie, mai mult decât oricând, de suportul Uniunii Europene și trebuie să dăm un mesaj foarte clar că nu tolerăm această situație, în care voința cetățenilor din Chișinău, de a-l alege pe Andrei Năstase primar, este răsturnată prin influențarea unor decizii ale instanțelor.

Mai nou, în contextul noilor legi electorale, care încalcă recomandările Comisiei de la Veneția și ale biroului OSCE, este nevoie de un mesaj la fel de clar că trebuie să se revină la o legislație care oferă șanse egale tuturor competitorilor politici. Moldova trebuie să rămână pe drumul valorilor europene, către o democrație sănătoasă, către un sistem judiciar independent, către dezvoltarea mediului de afaceri.

  Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Pane předsedající, pokud má dojít k zneplatnění voleb, tak se tak může stát pouze na základě velmi silných argumentů a musíme říci, že to rozhodnutí kišiněvského soudu je argumentačně naprosto ploché. Nicméně situace v Moldavsku je dlouhodobě krajně znepokojivá. Moldavsko je krásná země, žijí tam velmi dobrosrdeční lidé a pak zde máme několik jmen oligarchů, která se neustále opakují a s nimiž je spojeno bezbřehé rozkrádání.

Myslím si, že podpora Evropské unie se tak trochu ztrácí a nedostává se právě k občanům. A občané Moldavska se zaslouží naši podporu, protože já cítím, že oni vyznávají naše hodnoty, hodnoty Evropské unie. Můžeme dnes my mlčet? No nepochybně nemůžeme mlčet, protože my jsme s občany Moldavska. A to je naše hlavní výhoda na rozdíl od těch oligarchů, kteří s nimi nejsou. Takže pojďme prosím pomoci lidem v Moldavsku. Najděme cesty, jak obejít oligarchy a podpořit Moldavsko jako takové.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

  Federica Mogherini, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, let me start by thanking Parliament for the attention you always pay to Moldova. I would like to thank the representatives of the opposition in Moldova for their presence here with us today, and also for the opportunity I had to meet with them yesterday. I also met with Prime Minister Pavel Filip just two months ago at our Association Council and I think that our constant attention and the channels which are constantly open with all our interlocutors from Parliament, myself, Commissioner Hahn and all the European institutions are extremely important in terms of accompanying the country onto the right track.

I remember, with a lot of emotion and positive memories, when we had visa liberalisation for Moldovan citizens, Moldova being the frontrunner of our Eastern Partnership countries, just a few years ago.

After the invalidation of the mayoral elections in Chișinău, as you know, Commissioner Hahn and I reacted immediately. The Supreme Court decision of 25 June deprives the citizens of Chișinău of a democratically elected mayor. Last week, the Central Election Commission decided not to organise new elections and this confirms that Chișinău will continue to be governed by a non-elected administration. These decisions undermine the trust of the citizens of Moldova in the state institutions. The invalidation of the mayoral elections was non-transparent, and we expect – I personally expect – the Moldovan authorities quickly to find a way out of this unacceptable solution and to guarantee judicial independence, in line with Moldova’s international commitments.

In all our contacts with our Moldovan interlocutors, we always keep a strong focus on the reforms Moldova needs: addressing the lack of independence of the judiciary, investigating the banking frauds, looking at electoral reform, protecting the space for free media, and we could continue. The European Union has been consistently asking for these reforms, but – and let me stress this very clearly – it is, first and foremost, Moldovan citizens who expect and deserve them. They have been asking for these reforms for years, and I think they expect them to be delivered.

In recent weeks the citizens of Chișinău have been expressing their dissatisfaction very clearly through peaceful demonstrations. Their safety, freedom and right to demonstrate must always be respected and guaranteed. This is an absolute priority. I would like to stress – as Rebecca Harms mentioned earlier – that we will keep an eye on what happens in the coming weeks. We expect their safety and freedom to be protected and guaranteed.

Journalists must always be allowed to do their job freely. While I am mentioning the press, let me just mention the work we are doing in Moldova through our Strategic Communication Task Force, to support independent media, to monitor disinformation from all sources and to communicate the benefits of cooperation with the European Union. Let me stress very clearly that cooperation with the European Union is not against anyone: it is for the benefit of Moldovan citizens. We do not think in terms of spheres of influence or geopolitics. We think only in terms of reforms, sustainable situations, including on the economic front, and the rule of law and democracy in the countries that are around us.

Let me also share with you the news that we will increase our work on communication and media freedom in Moldova, and in other Eastern Partnership countries, thanks in part to this Parliament’s support for all the strategic communications task forces, and in particular the ‘East’ one.

Credible, inclusive and transparent elections at all levels are basic pillars of any democracy. The way the mayoral elections in Chișinău have been handled does not bode well for the organisation of the national elections expected at the end of this year. Our position has been very clear since the Council conclusions we adopted last February. The new electoral law that was adopted exactly a year ago does not address the key recommendations of international partners, namely the Council of Europe Venice Commission and the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. This is also largely reflected in your motion for a resolution, and all this is why we have decided to put on hold the disbursement of the first tranche after the current macro—financial assistance programme.

As you know, disbursements under the macro—financial assistance programme are contingent on two things: not only the successful implementation of specific economic policy measures laid out in the memorandum of understanding – and we consider that these have been implemented – but also the fulfilment of political preconditions related to respect for democratic mechanisms, the rule of law and human rights. Following the invalidation of the mayoral election, the political preconditions have not been fulfilled. In this situation, a decision was taken to put on hold the disbursement of the first macro—financial assistance tranche until the political preconditions attached to our assistance are met. We hope this can happen soon – the sooner, the better – but it must happen.

I will personally keep in constant contact with all our interlocutors in Moldova. I hope you will continue to do the same. Parliament can be extremely helpful and useful here, as always. For us, Moldova is not just a neighbour, it is a friend and a partner – Moldovan citizens are – and we will keeping engaging for a positive, fast solution to the current crisis.

(Applause)

  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się w czwartek 5 lipca 2018 r.

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)

  Dominique Martin (ENF), par écrit. – Le débat du 5 juillet 2018 sur la Moldavie au Parlement européen s’écarte des vrais sujets: il sera seulement question de querelles électorales. On oubliera les 661 millions d’euros de subventions européennes déjà versées depuis 2007, et les détournements massifs dont l’ancien premier ministre Vlad Filat s’est rendu coupable. Ce dernier a pourtant été condamné en 2016 à neuf ans de prison ferme pour avoir reçu 260 millions de dollars de pots-de-vin provenant du milliard d’euros «disparu» de trois banques moldaves. Quid de l’attelage curieux de «l’Assemblée EURONEST» formée par des élus du Parlement européen et des parlements d'Arménie, Azerbaïdjan, Géorgie, Moldavie et d’Ukraine. Quel contribuable français peut accepter ce concept de parlementaires européens perdant leur temps dans un « Parlement bis » avec ces pays l’Est ? Ce temps de débat devrait être utilisé pour débattre des trois priorités des européens: la lutte contre le djihadisme, le contrôle des flux migratoires et la lutte contre le chômage.

4.2. Somália (debate)

  Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest debata nad sześcioma projektami rezolucji w sprawie Somalii (2018/2784(RSP)).

  Charles Tannock, author. – Mr President, last Sunday on the 58th anniversary of Somalian independence, four civilians were tragically killed by mortar attacks in Mogadishu. The next day, seven more were injured by a roadside bomb. Both attacks have been attributed to the Jihadi terrorist group Al-Shabaab. On what should have been a weekend of celebration and hope for the Somalian people, there was more killing, more bereaved and broken families, more fear and terror.

For over two decades, these recurring tragedies have blighted the Somali nation. The civil war and unchecked terrorist activities, as well as corruption and mismanagement, have left 80% of the Somali population in dire poverty, with two million living as refugees.

The lack of food is a reality for millions on the verge of starvation, but, in spite of all this, under President Mohammed’s government the country is inching towards some stability – but there is still much more work to be done. If Somali security forces are to be up to the task following the withdrawal of the UN Amisom troops in 2020, then state military capability, security and financial governance must be strengthened.

The international community and the EU must continue to do what it can to promote lasting stability and peace in this very fragile nation in the Horn of Africa.

  Bodil Valero, författare. – Herr talman! Precis som herr Tannock säger gör Somalia vissa framsteg mot mer demokrati, men vägen är väldigt lång och den påverkas av en mängd faktorer. Efter år av torka har till exempel de senaste skyfallen lett till att 130 000 människor tvingats lämna sina hem. Man räknar med att hälften av dem är barn. Redan innan hade 2,6 miljoner människor drabbats av torkan och konflikten.

I Dadaab-lägret i Kenya lever 350 000 människor som kenyanerna helst skulle vilja skicka tillbaka, eftersom det internationella samfundet inte bidrar med adekvat stöd. Många somalier har också tagit sin tillflykt till Europa.

Men för att komma till rätta med problem måste man gå till grundorsakerna. De största orsakerna är decennier av konflikt och fattigdom och båda förstärker varandra. En alltmer bidragande orsak är klimatpåverkan som leder till torkan och översvämningarna. Klimatpåverkan har varit ett tydligt inslag i redan många år, men kommer i skymundan av andra mer direkta och synliga problem.

Ett annat stort problem är straffrihet, och vi välkomnar därför att en oberoende nationell människorättskommission inrättas. Vi förväntar oss att alla kränkningar ska undersökas och gärningsmännen lagföras.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar, autor. – Señor presidente, señora Mogherini, en este Pleno del Parlamento Europeo, como siempre, nos ocupamos de los problemas y retrocesos de los derechos fundamentales, sea en Europa, como cuando discutimos el retroceso del imperio de la ley y la separación de poderes en Polonia o las inaceptables declaraciones del ministro del Interior italiano, Matteo Salvini, contra los gitanos o la estigmatización general contra los extranjeros, como si fueran una amenaza contra nuestra seguridad, cuando, en realidad, muchos de ellos huyen del terror. O fuera de Europa, como es el caso de Somalia: atentados terroristas, Al Shabab, masacres continuadas...

¿Una recién elegida nueva situación democrática? ¡No! Hubo unas elecciones en 2018, pero sigue habiendo muchísimos problemas que acucian a los derechos fundamentales ——libertad de asociación, libertad de expresión, libertad de sindicación—, hostigamiento a los sindicatos y, por supuesto, represión de la libertad de expresión de los periodistas.

Y, por eso, es imprescindible que la Unión Europea emplee a fondo su diplomacia junto con las Naciones Unidas y la propia Unión Africana para firmar el compromiso de la acción exterior y la cooperación al desarrollo con el mandato de respeto y preservación de los derechos fundamentales de todas las personas.

  Dita Charanzová, author. – Mr President, I want to congratulate Somalia on its 58th year of independence earlier this week. However, I would have hoped for it to have taken place under brighter conditions. The security situation remains precarious. More than two million people remain internally displaced. The country is on the brink of another famine. Al-Shabaab is a lesser threat than before, but it is nevertheless still present and is forcibly recruiting children. And despite a new government taking power last year, we have been seeing it gradually take a more autocratic approach with the arbitrary arrests, attacks on journalists, threats and intimidation of trade unions.

This is just naming a few of the many serious problems that Somalia faces today. After decades of conflict, we cannot risk seeing Somalia turn into a failed state or fall into the hands of terrorists. Somalians deserve a better future, and the EU must continue supporting Somalia in any way it can.

  Michaela Šojdrová, author. – Mr President, I would like to express my gratitude to all those who pay attention to the situation in Somalia. This is a typical frozen military conflict. I would like to remember the suffering of millions of people, especially children.

Somalia is a country that has been at the top of the Fragile States Index for the past ten years. The fragility of this country’s alarming state of human rights is not ignored by the EU: the EU has provided EUR 486 million through the European Development Fund, focusing on peace-building, food security and education. Therefore, we need to express our support for such stabilising initiatives and call on local governmental authorities to undertake the appropriate steps in order to mitigate the situation.

This country experiences awful terrorism, higher rates of corruption, misusing children as soldiers, extreme poverty, child malnutrition and political instability. We must make sure that a mission funded by the EU implements its mandate fully in order to protect civilians.

So I ask you, Madam High Representative, to ensure that the international humanitarian response plan for Somalia is fully developed. I am convinced that this resolution outlines a possible solution to Somalia’s desperate situation. I hope it will be largely welcomed and supported.

  Lola Sánchez Caldentey, autora. – Señor presidente, señora Mogherini, Somalia es uno de los países más pobres del mundo y lleva sumido en una especie de guerra civil más de una década. La violencia entre clanes es instrumentalizada por intereses exteriores, como Arabia Saudí, uno de nuestros principales socios comerciales, lamentablemente.

Las inundaciones y las sequías constantes agravan la dramática situación que vive el pueblo somalí. Al terrorismo se le combate con desarrollo sostenible, con integración y cohesión social, con redistribución de la riqueza, como bien señala la Resolución que votaremos hoy, no con militarización. La estabilización de Somalia requiere que pongamos fin a la hipocresía de nuestra política exterior.

La ayuda al desarrollo no debe condicionarse a su complicidad en la nefasta política migratoria de la Unión, que debe centrarse en alcanzar los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible. Pero, tristemente, el mayor gasto, con diferencia, de la comunidad internacional en Somalia es el militar.

No objetaríamos si los drones repartieran inclusión social y derechos humanos, pero sabemos que, producto de nuestra coherencia política, esto no es así.

  Pavel Svoboda, za skupinu PPE. – Pane předsedající, Somálsko zažilo 20 let občanské války, lidská práva zde nemají prakticky žádného zastání. V zemi dochází k mnoha teroristickým útokům islamistů. Při největším z nich zahynulo v říjnu 2017 minimálně 512 osob.

Transparency International považuje Somálsko za zemi s největší mírou korupce na světě. Mezinárodní federace novinářů považuje Somálsko za nejnebezpečnější zemi na světě. Soudní řízení zde často provádějí vojenské soudy a často používají trest smrti. V pronásledování křesťanů má Somálsko trvale třetí místo na světě. Arcibiskup z Mogadiša prohlásil, že v Somálsku nelze být křesťanem. 1 200 000 dětí trpí podvýživou. Sucho a následné záplavy donutily opustit své domovy 230 000 lidí.

Takto bohužel vypadá takřka dokonalý katalog příčin migrace z afrického kontinentu. Chceme-li přispět k odstranění těchto příčin, musí Evropská unie přispět k tomu, aby základní funkce somálského státu začaly fungovat, aby byly vytvořeny základy somálské obnovené občanské společnosti. To by mělo být cílem Evropské unie.

  Francisco Assis, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária Mogherini, Caros Colegas, a Somália é, como sabemos, um país fustigado pela violência há já demasiado tempo, uma violência multiforme, com várias origens e vários atores, uns estatais, outros não estatais, que atinge a população, ora diretamente, ora colateralmente, por via de conflitos entre fações e disputas territoriais, e que não poupa as crianças.

É sabido que a violência tem o condão em todo o lado de suscitar ainda mais violência e nos últimos anos a Somália teve ainda de suportar os atentados terroristas da milícia al—Shabaab, uma metástase da Al-Qaeda.

