Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 49kWORD 43k
28 February 2012
E-002248/2012
Question for written answer E-002248/2012
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Rule 117
Judith Sargentini (Verts/ALE) and Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE)

 Subject: VP/HR — Use of administrative detention by Israel and the case of Khader Adnan
 Answer in writing 

On 20 February 2012 a Palestinian man named Khader Adnan entered the 65th day of a hunger strike(1) in protest at his having being placed in ‘administrative detention’ by the Israeli authorities since 17 December 2011. Currently there are approximately 300 people, including children, being held in ‘administrative detention’ (i.e. without trial or charge) in Israel(2). On 17 February 2012 the EU High Representative issued a statement in response to the Khader Adnan case, in which, inter alia, she referred to the EU’s ‘longstanding concern about the extensive use by Israel of administrative detention without formal charge’.

1. How does the High Representative assess the use of ‘administrative detention’, in the framework of the Treaties, the Charter, the ECHR, ECHR case-law and international law, (especially, but not limited to, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Fourth Geneva Convention)?

2. Can the High Representative specifically explain how she assesses the use of ‘administrative detention’ that exceeds 30 days and is not related to asylum and/or immigration issues, in the context of the aforementioned legal instruments?

3. Can the High Representative indicate why, in her statement of 17 February, she has not condemned the use of ‘administrative detention’ by the Israeli authorities in this specific case or in general, but has merely reiterated the EU’s ‘concern’ over its ‘extensive use’?

4. Is the High Representative willing