Embora o Governo somali tenha dado alguns passos no sentido de uma normalização institucional e eleitoral, com o apoio da comunidade internacional, e tenha realizado eleições livres em 17, a verdade é que os direitos humanos, políticos e civis continuam a ser sistematicamente agredidos a uma escala com poucos paralelos no resto do mundo.

A Somália é, hoje, um Estado desestruturado e, enquanto assim for, dificilmente conseguirá travar a violência e a miséria que tornam a vida dos seus habitantes num inferno.

A UE tem prestado uma ajuda financeira significativa, mas deve redobrar os seus esforços no sentido da estabilização e estruturação do país, o que também passa por convocar e responsabilizar alguns países árabes que têm contribuído para agudizar a conflitualidade política com os seus interesses conflituantes.

  Anna Elżbieta Fotyga, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, decades of civil war in Somalia left an enormous death toll among civilians, and also a very grave humanitarian situation. We support President Mohamed’s resolve to eradicate al—Shabaab’s terrorism. We also support engagement of regional countries like Kenya and Ethiopia in strengthening this resolve. Yet, I think that we have to engage and think about the future, think about withdrawal of AMISOM (the African Union Mission to Somalia) and strengthening our presence, including the EU NAVFOR Somalia (Operation Atalanta) rearrangement after Brexit.

  Javier Nart, en nombre del Grupo ALDE. – Señor presidente, hago mías las descripciones que se han realizado de Somalia, pero hay una cuestión en la que nadie entra. En Somalia combaten los somalíes y, con mucha eficacia, la milicia terrorista de Al-Shabab, pero enfrente combaten los extranjeros, como ocurre en Afganistán. Los talibanes son los afganos y los que evitan que los talibanes ganen son los extranjeros.

Algo está ocurriendo cuando en un lugar donde los clanes y las tribus son extraordinariamente eficaces en la guerra, los únicos que se enfrentan con eficacia a Al Shabab son los extranjeros, y cuando se vayan los extranjeros, ganarán los locales, que es la milicia terrorista.

Tenemos que hacer algo más que «palabras». El problema no es incrementar las unidades extranjeras o la presencia de las Naciones Unidas; el problema es contar con actores locales, porque no se puede hacer una guerra contra o sin el pueblo local. Lo que estamos haciendo es manteniendo con respiración asistida un sistema muerto y, al final, lo pagaremos.

  Ignazio Corrao, a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, Elman Ali Ahmed aveva un sogno: disarmare i bambini soldato e porre fine alla guerra civile che da troppi anni insanguina il suo paese, la Somalia. Il padre somalo della pace, davanti a reclutamenti forzati, uccisioni sommarie e mutilazioni di bambini, decise di utilizzare la sua vita come scudo per dei bambini vittime di follia, pagando così il prezzo del suo sogno con la vita stessa.

Tante persone come Elman oggi lottano e muoiono per salvare la Somalia da una guerra infida combattuta tra clan, gruppi terroristici e forze governative. Una guerra dilaniante che non esita a utilizzare bambini come carne da macello, in un paese ormai stremato da siccità e malattie. Siamo davanti ad una crisi umanitaria senza precedenti in un paese dove la vita umana continua a valere molto poco. A questo si aggiunge la repressione, la limitazione di qualsivoglia libertà, gli arresti arbitrari e le esecuzioni sommarie per mano di tutte le parti in conflitto.

Auspico che l'Unione europea eserciti immediata pressione sulle autorità somale affinché cessino di utilizzare l'agenzia di intelligence NISA per perpetrare arresti arbitrari, abusi e torture ai presunti terroristi. La NISA deve essere urgentemente ridimensionata e regolata da un efficace meccanismo di controllo, al fine di prevenire le gravi violazioni dei diritti umani in corso.

  Jacques Colombier, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, la situation en Somalie est terrible, tout le monde le constate.

Portée par quatre députés de gauche, cette motion de résolution est, une fois de plus, un agrégat de vœux pieux visant à se donner bonne conscience. Les élus socialistes semblent découvrir aujourd’hui tous les méfaits de l’islamisme radical, car là est le problème. Alors que partout où ils sont au pouvoir en Europe, ils sont les grands défenseurs du multiculturalisme et sont très peu regardants sur les dégâts de l’islamisation de nos sociétés. Grands partisans de l’immigration de masse, ils devraient avant tout combattre l’infiltration massive des djihadistes en Europe, délibérément organisée par l’État islamique. Alors, vouloir pacifier la Somalie reste une illusion, vu l’état du pays, d’autant qu’on ne peut mettre sur un même plan l’action des États et celle des groupes islamistes meurtriers.

Alors, que les moralisateurs socialistes balayent devant leur porte et cessent de se faire les complices de l’islamisation des nations d’Europe, comme ils l’ont fait ou continuent de le faire à Molenbeek, ou en Italie hier, ou en Espagne aujourd’hui.

  James Carver (NI). – Mr President, I would like to say to the High Representative that I never cease to be amazed by some of the proposals that come before this Chamber for discussion. In the case of Somalia, we have before us proposals that would be onerous for a first-world economy to implement, but here we are seriously suggesting that one of the world’s most impoverished states should be concerned with statutory oversight of its security apparatus and protecting the rights of labour unions.

Might I respectfully suggest that the priority for both Somali forces and the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) is to deal with al-Shabaab and other extremist militias, thus ensuring that all Somalis may be able to take part in the democratic process? Even more important to them are food security and access to clean water and education. These self-indulgent proposals bear no relation to the situation on the ground.

You seem to hold the Somali authorities to a very high standard, High Representative, much higher than that to which the Spanish Government has been held, for example, who seem to be able to imprison political opponents with impunity. Mr President, why not instead try to help Somalis, as opposed to saddling them with further pointless and irrelevant bureaucratic obligations?

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))

  Julie Ward (S&D), blue-card question. – I wonder if Mr Carver, who is a Brexiter, is aware of the incredible danger to security on the Kenyan and Somali border precisely because of Brexit? We have a very complex arrangement with the Kenyan security authorities, who I spoke to when I visited the British Embassy in Kenya, and they told me about the arrangements that had been made to secure the border of Somalia, thereby ensuring that al-Shabaab terrorists would not come over. These arrangements are to do with paying the stipend of the soldiers and their training, and it is in danger because of Brexit, Mr Carver.

  James Carver (NI), blue-card answer. – As someone who has visited Somalia on four occasions, I am probably the Member here who has visited the country more times than anybody else and I feel far more qualified to speak in this area.

AMISOM of course have huge international support, and it is absolutely ridiculous to suggest that international support will not continue after Brexit. Maybe you might prefer doing it in the name of the European Union; maybe you support European military forces. I doubt that many of your constituents do, Ms Ward, but I take the view that it should be up to national Member States to actually have that important decision with regard to the use of our military forces and whom we support.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D), blue-card question. – Honourable colleague, I understand that fake news has been spread much too often in recent times, and in particular it had a lot to do with the result of the Brexit referendum in the UK, but I just heard you say that the Spanish Government imprisons political opponents with impunity. How can you say that? Are you aware that it was a judicial decision in the first place and nothing to do with the Government’s decision? Are you aware that the grounds are precisely that they have presumably committed criminal offences? How do you dare to spread fake news, live in the European Parliament, with impunity?

  James Carver (NI), blue-card answer. – As someone who speaks of self-determination, not just for my country with our withdrawal from the European Union and a supporter of Brexit, but also self-determination for countries such as Somaliland, which has been a peaceful breakaway part of Somalia for the last 27 years, I have every right to speak on every issue, I say; and Sir, I can look our Catalonian colleagues in the eyes far better and with far more satisfaction with own soul than I’m sure you can!

  Wajid Khan (S&D). – Mr President, Somalia is not a safe place for many reasons. Al—Shabaab keep terrorising the population. Human rights defenders, civil society activists and political leaders continue to face threats on a daily basis. Journalists cannot report on the widespread corruption that is tearing through the country. Children are at constant risk of being abducted and used as soldiers or going through severe malnutrition.

Somalia is facing extreme challenges – we acknowledge that – and the EU will continue to assist Somalia in improving the living conditions of the most vulnerable, fighting the plight of child soldiers as well as a terror threat that is jeopardising the country’s stability. However the government of Somalia must be willing to work on its human rights record, including guaranteeing the basic freedoms of expression and association, as well as ensuring that those responsible for grave abuses do not walk away with impunity. I know that the Vice—President / High Representative Ms Federica Mogherini is doing a great job, but this area needs her full attention and I am she will do a fantastic job in this area.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – Mr President, the situation in Somalia has been horrific for several decades. The failure of state institutions has allowed non-state actors such as al—Shabaab to take control over parts of the territory and perpetrate widespread human rights abuses. As I have already said, a situation that will be worsened by Brexit.

Freedom of expression continues to be limited, and policed by the authorities and armed groups. The plight of journalists is particularly concerning because they are under attack from all sides. Somalia is one of the most deadly countries for journalists, with numerous killings often met with impunity. The humanitarian situation is sadly also dramatic as hunger and malnutrition continue to be widespread. The drought has led to the further isolation of women and girls, exposing them to greater risks of sexual violence.

The EU should continue to lead support for the Somalian people, towards security, and our European partnership with Somalia must be based on human rights and it needs to involve women and young people.

  President. – Mr Carver, I see your blue card, but you have already asked Ms Ward a question. I would like to propose that you do not continue the British-British dispute.

  James Carver (NI). – Mr President, this is a point on Somalia. This is not a party political point. This is not a point relating to Brexit. This is a political Somalia issue.

Zgłoszenia z sali

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, ta debata jasně popsala katastrofickou situaci v Somálsku. Na tom se všichni shodneme. Není v našich silách tu věc vyřešit aktuálně. To, co můžeme, je poskytování humanitární pomoci vedle našeho diplomatického působení.

Rád bych se zeptal paní vysoké představitelky: Jak to aktuálně vypadá s naší humanitární pomocí? V usnesení se hovoří o konkrétních číslech. Chci se zeptat, zda ta pomoc je opravdu reálně naplněna. Jestli nekončí pouze u obecných proklamací a zda tedy ta pomoc je efektivně využívána a dostává se opravdu těm, kteří ji potřebují.

Ne bohužel zřídka jsme svědky toho, kdy peníze poskytnuté do třetí země končí v kapsách vládních struktur oligarchů nebo humanitární pomoc není poskytnuta těm nejpotřebnějším. Takže prosím o reakci na tuto otázku.

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Σομαλία πληρώνει τη σκληρή σύγκρουση Σαουδικής Αραβίας και Κατάρ. Εκεί εξελίσσονται συνθήκες εμπόλεμες, στην περιοχή της Σομαλίας, με στρατολόγηση παιδιών, με σεξουαλική βία, με την τρομοκρατική λειτουργία της Αλ Σαμπάμπ. Τον Οκτώβριο του 2017, είχαμε 512 νεκρούς στην επίθεσή της, ενώ συνολικά υπάρχουν θάνατοι 2.078 αμάχων και 2.500 τραυματίες. Είναι προφανές ότι πρέπει να επικρατήσει μια ειρηνική διαδικασία και να χτυπηθεί ο ριζοσπαστικός ισλαμισμός που αναπτύσσεται στην περιοχή.

Βεβαίως, και η κυβέρνηση της Σομαλίας δεν έχει τις καλύτερες, αν θέλετε, διαπιστεύσεις στο θέμα της τήρησης των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων. Έχει κατηγορηθεί από τη ΔΟΕ ότι παραβιάζει την αρχή του συνεταιρίζεσθαι, παρότι παίρνει βεβαίως 486 εκατομμύρια ευρώ από το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Ανάπτυξης. Είναι προφανές ότι η φτώχεια οδηγεί και αποτελεί λίπασμα για την τρομοκρατία. Να στηρίξουμε τις προσπάθειες να ξεριζωθεί ο ριζοσπαστικός ισλαμισμός στη Σομαλία.

  Jean-Luc Schaffhauser (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, je n’avais pas l’intention d’intervenir, mais je tenais quand même à dire deux choses.

D’une part, le fait que l’Union européenne ait choisi d’aller en Somalie est très courageux. S’y rendre dans un endroit extrêmement risqué, et malgré tout avoir tenu bon, est une bonne chose, marque notre présence et celle-ci est positive.

La deuxième chose – j’ai été amené déjà plusieurs fois à le dire –, c’est que je ne crois pas qu’il y ait de solution au problème de la sécurité et de la défense sans soutenir très fortement les forces nationales. Et ceci, je reste persuadé, avec les membres du Conseil de sécurité qui sont plus particulièrement impliqués, qui ont la capacité d’intervenir et également les moyens. Je pense à la France, je pense à la Russie, je pense aux États-Unis.

Par conséquent, je pense que, d’une part, l’affirmation de notre présence et, d’autre part, le rôle que nous pourrions jouer pour assurer une telle coordination rempliraient vraiment notre mission de paix.

  José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, há duas décadas que a guerra civil devasta a Somália. Os continuados esforços da comunidade internacional para apoiar os esforços de paz têm tido poucos ou nenhuns resultados, com as milícias de clãs, o al-Shabaab e outros grupos terroristas a continuarem impunemente a cometer atentados terroristas contra o Governo somali e contra os civis indiscriminadamente.

Mas se é verdade que os somalis têm vindo a sofrer com o aumento das ações criminosas e terroristas por parte dessas milícias e grupos, não deixa também de ser verdade, infelizmente, que as sevícias infligidas ao povo somali são-no também por parte das autoridades somalis, seja através de violações e abusos cometidos contra centenas de crianças detidas pelo Governo somali pelas suas alegadas atividades terroristas, seja através da limitação à liberdade de expressão, de reunião e de associação, pilares fundamentais de qualquer democracia.

Senhora alta representante, o respeito pelos direitos humanos, a liberdade de expressão, de reunião e de associação como pilares fundamentais da União Europeia obrigam-na, na sua estratégia conjunta com África, a impor uma agenda rigorosa de defesa dos direitos humanos como condição prévia a toda e qualquer assistência financeira.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, aontaím leis an rún seo agus is maith an rud é go bhfuil seans againn aird a thabhairt ar chúrsaí sa tSomáil atá go huafásach i ndáiríre ach ag an am céanna, tá sé tábhachtach go dtabharfaimid aitheantas don rialtas ann atá ag troid i gcoinne constaicí an-mhór ar fad - sceimhlitheoireacht, gorta, caimiléireacht. Agus mar a dúradh, tá raic á déanamh ag Al Shabaab agus caithfear gach cabhar a thabhairt don tSomáil chun buachan orthu. Agus dar ndóigh, nuair a bhíonn caimiléireacht in aon tír is deacair fás geilleagrach a bheith ann ag an am céanna.

Molaim an tAontas as ucht €120 milliún a thabhairt don tSomáil anuraidh chun cabhrú leo troid i gcoinne an ghorta de bharr easpa fearthainne agus caithfimid dul ar aghaidh leis an gcabhair sin a thabhairt don tSomáil. Tá siad ag iarraidh bunreacht nua a thabhairt isteach agus tugann sé sin seans dóibh cearta daonna a aithint.

  Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já pokládám za mimořádně nešťastné, když na pozadí diskuze o porušování lidských práv ve vybraných zemích, případně o určitých případech, probíhá národní diskuze. To skutečně je mimořádně nešťastné, ba dokonce trapné a já děkuji panu předsedajícímu, že tuto debatu utnul. Jak v tomto bodě, tak v minulém bodě probíhala polská debata, skutečně to není asi rozumné.

Pokud jde o Somálsko, je to země dlouhodobých konfliktů, které mají dopad na civilní obyvatelstvo. Hovoříme o únosech, masakrech, občanská práva jakoby vůbec neexistují, naopak se projevuje beztrestnost, nulový právní stát a samozřejmě žádná lidská práva. Toto je mimořádně odsouzeníhodné a já chci vyjádřit soustrast s miliony obětí v rámci těchto konfliktů a chtěl bych podpořit paní vysokou představitelku Mogheriniovou, aby jednala se somálskou vládou a snažila se ochránit alespoň to civilní obyvatelstvo.

  Przewodniczący. – Dziękuję bardzo Panie Pośle. Dziękuję, że Pan wsparł moje wysiłki dla ograniczenia debaty brytyjsko-brytyjskiej na tematy w założeniu niebrytyjskie.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

  Federica Mogherini, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, all the speakers made the point very well that the people of Somalia have, for too long, suffered from all sorts of human rights violations. We have terrorist attacks that continue to target the civilian population. The instability has made it much harder for the international community to respond to the extreme weather events that have hit the country – you also mentioned that – adding to a very worrying humanitarian situation. The number of internally displaced people is now close to 2.5 million, with almost another million who have fled to neighbouring countries.

I hope that we keep these numbers in mind whenever we talk of an emergency related to migratory flows to Europe. We’re talking about two million people internally displaced in a country like Somalia – more than two million – and another million people who have fled towards other countries. Keep these numbers in mind when we talk about migration in Europe.

It is a complex crisis and the European Union has responded to it by mobilising all our different tools. First of all, on the humanitarian side, we stepped up our humanitarian aid to tackle the food crisis and prevent a widespread famine. Some of you asked for concrete figures and numbers and I’m happy to share these. In 2017, we dedicated EUR 130 million to humanitarian interventions alone, on top of the EUR 156 million for development projects. These consistently include human-rights-related indicators, such as inclusion of women and young people. Let me assure you that this money goes directly to projects and that we often visit projects on the ground to check not only that they are real but also that they benefit the local population. I know that some of you have done the same, not only in Somalia but also in other parts of the world where we deploy our massive humanitarian aid and massive development cooperation resources.

We have also increased our support for internally displaced people to provide them with shelter, clean water and health care. But humanitarian aid can be effective only if the security situation is under control, and this is definitely not the case in a country like Somalia. Lack of security, extortion and lack of access to certain areas often make it impossible to deliver aid to the people most in need. AMISOM, the African Union peacekeeping operation that the European Union has supported since the beginning in 2007, with more than EUR 1.6 billion, has been essential in providing basic security and will remain key for some time.

But I fully agree with those honourable Members who underlined the need to transfer the responsibility for, and ownership of, security into the hands of the Somalis themselves. As long as this has not been completed – and this is our aim, the focus of our effort and our work – it will be superficial somehow. This is why we insist so much on the fact that we will continue to support AMISOM and will continue to be the core element of support for the African Union presence there. But we want to see a transfer of responsibility, including in operational terms, to the security forces of Somalia. This is the only way to have sustainable security and peace in the country.

In support of Somali state building, three of our military and civilian missions are currently deployed to Somalia. Not operation Sophia but Operation Atalanta is our presence at sea; and today we are cooperating very closely with the federal government and the federation member states in support of the transition plan so that the Somalis can increasingly take responsibility for their own security. As I mentioned, this is our primary aim. Our engagement with the Somali Government is aimed at empowering them to ensure peace and security in their own country without having to rely on foreign troops forever, but our engagement with the Government goes well beyond security. We are working on women’s empowerment, the rule of law and human rights, which are essential to build sustainable security, sustainable peace and development. We are also, obviously, very much aware that freedom of expression in Somalia is under pressure and we provide financial support to Somali organisations promoting the work of the Somalian media.

As you know, the new Government has put forward a broad reform agenda on security, economics and inclusive politics that should lead to the increased participation of women, continued judicial reform and finalisation of the constitutional review, among other issues. It is for the sake of human rights in Somalia that we must accompany and support these reforms.

For those reasons, in a couple of weeks from now, on 16—17 July, the European Union – and I personally – will co-host and co-chair the Ministerial Somalia Partnership Forum in Brussels. We will focus precisely on the Government’s reform agenda, security, inclusive politics and economics, and in addition we will hold three side events, one on women’s participation (not least in this building), one on internally displaced people and one on private-public partnership. I believe this will be a very important moment, to show not only our support but also the international support for the efforts that have been made in Somalia.

As all the speakers mentioned, the situation there is incredibly difficult, but I can see that the people of Somalia have not lost hope. They want to turn the page and, let me tell you, they clearly count on us, the European Union, to be the partner – not one among the partners but the partner, as colleagues in this Chamber have emphasised – that can accompany this change. We are probably the only ones who can do this successfully.

We have an interest in doing it and a responsibility to do it. With our support and with Parliament’s constant engagement, I believe the Somalis can take the future of the country into their own hands.

  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się w czwartek 5 lipca 2018 r.

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)

  Mario Borghezio (ENF), per iscritto. – La Turchia in Africa si sta rafforzando sempre più per motivi economici, politici e militari e di difesa. Da anni la Turchia ricopre un grande ruolo nella ripresa economica e sociale della Somalia ricostruendo il porto e l'aeroporto di Mogadiscio oltre a illuminarne e asfaltarne le strade. Ankara tiene a conservare ed estendere il modello somalo poiché può essere un esempio di ciò che la Turchia sarebbe in grado di fare in altri paesi africani. Inoltre ha inaugurato il più grande centro di addestramento militare. La Somalia è il più grande destinatario internazionale della presenza turca e un satellite militare che aumenta così la visibilità di Ankara nel settore della sicurezza e la presenza nell'Oceano Indiano. La Turchia intende accrescere la sua influenza utilizzando i suoi legami cultural-religiosi con diverse regioni africane a maggioranza islamica. Un altro punto di interesse della Turchia è insito nella militarizzazione della costa orientale africana per ottenere il controllo sulle rotte mercantili. La VP/Alto rappresentante intende intervenire affinché l'Africa, e la Somalia in particolare, non diventi terra di influenza, se non di conquista militare da parte di Ankara? Può specificare a quanto ammontano gli investimenti turchi in Somalia?

  Bogdan Brunon Wenta (PPE), na piśmie. – Pomimo determinacji prezydenta Mohameda i jego rządu w przeprowadzaniu reform gospodarczych, politycznych i bezpieczeństwa, a także pomimo zaangażowania w proces zmierzający do umocnienia praworządności i stabilności w Somalii, poziom bezpieczeństwa w tym kraju jest bardzo niski. Al-Shabaab oraz inne organizacje terrorystyczne dopuszczają się ataków bombowych i porwań. Godne potępienia jest to, że dochodzi do rekrutacji dzieci przez somalijskie siły zbrojne. Stanowi to poważne naruszenie międzynarodowego praw człowieka i ratyfikowanej przez ten kraj Konwencji ONZ o prawach dziecka.

Somalia doświadcza również jednego z najbardziej długotrwałych kryzysów humanitarnych na świecie, dlatego konieczna jest poprawa warunków życia najwrażliwszych grup społecznych i rozwiązanie problemów związanych z przesiedleniami, brakiem bezpieczeństwa żywnościowego, epidemiami i klęskami żywiołowymi.

Apeluję do władz Somalii o wzmocnienie działań na rzecz ochrony praw człowieka i obywatela, a także do przeprowadzenia reform wymiaru sprawiedliwości i sektora bezpieczeństwa. Proces pokojowy i pojednawczy w Somalii musi być dalej wspierany przez wszystkich zaangażowanych aktorów międzynarodowych, aby pomóc w budowaniu stabilności kraju. Rekrutacja i wykorzystywanie dzieci przez siły bezpieczeństwa, grupy zbrojne i terrorystów jest łamaniem prawa, a osoby odpowiedzialne za rekrutację dzieci muszą zostać pociągnięte do odpowiedzialności.

4.3. Burundi (debate)

  Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest debata nad sześcioma projektami rezolucji w sprawie Burundi (2018/2785(RSP)).

Na początku mam następujący komunikat dla Państwa. Zaplanowano 27 minut na wystąpienia Pani Wysokiej Przedstawiciel i wystąpienia poselskie bez uwzględnienia blue card i catch-the-eye, 27 minut, czyli zakończylibyśmy 4 minuty przed godz. 12.00. O godz. 12.00 są głosowania. Zwracam się do Państwa. No blue card. No catch-the-eye. Ponieważ ostatnie 5 minut to jest wchodzenie do sali, więc nasza debata też ma bardzo ograniczony sens. I również prośba o bardzo dokładne trzymanie się reżimu czasowego.

  Mark Demesmaeker, Auteur. – Voorzitter, de migratiecrisis die de EU op haar grondvesten doet daveren kent verschillende oorzaken. In de top 5 van Afrikaanse landen van waaruit mensen een hachelijke tocht naar Europa ondernemen, staat Burundi. Waarom?

In het "UN-happiness report" van 2018 bungelt Burundi op de allerlaatste plaats. EU-resoluties en internationale rapporten over mensenrechtenschendingen en repressie schrikken president Nkurunziza niet af. In de laatste maanden werden 500 Burundezen gedood. Sinds 2015 leven 400 000 mensen in vluchtelingenkampen. Velen dromen van een leven in vrijheid en veiligheid en kijken daarvoor naar het noorden, naar ons.

De gevangenissen puilen uit met mensenrechtenadvocaten en journalisten. Wie angst heeft voor een kritische stem, degradeert zichzelf tot een autoritair regime en glijdt af naar de dictatuur. Daar liggen de wortels van migratie.

Ik roep daarom uitdrukkelijk op tot de vrijlating van de mensenrechtenactivisten Germain Rukuki en Nestor Nibitanga. Nkurunziza dreigt als een dictator de geschiedenisboeken in te gaan, tenzij hij onder druk van de internationale gemeenschap en de EU een nieuwe invulling geeft aan zijn presidentschap.

  Maria Arena, auteure. – Monsieur le Président, depuis avril 2015, le Burundi a sombré dans une grave crise humanitaire, une crise des droits humains, mais également une crise politique.

Depuis l’entrée en vigueur du troisième mandat de M. Nkurunziza, 593 personnes ont été assassinées et on compte 600 000 personnes réfugiées ou déplacées à l’intérieur ou à l’extérieur du Burundi.

La nouvelle révision constitutionnelle renforce encore ce pouvoir et ce régime autoritaire, qui élimine tout opposant politique et menace au quotidien sa population. La commission d’enquête des Nations unies a ainsi dénoncé un accroissement des violences, des arrestations arbitraires, des tortures et des discours haineux. La liste des journalistes et des opposants politiques aujourd’hui en prison est de plus en plus longue.

Par conséquent, nous demandons à la Commission et au Service européen pour l’action extérieure de poursuivre les pressions à l’égard du gouvernement burundais, ainsi que de maintenir l’aide humanitaire à l’égard des populations internes et externes du pays aujourd’hui, de travailler avec l’Union africaine et la Communauté d’Afrique de l’Est afin de soutenir cette stratégie, d’exiger la libération des prisonniers politiques, d’exiger la poursuite judiciaire et d’éviter que le financement des missions de maintien de la paix ne finance le gouvernement actuel du Burundi.

  Ignazio Corrao, autore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, quanto vale la parola data da un uomo come Pierre Nkurunziza? Questo è quello che si stanno chiedendo tutti in Burundi: la società civile, le opposizioni ma anche i cittadini comuni.

Il presidente ha infatti dichiarato che non si candiderà alle prossime elezioni del 2020, nonostante potrebbe farlo proprio grazie al referendum costituzionale che ha fortemente voluto e vinto lo scorso maggio, referendum che ha apportato modifiche costituzionali che gli permetterebbero di continuare ad essere la massima carica dello Stato per altre due legislature di sette anni e quindi fino al 2034.

Tutto questo accade in un paese che continua ad essere pervaso dal caos: il processo stesso del referendum ha visto più ombre che luci, con le milizie Imbonerakure impegnate a scortare i cittadini ai seggi, esortandoli a votare sì, una raccomandazione difficile da ignorare in un paese dove gli arresti arbitrari, le torture e le uccisioni extragiudiziali sono all'ordine del giorno.

Più di 1 200 morti e centinaia di migliaia di civili in fuga hanno spinto l'anno passato la Corte penale internazionale ad aprire un'indagine sugli avvenimenti in Burundi. La risposta non ha tardato ad arrivare: il Burundi, proprio per evitare tale indagine, è diventato il primo paese nella storia a ritirarsi dallo Statuto di Roma.

La commissione d'inchiesta sul Burundi, esponendo il proprio rapporto al Consiglio diritti umani delle Nazioni Unite, ha elencato tutte le violazioni riscontrate e ha evidenziato come la situazione continui ad essere estremamente preoccupante e come le autorità burundesi non cooperino con le Nazioni Unite.

Perciò, colleghi, commentando le dichiarazioni di Nkurunziza, ritengo che fidarsi è bene ma non fidarsi è meglio. Dobbiamo continuare a parlare e ad occuparci del Burundi, mantenere alta la pressione, non chiudere gli occhi davanti a una situazione tragica che continua ininterrottamente dal 2015.

Servono nuove sanzioni verso tutti coloro che continuano a violare i diritti umani in questo paese; sono necessari controlli supplementari dei fondi, per assicurare che essi non cadano nelle mani del governo e delle autorità del Burundi ma avvantaggino solamente la popolazione e la società civile.

  Louis Michel, auteur. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Haute-Représentante, le régime de Pierre Nkurunziza est purement et simplement un régime despotique, c’est une dictature abominable. Le référendum constitutionnel n’a été ni libre, ni transparent, ni indépendant et donc certainement pas démocratique. Une répression aveugle et sauvage s’est abattue sur ceux qui ont fait campagne contre la réforme constitutionnelle. Ce qui est plus grave, c’est que Pierre Nkurunziza ne respecte absolument pas et a fait une croix définitive sur les accords d’Arusha, qui avaient été conduits par Mandela.

Alors, j’espère que, tôt ou tard, il devra rendre des comptes à la Cour pénale – si lui ne doit pas en rendre, alors je ne sais pas qui devra en rendre. Je voudrais vous poser une question extrêmement précise sur un dossier précis qui touche à la manière dont l’Union européenne aide les réfugiés burundais. Une demande d’aide a été introduite pour permettre aux 500 à 600 étudiants burundais de poursuivre leur cursus à Kigali avec d’ailleurs l’appui des autorités rwandaises. Or, on me dit que cette aide aurait été refusée sur la base d’un avis de votre représentant au Burundi, qui estimerait que cela fâcherait M. Nkurunziza.

Donc voilà, je vous ai posé cette question de manière très précise, cela m’embarrasse de vous la poser et j’aimerais que vous nous informiez sur cette question. Il s’agit de l’association Maison Shalom, créée par Mme Marguerite Barankitse, qui a reçu des prix internationaux pour son action humanitaire, et qui se voit refuser une aide pour ces 500 étudiants et 70 000 familles burundaises qui sont réfugiés au Rwanda.

  Joachim Zeller, Verfasser. – Herr Präsident, Hohe Vertreterin! Während vor Kurzem eine hochrangige Delegation der Ostafrikanischen Gemeinschaft dem UNO-Generalsekretär Guterres versicherte, dass sich Burundi nach den politischen Unruhen seit 2015 auf einem Weg der Stabilisierung befindet, kommt eine von den Vereinten Nationen eingesetzte Untersuchungskommission zur Lage in Burundi zu einem anderen Ergebnis: Politische Gewalt, willkürliche Verhaftungen, außergerichtliche Exekutionen, Hassreden und Verletzungen der Bürger- und Menschenrechte sind an der Tagesordnung. Die Jugendorganisation des Präsidenten, Imbonerakure, hat freie Hand bei der Unterdrückung der Menschen, die Pressefreiheit ist abgeschafft, Journalisten werden ermordet, inhaftiert oder mussten das Land verlassen, weil sie an Leib und Leben bedroht sind – so wie mehr als 400 000 Menschen, die bislang in die Nachbarländer geflohen sind und dort ein erbärmliches Leben führen müssen.

Fast vier Millionen Menschen in Burundi selbst sind auf humanitäre Hilfe aus dem Ausland angewiesen. Dabei haben viele ausländische Geldgeber ihre direkten finanziellen Unterstützungen für das fünftärmste Land der Erde eingestellt, damit die Gelder nicht bei denen landen, die für die Diktatur in Burundi verantwortlich sind, beim Präsidenten Nkurunziza und seinem Umfeld.

Die untragbaren Zustände in Burundi sind auch zunehmend für die Nachbarländer ein großes Problem. Neben den Flüchtlingen mehren sich Berichte, dass bewaffnete Banden aus Burundi Dörfer, zum Beispiel in Ruanda, überfallen.

2020 sollen in Burundi Wahlen vorbereitet werden. Nkurunziza soll gesagt haben, dass er entgegen früher geäußerten Absichten nicht mehr antreten will. Wahlen ergeben aber nur Sinn, wenn sie unter internationaler Aufsicht vorbereitet werden, die Unterdrückung der oppositionellen Kräfte sofort aufhört und die politischen Gefangenen befreit werden.

  Marie-Christine Vergiat, auteure. – Monsieur le Président, c’est la sixième résolution sur le Burundi depuis avril 2015, date à laquelle le président Nkurunziza a annoncé son intention de se représenter. Depuis, la répression n’a cessé de s’intensifier prenant une nouvelle ampleur avec le référendum constitutionnel de mai 2018. On ne compte plus les militants des droits de l’homme emprisonnés, condamnés à de longues peines de prison, les restrictions à la liberté d’association et à celle de la presse.

La commission d’enquête des Nations unies dénonce durement violences politiques, arrestations arbitraires et exécutions extrajudiciaires. Les Imbonerakure, les jeunes de la ligue du parti au pouvoir, sont de plus en plus militarisés et radicalisés. Ils sont les principaux responsables de cette montée des violences et des exactions. Les fragiles accords d’Arusha sont plus que jamais menacés, notamment en raison de l’ethnicisation de la crise politique. La population burundaise en est la première victime. 65 % des personnes vivent sous le seuil de pauvreté alors que ce pays est, comme beaucoup d’autres dans la région, riche de son sous-sol.

L’Union européenne a pris des sanctions individuelles. Elle a décidé de suspendre ses versements directs au gouvernement burundais. Dont acte. Il y a urgence à agir, à agir avant les élections de 2020 et à tout faire pour que le président Nkurunziza s’en tienne enfin à sa parole de ne pas se représenter. Seul un processus politique associant l’ensemble des parties prenantes peut y aider. C’est en ce sens qu’il nous faut travailler ensemble.

  Tomáš Zdechovský, za skupinu PPE. – Pane předsedající, paní Mogheriniová, většinou preferuji, když tyto urgentní rezoluce se týkají pouze jednoho případu a kdy můžeme pomoci jednomu člověku nebo skupině osob dostat se z vězení nebo z nějaké tíživé situace. Nicméně situace v Burundi je natolik vážná, že se musíme věnovat celému státu.

Jsme svědky obrovské politické, lidskoprávní a humanitární krize. Celá krize eskalovala obrovskými nepokoji a má za následek stovky obětí, stovky tisíc uprchlíků, stovky násilně vysídlených osob. A tisíce lidí, kteří dneska nesou osudy tohoto krvavého konfliktu. Mimo civilistů jsou systematicky napadáni novináři, aktivisté, političtí oponenti, kteří upozorňují na praktiky stávající vlády a posilování moci a zastrašování. Proto vás vyzývám, paní Mogheriniová, věnujte se intenzivně této situaci.

  Soraya Post, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, the people of Burundi have experienced a huge crisis in recent years. Not only have we seen worrying changes to the country’s constitution, and tremendous violence surrounding the referendum, but Burundian civil society is also under threat. Since 2016, Burundi has banned six human rights organisations from operating in the country, as well as many media outlets. Human rights defenders are being punished for doing their legitimate work.

In April, human rights defender Germain Rukuki was sentenced to 32 years in prison. We know that those in detention can face sexual violence and torture, and he is just one example of many. The EU Member States, including the delegations and embassies on the ground, need to step up support for civil society in Burundi and call strongly for the release of all jailed human rights defenders.

  Dita Charanzová, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, Burundians are living in a state of fear. Security forces and youth party members have been killing, raping, abducting, torturing and intimidating anyone they believe to be opponents.

While the President has finally stated that he will not run for another term, what happened in the run-up to this referendum cannot be forgotten. A government that allows these atrocities to be committed, against real or perceived opponents, has no legitimacy to represent the citizens. A referendum that takes place in such conditions cannot be considered to represent the will of the people. If the Government is truly to show good intentions, it must resume cooperation, in full, with the UN Commission of Inquiry and allow for an independent investigation into all the abuses committed. Talks must be resumed between the Opposition and Government as a matter of urgency, and the EU should actively support this.

  Bodil Valero, för Verts/ALE-gruppen. – Herr talman! Vi instämmer fullständigt i kritiken mot den burundiska regimen och dess fortsatta kränkningar av de mänskliga rättigheterna, och med det sagt vill jag gå över till att prata om EU:s roll i landet.

Enligt European Network for Central Africa bidrar EU med väsentliga summor till att finansiera den burundiska regimen, trots sanktioner. Bidragen går bakvägen via AMISOM och African Peace Facility, eftersom den burundiska regimen tvingar sina soldater att betala 20 procent av sina löner till den statliga kassan. Jag skulle vilja att utrikestjänsten hittar en lösning på problemet. Det här är en oönskad och problematisk konsekvens när vi kopplar säkerhet och utveckling till varandra.

I punkt 6 i resolutionen lovordar vi värdländerna för deras insatser att hysa de burundiska flyktingarna och vi uppmanar dem att se till att flyktingarnas återvändande är frivilligt, baserat på välgrundade beslut och genomförs under säkra och värdiga former. Jag utgår från att det gäller även de burundier som tagit sin tillflykt till Europa, och där långt ifrån alla beviljas asyl.

Situationen för oliktänkande i Burundi är ju inte ny, men ändå har burundier med hjälp av Frontex under åren tvångsutvisats i chartrade plan från flera länder i Europa...

(Talmannen tog ifrån talaren ordet).

  Lola Sánchez Caldentey, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señor presidente, desde 2015 casi medio millón de personas han huido de Burundi y este año, previsiblemente, serán más aún. Ha disminuido la producción agrícola, han aumentado los precios y se han recortado servicios básicos. Además, el gobierno reprime sistemáticamente a la sociedad civil y viola sus derechos humanos, a la vez que reprime toda oposición política.

Por eso, me preocupa que el plan para Burundi de ACNUR haya recibido solo el 21 % de los fondos que necesitaba para 2017. Lamentamos que Burundi se haya retirado de la Corte Penal Internacional y pedimos el establecimiento de un diálogo político entre las partes, la liberación de los presos políticos, la reapertura de los medios de comunicación y de las oenegés y que los Estados vecinos garanticen el retorno seguro de refugiados bajo el principio de voluntariedad de cada persona.

Por último, en el marco de la crisis humanitaria y migratoria, reclamamos que se otorgue el estatuto de refugiado a todo solicitante de asilo procedente de Burundi.

  Margot Parker, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Mr President, Burundi teeters on the edge. A return to the barbarity of the civil war must be avoided. Instability in Burundi risks spreading to the immediate neighbourhood, especially with repeated attacks in bordering Rwanda, originating from within the country.

However, there are no easy solutions. Human history has shown that, of all systems man has devised, democracy offers the greatest wealth and security for all. It is imperative that Burundi continues to develop a thriving democracy, despite the actions of the President in extending his term and modifying the country’s constitution to allow him to retain powers into the 2030s, after a referendum that may not have been conducted freely.

His commitment not to seek another term beyond this one is helpful. The decision is not quite a resolution to the issue, but it looks to be moving in the right direction and, hopefully, we will begin to move away from the instability that has plagued Burundi since 2015.

  Jean-Luc Schaffhauser, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, au Burundi une mécanique de la guerre, avec un possible génocide, est en train de s’enclencher.

Elle n’est pas le fait du gouvernement légitimement élu et qui représente, malgré tout, une large part de la population. Elle résulte d’une agression à peine voilée du voisin rwandais. Après ses hauts faits sanguinaires et génocidaires dans les Grands Lacs, le président Kagamé veut reprendre la main au Burundi. Sa technique est simple, elle est éprouvée: on fait monter les tensions interethniques, puis, quand le gouvernement veut rétablir son autorité, on crie au possible génocide pour envahir le pays. C’est la méthode Kagamé d’invasion, lui qui a aussi modifié la constitution pour être dictateur à vie. Nous ne devons pas nous laisser manipuler par des sanctions dont souffrent toujours les populations, alors que l’on réhabilite le tyran de Kigali. Nous devons accompagner un processus dur et difficile de démocratie.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, a political, human rights and humanitarian crisis has plagued Burundi since the re-election for a third term of their President in 2015. Thousands have been killed, thousands have fled the country, thousands are displaced and millions are in need of humanitarian assistance. The recent constitutional changes voted for in the 2018 referendum include, for example, expanding presidential powers and prohibiting political parties with less than 5% of the vote from participating in government.

This is a great threat to the peace and reconciliation that Burundi has been working towards. Violence has significantly increased – not surprisingly, I suppose – as a result of this referendum campaign and the ensuing result. The repression of views is ever increasing. Many human rights defenders have been detained – some for as long as 32 years – and this is all happening as we speak. I think it is right that we should raise our concerns here in Parliament and hopefully help to bring about a resolution.

  Neena Gill (S&D). – Mr President, the humanitarian situation in Burundi is alarming. The period of the constitutional referendum has aggravated the tendency of violence and threats in the country. Opponents of the constitutional reform have faced torture, execution and continuing threats and intimidation. Political and ethnic polarisation are now tearing apart the integrity of the army, posing another major threat to Burundi’s stability.

My questions to the High Representative are as follows. Firstly, what is the EU doing to support the East African Community to revive an inclusive and political dialogue, as this is the only way to find a lasting solution to the crisis? Secondly, how is the EU supporting refugee camps and settlements, in particular in Nyarugusu in Tanzania, where the number of refugees has grown three times beyond the intended capacity? Thirdly, how does the EU support the 3.6 million people inside Burundi who are in need of humanitarian aid? Finally, High Representative, I urge you not to mistake President Nkurunziza’s statement, made in support of his successor after the referendum, as a clear and firm commitment not to run.

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Mr President, even though so much has been achieved since the Arusha agreement, I have to express deep concern regarding the existing political and human rights situation in Burundi, which undermines any initiative for reconciliation, peace and justice. Since April 2015, Burundi has been going through acute political, human rights and humanitarian crises, which have so far led to the death of 595 persons, while another 3.6 million are in need of humanitarian assistance.

Therefore, I welcome the European Union’s humanitarian actions in this regard and I consider that we must maintain support for the population affected. It is crucial that this aid be provided in a direct manner to those in need. Violence and intimidation against political opponents, human rights defenders and NGOs must end, as well as the continued degradation of media space and press freedom.

I will conclude by underlining that we should step up our efforts all together.

  Federica Mogherini, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, as all the speakers have pointed out, this is a very difficult month for the people of Burundi, with more violence inflicted on a population that has already suffered too much.

In April, the Council assessed that there was no reason to change its decision on appropriate measures, as per Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement. This means that, although we continue to support the people of Burundi through partners on the ground – and I want to reassure you on that point – we have suspended direct financial support to the administration of Burundi. The country remains the only one to have effectively withdrawn from the International Criminal Court, as some of the speakers pointed out, and this decision has come together with a deterioration of the situation in the country.

On 17 May, a constitutional referendum was held in a climate of intimidation and repression. Political freedoms are being disregarded. Arbitrary arrests and extra-judicial executions have become common, a situation that we had already denounced before the vote, and we have also called on the authorities of the country to respect the spirit and the letter of the Arusha peace agreement.

Last week, on 27 June, the Commission of Inquiry on Burundi briefed the UN Human Rights Council in advance of the submission of its final report in September and, according to the Commission, the ruling party’s youth wing bore the main responsibility for human rights violations during the referendum campaign, with the complicity or approval of state officials. After the referendum, the President indicated that he would not run for the post again in 2020, after 15 years in office. But the announcement, as some of you mentioned very clearly, will need to be followed by an opening of political and public space.

The next important political step would be an inclusive dialogue focused on delivering credible elections in 2020. I agree with those of you who underlined the key role of regional players in mediating and facilitating this process, and we give them all our support. Back in 2000, the Arusha agreement gave hope not only to Burundi but also to the entire region, and it is urgent now to go back to the spirit of that agreement and to preserve the country as an inclusive and democratic home for all its people. It is what we will continue to work for, together with the United Nations, the African Union and the East African Community.

Let me answer specifically two questions that were raised. Nina Gill asked about our humanitarian aid, focusing mainly on the refugee response. It has amounted to about EUR 8 million in the course of this year, with relatively limited humanitarian support within Burundi and the major effort outside the country, for refugees.

  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się w czwartek 5 lipca 2018 r.

(Posiedzenie zostało zawieszone o godz. 11.56 w oczekiwaniu na głosowanie.)

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)

  Marijana Petir (PPE), napisan. – Pozdravljam odluku kojom se suspendira izravna financijska potpora administraciji Burundija zbog kršenja ljudskih prava, demokratskih načela i vladavine prava. No moramo nastaviti pružati direktnu pomoć građanima Burundija kroz ulaganja u projekte jer trećina njih danas nije u stanju prehraniti svoju obitelj.

Više od 400 000 ljudi pobjeglo je iz Burundija kako bi potražili utočište u susjednim zemljama zbog kršenja građanskih sloboda i vladavine prava. Ne možemo podupirati Vladu koja se povukla iz Rimskog statuta i time suspendirala nadležnost Međunarodnog kaznenog suda, vlast koja je Germaina Rukukia zaposlenog u Udruženju katoličkih pravnika osudila na 32 godine zatvora pod lažnim optužbama.

U Burundiju je 2011. godine u samostanu ubijena časna sestra Lukrecija Mamić koja je vodila Centar za neishranjenu djecu i brinula o više od 1 500 djece. Dala je svoj život pomažući građanima Burundija koji su zaslužili slobodu, jednakost, povratak svojim kućama kao i našu punu podršku. Ne dajmo da njena žrtva bude uzaludna.

PŘEDSEDNICTVÍ: PAN PAVEL TELIČKA
místopředseda

5. Reinício da sessão

(Denní zasedání pokračovalo ve 12:01.)

  President. – Ladies and gentlemen, if I may ask you kindly to take your seats, we will proceed with the votes.

Before I do so – and I would appreciate a second of silence – today is Ellen Heinemann’s last day. She has been working for Parliament, including serving this plenary, for the last 25 years, mostly working on the Minutes and making sure that the texts adopted are correctly published. I must say that she is one of those persons who are not necessarily visible but without whom we would hardly be able to conduct our work.

(Applause)

So warm thanks, on my behalf and of course – as I am sure you can hear the applause – also from other colleagues.

6. Período de votação

  President. – The next item is the vote.

6.1. Crise política na Moldávia, na sequência da anulação dos resultados das eleições municipais em Chisinau (RC-B8-0322/2018, B8-0322/2018, B8-0326/2018, B8-0328/2018, B8-0329/2018, B8-0330/2018, B8-0332/2018) (votação)

6.2. Somália (RC-B8-0323/2018, B8-0323/2018, B8-0324/2018, B8-0325/2018, B8-0327/2018, B8-0331/2018, B8-0334/2018) (votação)

– Before the vote on paragraph 10:

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Mr President, on behalf of the EPP Group, I suggest an oral amendment to paragraph 10. At the end we would add the following ‘urges AMISOM to fully implement their mandate to protect the civilian population’.

(The oral amendment was adopted)

6.3. Burundi (RC-B8-0333/2018, B8-0333/2018, B8-0335/2018, B8-0336/2018, B8-0337/2018, B8-0338/2018, B8-0339/2018) (votação)

6.4. Direitos de autor no mercado único digital (A8-0245/2018 - Axel Voss) (votação)

– Before the vote:

  Axel Voss, Berichterstatter. – Herr Präsident! Wir alle haben intensive Diskussionen hinter uns, aber um was geht es bei dieser Reform? Es geht um die Beendigung der Ausbeutung der europäischen Künstler, die im Internet stattfindet. Wir reden hier von den großen US-Plattformen wie Google und Facebook, die seit Jahren Riesengewinne einfahren, und das auf Kosten der europäischen Kreativen. Das sollten wir nicht weiter hinnehmen, und mir ist völlig unerklärlich, wie man eigentlich diesen extremen Internetkapitalismus von einigen auch noch befördern kann.

(Beifall)

Während die anderen America first rufen, unsere Daten missbrauchen und unsere künstlerischen Inhalte ausbeuten, sollten wir langsam mal anfangen, auch an der Seite unserer europäischen Kreativen zu stehen, unsere Werte schützen. Ansonsten droht hier eine kreative Insolvenz.

Es geht bei dieser Reform aber auch darum, existierendes Recht – nämlich Urheberrecht und das Grundrecht auf Eigentum – hier in eine Balance zu bringen und nicht dem kulturellen Diebstahl weitestgehend die Türen zu öffnen. Was spricht denn dagegen, dass wir Urheberrechtsverstöße vermeiden wollen? Was spricht dagegen, dass wir eine faire Vergütung für Journalisten, Verlage und Künstler wollen? Und was spricht dagegen, dass große Plattformen mehr Verantwortung übernehmen müssen?

Die extreme Kampagne von Google, Facebook und Amazon, der wir im Moment ausgesetzt sind, die hier ins Haus getragen werden, die sogar Kinder von Abgeordneten betreffen, da sie angerufen werden – das alles beruht auf Lügen. Sie finden keinerlei Beeinträchtigungen für den einzelnen Nutzer. Jeder kann weiterhin seine Links setzen, jeder kann weiterhin mit Rechtssicherheit seine Uploads durchführen, und zum ersten Mal haftet der Einzelne sogar nicht mehr für Urheberrechtsverletzung.

(Beifall)

– Before the vote:

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, um ponto de ordem ao abrigo do artigo 158.° do Regimento. Antes de mais, quero manifestar aqui a nossa solidariedade para com a justa luta dos intérpretes e quero dizer-lhe, Sr. Presidente, que no momento em que procedemos a esta votação não está disponível o texto...

(O presidente retira a palavra ao orador)

– Before the vote:

  Catherine Stihler (S&D). – Mr President, I want to thank everyone for the work they’ve done on this important file. We are all united in our shared mission to protect artists and cultural diversity in Europe and I speak as rapporteur in the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO), which is the only Committee to share joint competency on one of the most controversial articles – Article 13.

In our Committee we were able to reach a broad compromise that makes meaningful progress on the value gap while at the same time safeguarding the rights of European Internet users, SMEs and start—ups. I deeply regret that the IMCO position has not been taken into account and the text of the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) does not achieve the needed balance.

There are real concerns about the effect of Article 13 and freedom of expression, raised by experts ranging from the UN Special Rapporteur, David Kaye, to the inventor of the World Wide Web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, and there are real concerns voiced by our citizens. Just yesterday I received a petition signed by almost a million people against the JURI Committee mandate.

(Murmurs of dissent followed by interjection by the President)

Although there is consensus about the goals behind this law, huge controversy still exists about the methods proposed. Something is not right here. We owe it to the experts, stakeholders and citizens to give this directive the full debate necessary to achieve broad support.

I ask you to refuse to fast—track this law to allow for a broad fact-based debate in September. Please reject the mandate and vote against the JURI proposal.

(Loud applause)

6.5. Iniciativa de cidadania europeia (A8-0226/2018 - György Schöpflin) (votação)

– Before the vote:

  György Schöpflin, Rapporteur. – Mr President, the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) is an EU instrument intended to bring citizens closer to the European Union. If a million people sign an initiative then the Commission can be invited, I stress that word, to launch legislation. Parliament has an input into this process in that it holds hearings and – this is the point of contention – plenary debates. The Commission published a new draft regulation about a year ago and would like this to come on stream in 2020.

I prepared a thorough and cogent report. My grateful thanks to all who helped. I’ve had numerous discussions with the Commission and with stakeholders. The Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) voted for this text with a convincing majority. I am asking you today to give me a mandate to begin interinstitutional negotiations.

I would like to add here that the Council is well disposed towards these negotiations. It’s a significant window of opportunity.

You will all have received a massive input from a group of NGOs demanding that you deny me a mandate, basically because my text does not contain a commitment to holding a plenary debate. This demand is based on a serious error of understanding to the effect that a legislative text can change this House’s Rules of Procedure. No, this is a breach of our internal rule of law, our checks and balances. If I am denied a mandate, as the NGOs are demanding, the whole process will come to a halt and a favourable moment will have been lost.

So I am asking you to vote in favour of my mandate. If you do so, I shall initiate an amendment to the Rules of Procedure (under Rule 227) to amend Rule 211 so as to ensure that plenary debates are held on successful ECIs.

I’m delighted to say that I have the full support of the S&D Group, so please vote ‘yes’.

6.6. Lançamento do intercâmbio automatizado de dados de ADN na Croácia (A8-0225/2018 - Jaromír Štětina) (votação)

6.7. Sistema Europeu de Informação e Autorização de Viagem (ETIAS) (A8-0322/2017 - Kinga Gál) (votação)

6.8. Sistema Europeu de Informação e Autorização de Viagem (ETIAS): tarefas da Europol (A8-0323/2017 - Kinga Gál) (votação)

6.9. Disposições financeiras aplicáveis ao orçamento geral da União (A8-0211/2017 - Ingeborg Gräßle, Richard Ashworth) (votação)

  Günther Oettinger, Member of the Commission, in writing. – :

Joint statement

Joint Statement on the discharge procedure and the date of adoption of the final EU accounts

"The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission will – in cooperation with the European Court of Auditors – set out a pragmatic calendar for the discharge procedure.

In that context, the Commission confirms that it will strive to adopt the EU consolidated annual accounts for the financial year 2017 by 30 June 2018 provided that the European Court of Auditors transmits all findings concerning the reliability of these EU accounts, and all consolidated entities' accounts, by 15 May 2018, and its draft annual report by 15 June 2018.

The Commission also confirms that it will strive to provide its replies to the European Court of Auditors' Annual report for the financial year 2017 by 15 August 2018 provided that the European Court of Auditors transmits its draft observations to the Commission by 1 June 2018."

Commission unilateral statements

Statement in relation to Article 38 Publication of information on recipients and other information

“The Commission will support through networks with the Member States the exchange of good practices as regards the publication of information on recipients of Union funds implemented under shared management. The Commission will take into due consideration the lessons learnt in view of preparing the next Multiannual Financial Framework."

Statement of the Commission on MFF (single set of rules)

"The Commission underlines the importance of making progress in the post-2020 multiannual financial framework towards a single set of rules governing the same type of operations irrespective of the way these operations are implemented".

Declaration of the Commission in relation to Article 234(1) regarding the creation of thematic Trust funds

"Despite the concerns expressed by the Commission during negotiations, Article 234(1) of the Financial Regulation requires that any decision to establish thematic EU Trust-Funds be submitted to the approval of the European Parliament and the Council. The Commission considers that such a decision falls within the scope of Article 317 TFEU, since it concerns budgetary implementation. The envisaged control by the European Parliament and the Council of the exercise of the Commission's implementing powers is not provided for in Regulation (EU) 182/2011 , and would be contrary both to Article 291 TFEU and to this regulation. The Commission therefore reserves its rights."

Statement of the Commission on Article 247 Integrated financial and accountability reporting

“The Commission will strive to provide the long-term forecast of future inflows and outflows covering the next five years within the budgetary procedure, together with the Amending Letter to the Draft Budget.”

Statement in relation to Article 266 Specific provisions regarding building projects

"The Commission and the EEAS will inform the European Parliament and the Council, in the context of the working document referred to in Article 266, on any sale and acquisition of building, including those below the threshold set in that Article."

Statement of the Commission on future revisions of the Financial Regulation (impact assessment)

“The Commission underlines that the Financial Regulation provides the general rules and the toolbox for the implementation of the spending programmes. There are therefore no direct economic, environmental or social impacts that result from revisions of the legislation and that could usefully be analysed in an impact assessment. The value added of impact assessments comes when making policy choices on specific spending programmes, which have to comply with the regulatory framework provided by the Financial Regulation. The Commission confirms that the required impact assessments will be carried out when preparing these programmes.

The Commission will also continue with its practice of targeted and public consultations of all stakeholders and the broader public. In addition to the results of these consultations, the Commission will also indicate in the explanatory memorandum of future revisions how it has taken into account relevant evaluations of programmes implementing rules or tools provided in the Financial Regulation that it proposes to modify.”

Statement by the European Commission on Article 272(8)

"The Commission considers that, where a local action group carries out the tasks set out in points (a) to (g) of the first subparagraph of Article 34(3) of Regulation No. 1303/2013 as amended by this Regulation, that local action group need not be designated as an intermediate body. However, in such cases, the final verification of eligibility of operations before their approval shall remain the task of the managing authority, unless that task is formally delegated to the local action group. In that case, the local action group must be designated as an intermediate body and must carry out that task under the final responsibility of the managing authority in line with Article 123(6) of Regulation No. 1303/2013 in the case of the Funds and the EMFF, or in line with Article 66(2) of Regulation No. 1305/2013 in the case of the EAFRD."

Statement by the European Commission on Article 272(14) point (a)

"The Commission confirms that the rules on management and control, as set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 40 of Regulation No. 1303/2013 applicable at the moment of signature of the funding agreements, shall continue to apply to financial instruments referred to in Article 39 of Regulation No. 1303/2013 which were established by a funding agreement signed before the entry into force of this Regulation. This derogation is already enshrined in the legal framework through Article 40(2a) of Regulation No. 1303/2013 and covers the entire life span of these instruments, including any amendments to the initial funding agreement, which may include additional contributions."

Statement by the European Commission on Article 272(16) point (a)

"The Commission regrets the modification of Article 42(3) of Regulation No. 1303/2013 as it will lead to increased amounts of the EU budget being paid into escrow accounts. Any eligible expenditure not used in the programming period and paid into an escrow account implies a significant exception to cohesion policy rules as it goes against the basic principle that support from cohesion policy should be implemented and accounted for at the moment of closure of programmes. In addition, this leads to practical implementation issues related in particular to reporting and audit of amounts paid into escrow accounts."

Statement by the European Commission on Article 272(26) points (a) and (e)

"The Commission reiterates that, regardless of the legislative changes on provisions applicable to operations generating net revenue after their completion, the principle of sound financial management – as set out in Article 33 of this Regulation – requires that managing authorities make appropriate arrangements to avoid the over-financing of such operations, including where such operations are subject to State aid or generate operating cost-savings. This should particularly be the case for operations with a total eligible cost exceeding EUR 1.000.000, where the beneficiary is not an SME."

Statement by the European Commission on Article 273

"The state aid "de minimis" rules are laid down in regulations adopted by the Commission on the basis of Article 108(4) TFEU pursuant to the powers granted to it by Council under Article 109 TFEU (through Council Regulation 2015/1588).

Measures which do not exceed the ceiling in the de minimis Regulations (in most cases EUR 200.000 per undertaking over a period of three years) are deemed not to have any effect on trade between Member States. They may therefore be put into effect without being caught by the prohibition of State aid laid down in Article 107(1) TFEU.

The de minimis rule aims at striking the right balance between simplification and avoiding competition distortions in the internal market, where the Member States have varying financial capacities to subsidize their economies. The amount of de minimis aid has been set at a level below which it can safely be assumed that the aid will have no effect on trade between Member States.

The Commission is not at present considering changes to the de minimis rules to cater for exceptionally serious economic circumstances. However, the Commission would recall that it has in the past put in place exceptional measures to allow State aid to address serious disturbances in the economy of the Member States. For instance, in response to the effects of financial crisis on the real economy, it adopted the so called "Temporary Framework", which applied from December 2009 until December 2011 and allowed, amongst other, aid up to EUR 500.000 per undertaking. The Commission retains the possibility to take such measures where necessary under Article 107(3)(b) TFEU."

6.10. Agência europeia para a gestão operacional de sistemas informáticos de grande escala no espaço de liberdade, segurança e justiça (A8-0404/2017 - Monica Macovei) (votação)

– Before the vote:

  Monica Macovei (ECR). – Mr President, I have two minutes, like all the others, because we didn’t have our mandate, but I will not keep you for two minutes.

I will now speak in my own language.

Votăm astăzi pentru regulamentul Agenției IT a Uniunii - Agenția eu-LISA. Este vitală pentru managementul și operarea bazelor de date care asigură securitatea Uniunii și securitatea și siguranța fiecărui cetățean.

Regulamentul are și prevederi care protejează datele personale, cum este normal. Personalul IT și analiștii de date din cadrul Agenției eu-LISA nu au acces la informațiile din servere, ci doar asigură fluiditatea informațiilor și a traficului la frontierele externe, atunci când cei de la frontierele externe au probleme accidental sau temporar la accesarea bazelor de date.

Statele membre au un rol crucial, pentru că ele trebuie să introducă rapid informații corecte și complete în bazele de date – altfel, bazele de date nu pot funcționa. De asemenea, eu-LISA va avea un rol crucial în interoperabilitatea bazelor de date făcute în ani diferiți în timp și care nu vorbesc între ele. E bine să fie coordonate. E mai simplu să te adresezi într-un singur loc decât în zece locuri să obții o informație.

În final, mă bucur că am ajuns la un acord final. Le mulțumesc raportorilor, le mulțumesc colegilor, le mulțumesc advisorilor de la toate grupurile și, încă o dată, toată gratitudinea mea pentru eforturile pe care le-au făcut pentru a ajunge la o înțelegere finală.

  Federica Mogherini, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, in writing. – :

Commission statement

“The Commission regrets that on several points, the co-legislators have decided to deviate from the Joint Statement of the European Parliament, the Council of the EU and the European Commission on decentralised agencies, without providing the necessary justification. This relates in particular to deviations from the procedure for appointing and dismissing the Executive Director of EU-LISA, for which no justification was given and which risk affecting the autonomy of the Agency, and for automatically extending the Executive Director's mandate. The Commission also regrets the deviation from the Joint Statement with regard to the process for conducting an overall evaluation of the Agency, which could be a way to interfere with the independence of the Commission in conducting this evaluation. The Commission will consult the Management Board as part of its general stakeholder consultation activities. The Commission will assess the impact of those deviations on the functioning of the Agency at the appropriate opportunity. They should not be considered as a precedent for other agencies.”

6.11. Orçamento 2019 - Mandato para o trílogo (A8-0247/2018 - Daniele Viotti) (votação)

– Before the vote on amendment 26:

  Miguel Viegas (GUE/NGL). – Queria assinalar um erro na tradução e clarificar que, na alteração 26, o que nós pretendemos, como é evidente, é a reposição do regime POSEI Pescas e não a sua substituição, como ficou erradamente na tradução.

– Before the vote on paragraph 1a:

  Daniele Viotti, relatore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, sarò molto più veloce, ho soltanto un emendamento orale per aggiungere un paragrafo 1 bis, che recita testualmente "sottolinea che l'UE deve essere all'avanguardia nell'attuazione degli obiettivi di sviluppo sostenibile delle Nazioni Unite (OSS) attraverso la loro integrazione in tutte le politiche dell'UE;"

(The oral amendment was incorporated)

– Before the vote on Amendment 2:

  Daniele Viotti, relatore. – Signor Presidente, in questo caso si tratta di un'aggiunta al paragrafo 40 bis. Si aggiungono le parole "accoglie con favore anche gli ulteriori 45,6 milioni di euro concessi al fine di sostenere la Grecia e la Spagna nella gestione del flusso di migranti in arrivo nel loro territorio; sottolinea che un controllo efficace delle frontiere debba essere accompagnato da un'adeguata assistenza dei migranti in arrivo;"

(The oral amendment was incorporated)

6.12. 73.ª Sessão da Assembleia Geral das Nações Unidas (A8-0230/2018 - Eugen Freund) (votação)

6.13. Crise migratória e situação humanitária na Venezuela e nas suas fronteiras (RC-B8-0315/2018, B8-0315/2018, B8-0316/2018, B8-0317/2018, B8-0318/2018, B8-0319/2018, B8-0320/2018, B8-0321/2018) (votação)

6.14. Orientações para os Estados-Membros evitarem a criminalização da ajuda humanitária (B8-0314/2018) (votação)

6.15. Adequação do nível de proteção assegurado pelo Escudo de Proteção da Privacidade UE-EUA (B8-0305/2018) (votação)

6.16. Efeitos negativos sobre os cidadãos da UE resultantes da legislação dos EUA relativa às obrigações fiscais dos titulares de contas no estrangeiro (B8-0306/2018) (votação)

6.17. Estatuto para as empresas sociais e solidárias (A8-0231/2018 - Jiří Maštálka) (votação)

7. Declarações de voto

7.1. Disposições financeiras aplicáveis ao orçamento geral da União (A8-0211/2017 - Ingeborg Gräßle, Richard Ashworth)

Ústní vysvětlení hlasování

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já jsem s radostí podpořil tento návrh týkající se upřesnění pravidel střetu zájmů ve chvíli, kdy národní politici by se dostali do střetu zájmů a určitým způsobem by mohli čerpat peníze, které poskytuje Evropská unie.

Myslím si, že bylo třeba takovéto pravidlo doplnit, protože třeba příklad České republiky ukazuje, že takováto situace může nastat a z důvodu transparentnosti vůči našim občanům a vůči veřejnosti musí být jasné, že ten, kdo rozhoduje o evropských penězích, tak současně nemůže z takového rozhodování mít nějakou osobní výhodu. Toto považuji za velmi důležité, že se do pravidel našim hlasováním doplnilo, a proto jsme celý návrh podpořil.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, I welcome this report, which has prioritised the simplification of rules applicable to the EU budget. The emphasis on results and performances is a welcome move away from focusing on control of costs. I support the retention of the non—profit principle in grants in order to avoid misuse of public money. Furthermore, I am in favour of the limitation of trust funds to external actions, and of maintaining the competences of the budgetary authority.

The elimination of transfers from structural funds to the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI) is also welcome. I am happy to see such a commitment to simple rules for the EFSI and EFSI funding, which was elaborated on by Richard Ashworth in last night’s debate. Having hosted several events for my constituents in Ireland on EU funding and having heard their concerns about a lack of clarity therein, I believe that simplification of these rules is a very positive and important step and will be much appreciated by our constituents.

7.2. Sistema Europeu de Informação e Autorização de Viagem (ETIAS): tarefas da Europol (A8-0323/2017 - Kinga Gál)

Ústní vysvětlení hlasování

  Monica Macovei (ECR). – Domnule președinte, ETIAS este un sistem nou, care va autoriza intrarea în Uniune a cetățenilor din state terțe care nu au nevoie de vize. Sunt peste un miliard de persoane în această situație. Ele provin din 60 de țări și s-a dovedit că, atunci când vin, unele dintre ele nu respectă normele europene. ETIAS va stabili dacă prezența persoanei respective pe teritoriul nostru este un risc de securitate, criminalitate, migrație ilegală sau de sănătate.

Prin crearea acestui sistem va crește și rolul Europol. Europol va introduce în sistemul ETIAS informații privind persoanele suspectate de comiterea unor infracțiuni sau despre care există indicii că ar fi comis infracțiuni sau ar putea comite infracțiuni. De asemenea, Europol va introduce în sistemul ETIAS date privind infracțiuni de terorism sau alte infracțiuni grave.

Pentru o Europă sigură, toate aceste sisteme și agenții trebuie să funcționeze și să coopereze.

7.3. Orçamento 2019 - Mandato para o trílogo (A8-0247/2018 - Daniele Viotti)

Ústní vysvětlení hlasování

  Monica Macovei (ECR). – Bugetul pe 2019 al Uniunii trebuie să reflecte prioritățile de pe agenda de securitate a Uniunii și să aloce fonduri în continuare pentru cooperarea judiciară transfrontalieră, pentru combaterea terorismului, a crimei organizate și a criminalității informatice.

De aceea, nu este deloc o veste bună că bugetul Europol a scăzut efectiv ca alocare pentru 2019 cu peste opt milioane de euro. Este nevoie să îl creștem. Acești bani ar fi permis și permit, dacă-l creștem, activități operaționale pe care Europol le-a stabilit deja pentru viitorul exercițiu financiar, de exemplu: verificări secundare de securitate pentru a preveni traficarea migranților, lupta împotriva drogurilor, împotriva criminalității informatice, combaterea terorismului online.

Sper că vom putea răspunde la aceste cerințe, pentru siguranța fiecăruia dintre noi. O Europă sigură înseamnă, în primul rând, o Europă liberă de criminalitate și de amenințarea terorismului.

  Момчил Неков (S&D). – Г-н Председател, след по-малко от година европейските граждани ще трябва да избират нов състав на Европейския парламент. Вярвам, че е изключително важно те да са информирани какво точно им дава Съюза като права и свободи, как всяко едно решение има пряко въздействие върху всекидневния живот на всеки от нас.

Функционирането на Европейския съюз не е достатъчно застъпено в учебните планове и това е жалко. Жалко е, защото хората не разполагат с пълната информация за възможностите, които членството ни в тази общност им предлага. В този смисъл програми като Еразъм+, Европейски корпус за солидарност и Европа за гражданите имат още по-голямо значение. На този етап, именно те позволяват на нашите граждани да имат досег с други европейски култури и да се чувстват европейци наравно с другите.

Точно затова смятам, че в бюджета за 2019 година трябва да има значително повече средства за тези програми.

  Jasenko Selimovic (ALDE). – Herr talman! Den inre marknaden är EU:s största framgång, som inget land opponerar sig mot. Den har gett oss möjligheten för personer, varor, tjänster och kapital att röra sig fritt över gränserna. Den har ökat EU:s BNP med 1,7 procent, den har skapat 3,6 miljoner jobb och nya arbetstillfällen sedan 1990.

Därför måste fullbordandet av den inre marknaden förbli en av prioriteringarna i 2019 års budget. För den inre marknaden betyder helt enkelt för mycket för att vi ska behandla den dåligt. Vi måste därför se till att det finns adekvat finansiering för fullbordandet av den här marknaden, för tullunionen, för konsumentskydd, för konkurrenskraft i EU, etc.

Brexit har betydande budgeteffekter för unionens budget, men vi får inte glömma att den inre marknaden är kärnan i EU och dem måste fungera bättre och effektivare för alla, då får vi alla det bättre.

7.4. 73.ª Sessão da Assembleia Geral das Nações Unidas (A8-0230/2018 - Eugen Freund)

Ústní vysvětlení hlasování

  Mirosław Piotrowski (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! W sprawozdaniu dotyczącym 73. sesji Zgromadzenia Ogólnego Narodów Zjednoczonych znalazło się wiele interesujących i ważnych zapisów. Jednak znalazły się też takie, których absolutnie tam być nie powinno. Przede wszystkim dotyczy to punktu aap), w którym Parlament domaga się zapewnienia legalnej i bezpiecznej aborcji, czyli zabijania dzieci nienarodzonych. Nie do przyjęcia jest też zrównanie w punkcie preambuły L ochrony mniejszości religijnych z ochroną osób określonych jako LGBTI. To sprawiło, że głosowałem przeciwko temu sprawozdaniu.

  Alex Mayer (S&D). – Mr President, I welcome this report, but would also like the Council to take note of the resolution passed by this House in May on animal testing for cosmetics. The 73rd session of the UN General Assembly is an ideal platform for EU leaders to build support for an international convention to ban animal testing for cosmetics within the UN framework. Organised by Cruelty Free International and the Body Shop, over 6.5 million people have signed a petition for a global ban to stop half a million animals suffering each year, because animal testing for cosmetics is cruel, unnecessary and outdated. Europe banned it. It works. Our cosmetics companies haven’t gone bust. Our makeup is still top—notch. Indeed, we know that using technologies like synthetic skin give more accurate results. Europe led the way. Our soaps, shampoos and lipsticks are cruelty free. So let it be across the world too.

  Jasenko Selimovic (ALDE). – Herr talman! Främjandet och skyddet av de mänskliga rättigheterna är kärnan i multilateralismen och en central pelare i FN-systemet, säger betänkandet. Jag håller fullständigt med, men FN kan inte fungera om det finns länder som skapar ineffektivitet och delvis bristande legitimitet av FN-systemet.

Vem tror att FN kan leverera när länder som systematiskt förföljer och förtrycker sina medborgare sitter i FN:s råd för mänskliga rättigheter: Venezuela, Kina, Kuba, Kongo, Saudiarabien? Vem tror att FN kan leverera när säkerhetsrådet är helt förlamat, kan inte ta beslut när det gäller blodiga massmord och konflikter som pågår, som till exempel Syrien?

Därför behöver vi i Europaparlamentet stödja FN:s generalsekreterare Guterres i sin ambition att reformera FN. FN behöver satsa på sitt kärnuppdrag, behöver minskad byråkrati, ökad transparens, bättre antikorruptionsarbete samt reformera sitt beslutsfattande. Vi måste bidra till att återuppbygga FN:s förtroende.

  Момчил Неков (S&D). – г-н Председател, Организацията на обединените нации има своя принос за постигане на диалога в света. За съжаление обаче, последните години показаха, че правилата и системата, по които работи Организацията не дават очакваните резултати. Взимането и блокирането на решения в Съвета за сигурност са основна причина, поради която редица въпроси остават блокирани.

Съставът на Съвета за сигурност също не отразява актуалната геополитическа ситуация.

Недопустимо е най-големия донор на хуманитарна помощ и най-успешния проект на мира, какъвто е Европейския съюз, да няма свое място и гласът на организацията да не бъде чут. Европейският съюз също така е на първа линия на много сериозния поток от миграция, който освен от икономически причини, се предизвиква и от утежнената политическа обстановка.

Европейският съюз е доказал своята способност и желание да допринася за постигане на глобалните цели. Поради тази причина, аз подкрепих днешния доклад.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, I support this report and its recommendations to the Council. Among others, I believe that the Council should actively support the UN Secretary—General’s three—pillar reform agenda with the aim of making the UN system truly coordinated. This would have the effect of making the UN more efficient, effective, integrated, transparent and accountable.

The world is facing a range of global challenges related to ongoing and emerging conflicts and their consequences, such as climate change and terrorism. I support the recommendations of reduced bureaucracy, simplified procedures and decentralised decision—making within the UN.

The Union’s Member States like Ireland remain fully committed to multilateralism, global governance and the promotion of UN core values as an integral part of the EU’s external policy. Every time peace and security are threatened, the EU and the UN should play complementary and reinforcing rules. If the EU speaks as one coherent voice, we can be significantly more effective on the global stage within the UN, so I fully support this.

7.5. Crise migratória e situação humanitária na Venezuela e nas suas fronteiras (RC-B8-0315/2018, B8-0315/2018, B8-0316/2018, B8-0317/2018, B8-0318/2018, B8-0319/2018, B8-0320/2018, B8-0321/2018)

Ústní vysvětlení hlasování

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedo, já jsem podpořil toto usnesení. My zde na plénu často debatujeme o tragické situaci ve Venezuele, tato debata je bohužel pořád stejná. Tamní diktátor, prezident Maduro, nerespektuje výzvy mezinárodního společenství k tomu, aby ukončil svoji socialistickou diktaturu nebo alespoň se určitým způsobem více staral o své obyvatelstvo.

Je zřejmé, že obrovská humanitární krize, která pokračuje odchody desítek tisíc lidí z této země, bude pokračovat a my bychom měli v této věci být aktivní, pomoci Kolumbii, která přijímá největší množství uprchlíků z Venezuely, ale také se pokusit ekonomicky, ale hlavně finančně pomoci dneska trpícím lidem ve Venezuele. Bohužel velkým problémem je situace u dětí, které umírají díky tomu, že nemají léky. Takže naší snahou by mělo být být aktivní a pomoci této zemi v humanitární krizi.

  Mirosław Piotrowski (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Głosowałem za tą rezolucją, dostrzegając dramatyczną sytuacją w Wenezueli, której władze określają się jako socjalistyczne. W państwie tym – jak powiedział kolega – umierają dzieci, brakuje lekarstw, żywności, wody. Ludzie umierają także z głodu. W trakcie debaty, która odbyła się w Parlamencie Europejskim, pan komisarz zadeklarował dodatkowe kilkadziesiąt milionów euro na pomoc mieszkańcom Wenezueli. Ja apelowałem i apeluję po raz kolejny o to, aby tę pomoc jeszcze wydatniej zwiększyć. Trzeba koniecznie szybko pośpieszyć z konkretną dużą pomocą humanitarną i uruchomić te środki, o których mówił pan komisarz. I powinna to zrobić albo sama Unia Europejska bezpośrednio, albo za pośrednictwem Caritasu, którego pomoc akceptują obecne władze Wenezueli.

7.6. Orientações para os Estados-Membros evitarem a criminalização da ajuda humanitária (B8-0314/2018)

Ústní vysvětlení hlasování

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Mr President, I voted in favour of this report, which I deem to be very timely. Humanitarian assistance as such should never be criminalised. The EU is bound to protect those in humanitarian need. This is one of the main elements of our soft power. The Commission is the third biggest donor of humanitarian aid after the United States of America and Germany. We need to keep this flag high and not allow our efforts to be diminished. But I call for major operation cooperation and coordination between actors providing humanitarian assistance and the competent authorities.

Humanitarian assistance, like any matter which involves financial resources, is subject to criminalisation. While we can guarantee accountability and transparency on the part of the Commission, we cannot fully guarantee the same from the NGOs that are our partners. Therefore, we need to monitor the enforcement and effective practical application of the Facilitators Package by collecting and recording annually information on the number of people arrested for facilitation.

7.7. Adequação do nível de proteção assegurado pelo Escudo de Proteção da Privacidade UE-EUA (B8-0305/2018)

Ústní vysvětlení hlasování

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Mr President, I voted in favour of the report and agree that we must take significant measures to ensure that the Privacy Shield will fully comply with EU regulations and with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, with no loopholes or competitive disadvantages for EU companies.

I know very well that it has required great effort for the EU to arrive at a common position on this, but what is more problematic now is to enforce our norms with regard to the United States of America. If we do not adopt a wise diplomatic approach immediately, this will become a real stumbling block for privacy in Europe and the European Union. For this reason, I particularly support the call on the EU authorities to start discussions on the Privacy Shield arrangement. That is why I voted in favour.

Another issue which bothers me, especially in view of the recent investigation into Cambridge Analytica, is the illegal use of our data for political manipulation.

7.8. Efeitos negativos sobre os cidadãos da UE resultantes da legislação dos EUA relativa às obrigações fiscais dos titulares de contas no estrangeiro (B8-0306/2018)

Ústní vysvětlení hlasování

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Mr President, providing an adequate level of protection for personal data transferred to the US under FATCA in full compliance with national and EU data protection law is a matter of crucial importance for the European Union. Thus I call on the Member States and the Commission to ensure that the fundamental rights of all citizens are guaranteed, especially the right to a private and family life.

The right to privacy and the principle of non—discrimination is laid down in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the European Convention on Human Rights.

It is necessary to present a joint EU approach to FATCA in order adequately to protect the rights of European citizens and improve equal reciprocity in the automatic exchange of information by the United States of America. I also would like to call on the Commission to open negotiations with the US on an EU—US FATCA Agreement with a view to ensuring full mutual exchange of information.

  Alex Mayer (S&D). – Mr President, I welcome this resolution. Since I spoke in this Chamber last night, I have heard from more accidental Americans in my constituency. Michelle, who lives in Norfolk, was born in the United States to a British dad and a Canadian mum and left aged four years old. Since then, she’s only lived studied and worked in Britain and, of course, paid British tax, but now her bank is threatening to close her account if she doesn’t supply multiple US tax compliance documents, not least providing her US Social Security number, which of course she doesn’t have. I have heard from constituents who are getting into debt, having their bank accounts closed and are feeling afraid and scared.

We have got European banks handing over personal data about their customers to the US authorities. FATCA breaches the right to data privacy under the European Convention on Human Rights. It’s time for a rethink so that Brits who never wanted to be Americans can continue ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’ in the place that they call home without being chased down like common criminals by the US tax authorities.

8. Correcções e intenções de voto: Ver Acta

(Denní zasedání bylo přerušeno ve 13:04.)

VORSITZ: RAINER WIELAND
Vizepräsident

9. Reinício da sessão

(Die Sitzung wird um 15.00 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.)

10. Aprovação da acta da sessão anterior: Ver Acta

11. Interpelações extensas (debate)

11.1. Violação dos direitos humanos fundamentais das mulheres no Paquistão

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die große Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung mit Aussprache von Marijana Petir, Alojz Peterle, Anna Záborská, Franc Bogovič, Michaela Šojdrová, Ivana Maletić, Željana Zovko, Elisabetta Gardini, Lorenzo Cesa, Jan Olbrycht, Miroslav Mikolášik, Lars Adaktusson, Luigi Morgano, Arne Gericke, Alberto Cirio, Fulvio Martusciello, Tomáš Zdechovský, Mihai Ţurcanu, Massimiliano Salini, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Laima Liucija Andrikienė, Agnieszka Kozłowska-Rajewicz, Ivica Tolić, Pavel Svoboda, Seán Kelly, Peter Liese, Karl-Heinz Florenz, Kinga Gál, Heinz K. Becker, Tunne Kelam, Bendt Bendtsen, Czesław Adam Siekierski, Norbert Erdős, Giovanni La Via, Fernando Ruas, Ivan Štefanec, Othmar Karas, Paul Rübig, Nuno Melo, Annie Schreijer-Pierik, Angelika Niebler, Patricija Šulin an die Kommission: Verstoß gegen die Grundrechte der Frau in Pakistan (O-000058/2018 – B8-0035/2018).

  Marijana Petir, autor. – Poštovani predsjedniče, Visoka predstavnice, Pakistan zauzima peto mjesto među pedeset zemalja u kojima je najteže biti kršćanin prema svjetskom indeksu progona kršćana za 2018. godinu, koji sastavlja organizacija Open Doors. Od 8 milijuna pripadnika manjinskih vjerskih zajednica, koliko ih živi u Pakistanu, 3,9 milijuna čine kršćani. U Pakistanu se kontinuirano primjenjuje Zakon o blasfemiji, kojim se vrši pritisak na kršćane i ostale vjerske manjine. Vrhovni sud Pakistana smatra kako su osobe optužene za blasfemiju izložene nerazmjernoj i nepopravljivoj patnji zbog nepostojanja adekvatnih zaštitnih mehanizama protiv pogrešne primjene ili zlouporabe ovoga zakona.

Kršćanka Asia Bibi, uhićena je i osuđena na smrt vješanjem 2010. godine temeljem ovoga zakona i danas se nalazi u zatvoru zbog lažnih optužbi. Asia nije jedina. Pakistanski policijski službenik oteo je četrnaestogodišnju djevojčicu Sumbal Arif i prisilio je da se preobrati na islam. Asma Yaqoob, 25-godišnja kršćanka preminula je nakon što ju je 10. travnja 2018. godine musliman Rizwan Gujjar polio kiselinom i potom zapalio, a sve zbog toga što se odbila preobratiti na islam i udati za njega.

Asia, Sumbal i Asma. Za njihove strašne sudbine znamo. Pitam se što je sa sudbinama tisuće djevojčica i žena kojima ne znamo ni ime, a koje trpe zbog ovog zakona? Kako je moguće da život kršćana u Pakistanu ne vrijedi ništa? I da oni koji počine zločin protiv njih prolaze nekažnjeno?

Jasno je da u Pakistanu nema političke volje da se poštuju ljudska prava, prava žena i prava kršćana jer je sindski kazneni zakon, koji predviđa kazne za prisilnu preobraćenje na drugu vjeru, ostao neratificiran. No, unatoč svemu, EU je omogućila Pakistanu ulazak u poseban opći sustav povlastica OSP+. Omogućili smo im da profitiraju s otprilike milijardu eura godišnje trgovinskog suficita s Europskom unijom, iako je više nego očito da Pakistan u naravi ne provodi međunarodne konvencije koje se tiču ljudskih prava.

Imamo obvezu štititi temeljne vjerske slobode u odnosu s trećim zemljama. Slobode koje se tiču vjere, njezina nesmetanog prihvaćanja, vanjskog štovanja i prakticiranja u vlastitom životu zauzimaju posebno mjesto među općim ljudskim pravima. A poštivanje ljudskih prava i temeljnih sloboda jedno je od ciljeva vanjske i sigurnosne politike EU-a. Kako se ta sloboda ne bi olako shvaćala, moramo njome uvjetovati našu vanjsku politiku jer tek ćemo tada osigurati pravi mir.

U suprotnom, dok se poštivanje ljudskih prava olako shvaća i „gura pod tepih” radi gospodarske suradnje, sve dok se čini da nam je novac važniji od ljudskih života, bojim se da dijelimo odgovornost i za Asiu, Sumbal i Asmu i za sve progonjene kršćane diljem svijeta, a kršćani su danas, nemojmo to zaboraviti, najprogonjenija vjerska skupina na svijetu.

  Federica Mogherini, Vice—President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, today we are here – not too numerous I have to say, unfortunately – for all the women in Pakistan killed or abused simply because they wanted to choose who to love or how to pray.

The story of Asma is only one of too many tragic stories coming from Pakistan – and let me say, not only from Pakistan but these stories of abuses on religious minorities happen everywhere in the world, including potentially in Europe. We have to remember about human rights and human dignity, also within our borders.

At the same time, Pakistan’s recent history tells us that change is possible and is happening. Laws can change and even culture can change. It takes the courage of women and men who are challenging the status quo – people who want Pakistan to be a better place, not just for women and minorities but for all its people. We all know the names of Malala or Asia Bibi, but there are also many more unknown stories of brave people who are helping Pakistan turn the page. It is thanks to these people that change is happening – slowly and still in a limited manner but is happening today. According to data provided by NGOs, acid attacks in Pakistan went down by 50% in the last three years and this is happening thanks to new laws that were introduced to protect women and victims, but it is also happening because of the relentless work of Pakistani civil society.

I am proud that the European Union has supported, is supporting and will continue to support this work. We’re working with civil society organisations that provide specialised medical support to the victims of acid attacks, and we have supported better legislation against these crimes. These may sound like small steps, but they tell us that progress is possible, change is possible and that engagement pays off.

Also on the rights of minorities, some important initiatives have been put in place. In the Punjab and Sindh provinces new actions have been taken to protect places of worship of non—Muslim religious communities. A nationwide debate has started on how to prevent false allegations of blasphemy. There is still too much violence against religious minorities in Pakistan, it’s true, but there are also many daily stories of coexistence. And let me add that the decision by Pope Francis to name the Archbishop of Karachi as a cardinal points precisely in this direction. We must invest in dialogue and coexistence, even more so in times when others invest in division and segregation.

We, as the European Union, are trying to accompany and incentivise all progress in the condition of women and minorities in Pakistan. We always raise these issues in the EU—Pakistan Joint Commission and in the subgroup on governance and human rights. Human rights are also a fundamental part of the monitoring process that we carry out in the context of our generalised scheme of preferences, the GSP+.

The European Commission presented its second biannual GSP+ report to Parliament and the Council in January and the report also includes an assessment on Pakistan. The next sessions of both the EU—Pakistan Joint Commission and the GSP+ monitoring mechanism are foreseen for next autumn, and our special envoy for freedom of religion and of belief was also recently in the country. As a consequence of our engagement, the government of Pakistan has committed to strengthening human rights institutions and human rights awareness.

On top of our diplomatic work, we are engaged on the ground. I’ve mentioned our support for NGOs, but beyond that we use our support for the Pakistani economy to empower women and girls across the country. Let me give just one example: one of the main development programmes we are running in Pakistan, in the Sindh province, relies exclusively on women and women groups for its implementation. This is empowering women.

The main objective of the programme is poverty reduction. We’re working with 750 000 poor households to lift out of poverty at least 30% of them, and we’re doing so working with women, helping them to get a job and raising their position within their communities.

We’re also engaged in increasing the number of girls who enrol in quality primary education. We have invested 210 million on education in Pakistan over a seven—year period. This is also investing in women and girls’ rights and empowering women. But this debate also coincides with a particularly important moment in Pakistan’s democratic life. General elections will be held on the 25th of this month, of July, and they can and should lead to a second consecutive democratic transition of an elected civilian government, which would be unprecedented in the country’s history, and improving women’s participation has become one of the major issues in the upcoming elections and various measures have been developed to this goal.

So in a moment like this, I believe we have a duty to engage even more closely with Pakistan. Only through dialogue and engagement can we make a difference to the life of Pakistani women, all of them. The GSP+ scheme provides us with an efficient and indispensable tool in this regard as a complement to our diplomatic action and to our development aid.

Pressure and dialogue can only go hand—in—hand. So our work with the people of Pakistan can lead to a country where no person is killed for their love or their faith. It is a realistic goal and I thank you for your engagement to make it happen together with us.

  Seán Kelly, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, firstly I would like to compliment High Representative Mogherini, and also my colleague and friend Marijana Petir, for initiating this topic, which I fully support, and reiterate the questions Marijana put on this important issue.

Attacks on women are widespread in Pakistan and the severity of these attacks is not to be underestimated. Women are continuously treated as second class citizens, and there are severe imbalances which need to be addressed. Pakistan’s latest national report on the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, for example, has been overdue since 1 March 2017, so pressure needs to be put on Pakistan immediately to start taking the lives of women seriously.

Furthermore, coming from a very religious country like Ireland, with a history of religious conflict unfortunately, I understand the dynamics of religious coexistence and the challenges it creates. However, I absolutely condemn acts of violence in an attempt to coerce another into converting to a different religion, or acts of violence as punishment for someone who is not willing to join that religion. The intersection of religious conflict with gender inequality further exacerbates the traumas women face on a daily basis, and so both of these issues need to be tackled head on.

I would also like to reiterate Marijana Petir’s position regarding GSP+.

Finally, I want to say that we have on too many occasions had to discuss gender violence and discrimination in this Parliament. It needs to stop within and outwith the European Union.

  Andrejs Mamikins, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, observance of women’s rights in Pakistan is a big human rights question in the West. Unfortunately, we have to admit that this country is one of the most dangerous countries for women. The state does little to protect women and girls, despite constitutional guarantees, with loss of free will for the women of Pakistan. They are denied their basic fundamental rights.

Women in Pakistan have been constantly complaining of isolation from the mainstream of society. Women feel disillusioned by being maltreated by the male oriented set—up in Pakistan. However, Pakistani society usually adopts a hostile attitude towards women, who face substantial systematic challenges in Pakistan, and most fundamental is the question of violence.

Violence against women is a very alarming situation in the country because it is getting to a very threatening situation in that the violence is getting more brutal day by day. The honour and dignity of females is endangered, and no woman is efficiently protected by the state. One of the key problems is that there is a very fragmented legal framework for violence against women and girls. Moreover, there are no proper mechanisms on the ground for proper law enforcement and prosecution of crimes against women. Despite several legislative developments to strengthen women’s protection system, there is no significant decline in the number of cases of violence against women.

Many laws for building the country’s protection of women’s rights for freedom, equality and justice were formally introduced, but never enforced in the country. As a result, dramatically cruel and ruthless actions of crime against women are still happening. Violence against women and girls, including rape, murder, through so—called honour killings and domestic violence and forced marriage remain routine. In fact, Pakistani human rights NGOs estimates that there are about 1 000 honour killings every year; yes, one thousand. As you can imagine, investigation rates on them are close to zero.

For example, in 2017 in Khyber Pakhtunkwa (KPK) Province in north—west Pakistan, 94 women were murdered by close family members. In June 2016, Zeenat Rafiq, aged 18 was burned to death in Lahore by her mother for ‘bringing shame to the family’ by marrying a man of her choosing. In the same year, family members tortured and burned to death an 18 year—old schoolteacher in Murree, Punjab, for refusing an arranged marriage, and Qandeel Baloch, a well—known Pakistani model, was killed by her brother in a so—called honour killing.

These are just a few examples of the numerous inhuman brutal crimes against women in Pakistan. Especially vulnerable are women from religious minority communities. The report by the movement for solidarity and peace in Pakistan found that at least 1 000 girls belonging to Christian and Hindu communities are forced to marry Muslim men every year. The government failed to act to stop such forced marriages. Moreover, child marriages still remain a serious concern in Pakistan, with 21% of girls marrying before the age of 18, despite the submission of proposals aiming to raise the legal minimum age to 18 for females and to introduce harsher penalties for those who arrange child marriages. It was withdrawn by the national parliament of Pakistan.

Given these facts, women and girls in Pakistan do not possess their due rights guaranteed by the Constitution of Pakistan. I know the situation. I visited Pakistan in April last year with the Committee on Foreign Affairs on an ad hoc mission to Pakistan. The state is unable to protect them from the inhuman social customs prevalent in this society. Dear colleagues, let us stop our silence. We have to protect women in Pakistan.

Thank you, Ms Mogherini, for your support on this issue.

  Urszula Krupa, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Z analiz Open Doors wynika, że 215 mln chrześcijan jest narażonych na prześladowania w takich krajach, jak Pakistan, Korea Północna, Afganistan, Sudan, Iran, Irak, Jemen czy Erytrea. Według Ordo Iuris do represji dochodzi aż w 128 państwach. W islamskim Pakistanie chrześcijanie stanowią około 2% wśród 160 mln Pakistańczyków. Należą do najbiedniejszych. Są pozbawieni dostępu do edukacji, pracy, mienia. Są prześladowani, torturowani, więzieni, co ma miejsce w około tysiącu przypadków rocznie. Mimo że prawo gwarantuje mniejszościom pewien stopień wolności religijnej, około 700 dziewcząt rocznie zostaje uprowadzonych i zmuszonych do małżeństwa oraz do przejścia na islam, co prowadzi do eliminacji chrześcijan w Pakistanie, gdzie szczególnie kobiety są gwałcone i podpalane. Chrześcijanka Asma Yacoob zmarła w szpitalu. Przykładem jest więziona od lat Asia Bibi, która – podobnie jak wielu innych chrześcijan – została niesłusznie oskarżona o bluźnierstwo przeciwko Koranowi, za co grozi więzienie, a nawet śmierć. Coraz częściej dochodzi do ataków na kościoły chrześcijańskie, dlatego zasadne stają się pytania o obronę praw człowieka i mniejszości chrześcijańskich, i to nie tylko w Pakistanie, gdzie w ostatnim raporcie tamtejszego instytutu poświęconym wolności religijnej wskazano problem, oceniając sytuację jako krytyczną. Unia ma wiele możliwości nie tylko poprzez rezolucje, interpelacje czy inne interwencje, tym bardziej że na arenie międzynarodowej problem prześladowania chrześcijan wydaje się bagatelizowany. Istnieje potrzeba solidarności, środków politycznych, zwłaszcza że prześladowania mogą zagrażać niegdyś chrześcijańskiej Europie, i to nie tylko w związku z migracją, ale przewagą sił – delikatnie mówiąc – niechętnych chrześcijaństwu.

  Ivan Jakovčić, u ime kluba ALDE. – Poštovani predsjedavajući, želim odmah na početku izraziti svoju osobnu solidarnost sa svima onima koji pate u Pakistanu iz vjerskih razloga, s kršćanima koji pate u Pakistanu, s drugima koji pate u toj državi. Želim izraziti svoju veliku solidarnost sa ženama koje upravo zbog vjerskih razloga bivaju mučene, ubijane i silovane.

Nasilje nad ženama u Pakistanu je samo jedan primjer onoga čemu svjedočimo u današnje vrijeme, nepravdi koje se čine prema ženama ili drugim manjinama koje postoje, vjerskim manjinama, ali Pakistan nažalost nije jedina zemlja, imamo ih puno još za nabrojiti i to su često i partneri Europske unije. Ono što želim naglasiti je da naravno da vidimo pozitivne razvoje, naravno da vidimo i ono što znači nadu da će svijet biti bolji, da će i Pakistan biti bolje mjesto za življenje i za žene i za kršćane i da će i druge zemlje biti bolje mjesto za življenje za razne manjine.

Cijeli svoj život posvetio sam borbi za prava manjina, borbi za ono što znači ljudsko dostojanstvo i čast i zato želim naglasiti da odgovornost za sve ovo što se dešava u svijetu snose prije svega one osobe koje nisu dostojne pogledati najprije u svoje dvorište.

Pogledajmo najprije u svoje dvorište jer ako mi kažemo o ovome pitanju da zakon koji još nije stupio na snagu u regiji Sindh, nije stupio na snagu zbog prosvjeda konzervativnih vjerskih zajednica, ja ne mogu a ne povući paralelu s ekstremnim vjerskim zajednicama i u Hrvatskoj koje se protive ratifikaciji Istanbulske konvencije. Opet prava žena, samo negdje drugdje, na našem kontinentu. Nemoguće je ne povući tu paralelu i nemoguće je ne ukazati na takvu licemjernost i zato pozivam Vas, visoka povjerenice, da zaista sagledate sve elemente o kojima smo danas govorili.

Naravno, Vaša je obaveza da promovirate europske ideje, da promovirate ono što je Europska unija u Pakistanu i drugdje, ono što smo mi stvorili kao kontinent, vrijednosti od kojih mnogi moraju učiti od nas. Ali s druge strane, vjerujem da prije svega, ako želimo biti pošteni, ako želimo biti zaista iskreni kršćani, trebamo staviti ruku najprije na svoje srce, a onda gledati u tuđa dvorišta.

(Zastupnik je pristao odgovoriti na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice (članak 162. stavak 8. Poslovnika))

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D), zilās kartītes jautājums. – Augsti godātais Jakovčiča kungs! Paldies liels, ka jūs pieņēmāt manu zilās kartītes jautājumu. Jūs visu pareizi pateicāt par kristiešu tiesībām un to aizsardzību Pakistānā, bet saprotiet — kad mēs tur bijām ar Ārlietu komitejas delegāciju pagājušā gada aprīlī, katra mūsu tikšanās sākās ar korāna lasīšanu. Pakistāna — tā ir dziļi reliģiska valsts, musulmaņu valsts, sunnītu valsts. Kā jūs saredzat kristiešu aizstāvību šajā situācijā?

  Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE), odgovor na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice. – Poštovani predsjedavajući, nema nikakve dvojbe da u Pakistanu ili u Iranu, gdje sam ja bio, gdje svi sastanci počinju s molitvom, imamo nešto što nije na neki način u Europi više slučaj. Imamo slučaj u takvim zemljama. Ja mislim da mi moramo prije svega razumijeti situaciju, ali pokušati zaista ono što je nama najbitnije, vrijednosti koje imamo a to su vrijednosti manjina, protivljenje nasilju, pogotovo nad ženama i djevojčicama. To je ono što mi moramo učiniti i učiniti sve upravo u tim zemljama, a hoće li svatko...

(predsjedavajući je govorniku oduzeo riječ)

  André Elissen, namens de ENF-Fractie. – Voorzitter, vanmiddag voeren we een belangrijk debat over de rechten van de vrouw in Pakistan. Eigenlijk had dit debat beter kunnen worden hernoemd naar het schrijnende gebrek aan rechten van de vrouw in Pakistan. Ontvoering, verkrachting, intimidatie en gedwongen bekering tot de haatideologie die islam heet. Het zijn slechts enkele voorbeelden van het leed dat veel Pakistaanse vrouwen treft.

Vaak wordt gedacht dat dit soort wreedheden kan worden gestopt met een subsidieprogramma vanuit het Westen. Ook het Europees Parlement maakt zich daar schuldig aan, dit terwijl steeds duidelijker wordt dat die zogenaamde hulp niet werkt. Lokale stamhoofden zeggen het één, maar doen het ander. Zo zijn gigantische sommen belastinggeld weggestroomd zonder enige verbetering van de leefomstandigheden van bijvoorbeeld vrouwen en christelijke minderheden. Waarom maken we dan nog steeds ieder jaar slaafs geld over?

Dit is helaas geen op zichzelf staand geval. Niet voor het eerst en niet voor het laatst ben ik bang, maakt de islam onschuldige slachtoffers. Overal in de wereld zorgt deze primitieve haatdragende ideologie voor oorlog en geweld. Westerse democratische waarden worden in geen enkel land waar de islam dominant is gedeeld.

En dan hebben we het nog niet eens over islamitisch terrorisme gehad. Europa is de afgelopen jaren opgeschrikt door vele tientallen islamitische aanslagen. De islam blijft de voornaamste bron van inspiratie en legitimatie voor terroristen die de afgelopen jaren al veel te veel slachtoffers hebben kunnen maken. Het lijkt tegenwoordig eerder regel dan uitzondering. Elke week is het wel ergens in Europa raakt. Ook Europol concludeert dat jaarlijks meer dan 95 % van alle doden die vallen bij terroristische aanslagen voortkomen uit islamitisch geïnspireerd geweld.

Enkele weken geleden heb ik schriftelijke vragen gesteld aan de Europese Commissie. Ik heb de Commissie verzocht te garanderen dat op geen enkele wijze geld zal worden uitgegeven aan islamitische dictaturen. Deze regimes waar zonder uitzondering vrouwen worden onderdrukt, kunnen hun kwalijke praktijken blijven uitoefenen, mede dankzij geld vanuit de Europese Unie.

Dit alles kan maar tot één conclusie leiden: het financieren van islamitische dictaturen als Pakistan moet direct stoppen. Iedere euro richting Pakistan is een steun in de rug van de islam, is een steun voor haat jegens iedereen die zich niet onderwerpt aan de verachtelijke regels van de sharia.

  Der Präsident. – Herr Kollege Elissen! Das Thema, das wir hier besprechen, ist sehr ernst. Und auch das Thema Islamismus ist sehr ernst. Aber ich halte die pauschale Beschimpfung einer Religion für nicht angemessen. Ich rufe Sie zur Ordnung.

  André Elissen (ENF). – Ik zal kort reageren in mijn eigen taal. Kijk, u mag de islam een religie vinden, wij vinden het een intolerante ideologie en alle wreedheden die we hier vandaag gehoord hebben, ook van de collega's, alles wat daar gebeurt in Pakistan, wat die vrouwen wordt aangedaan – u kunt wegkijken, de andere kant op kijken, maar het is verschrikkelijk. Wij komen gewoon op voor gerechtigheid voor de vrouwen, gelijke rechten en gewoon het beestje bij de naam noemen. Het is een intolerante ideologie en de inspiratiebron voor al deze wreedheden.

  Der Präsident. – Herr Kollege Elissen! Ich habe Sie zur Ordnung gerufen. Es bleibt dabei, weil Sie andere Worte in Ihrer Rede gebraucht haben als „intolerant“, und die halte ich für unparlamentarisch. Ich gedenke auch nicht, Ihnen ein weiteres Forum dadurch zu geben, dass ich eine Frage zulasse.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

  Marek Jurek (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie i Panowie Posłowie! Islam jest pluralistycznym państwem. Jest państwem, w którym funkcjonuje opinia publiczna. Jest państwem demokratycznym. My nie powinniśmy wyrabiać sobie opinii na temat islamu ani na podstawie ekstremistycznych grup terrorystycznych, ani na podstawie poprawności multikulturalnej. Rzeczywistym obrazem socjologii islamu są państwa takie jak Pakistan. I dlatego nasza polityka zagraniczna powinna mówić bardzo wyraźnie Pakistanowi, że to na przykład, że Asia Bibi siedzi w więzieniu, to jest obrazem islamu dla Europy. Bo to się nie dzieje wskutek decyzji bandy terrorystów, która kogoś zamknęła w piwnicy. To się dzieje za przyzwoleniem społecznym. Co więcej, szlachetni ludzie, politycy, którzy w Pakistanie chcieli zagwarantować jej wolność, spotykali się z ostrzeżeniami. Przecież to społeczeństwo nie wypuści jej z więzienia. Nasi dyplomaci powinni otwarcie mówić: nie budujcie złego obrazu swojej cywilizacji, swojej religii. Wolność dla Asi Bibi!

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

  Federica Mogherini, Vice—President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, let me share with you a bit of background. A European Union Member State that I know very well, an extremely Catholic Member State that I know very well used to have a law justifying honour killing that was abolished only less than 40 years ago. This is to say that legislation changes, culture changes, and what we can and must do is to accompany and encourage this change towards having full respect of every single human being – this is what the European Union stands for – regardless of gender, religious ethnicity or whatever other conditions.

This is where we stand. This is our DNA. And let me add one additional point that some of you raised and with which I will conclude. It is that our credibility in defending and protecting religious minorities everywhere in the world is directly linked to our capacity, our policies and practices, to protect and defend minorities inside the European Union – inside the European Union. I hope this is a message that we bring back home to all our countries, to all our Member States, because this is something I face in my daily work with our partners around the world. If we want to stand firmly and clearly in defence of all religious minorities in the world, we have to be consistent on this at home.

(Applause)

  Der Präsident. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

12. Petições: ver Ata

13. Entrega de documentos: ver Ata

14. Decisões sobre determinados documentos: ver Ata

15. Calendário das próximas sessões : Ver Acta

16. Transmissão dos textos aprovados na presente sessão : Ver Acta

17. Encerramento da sessão

(Die Sitzung wird um 15.34 Uhr geschlossen.)

18. Interrupção da Sessão

  Der Präsident. – Ich erkläre die Sitzungsperiode des Europäischen Parlaments für unterbrochen.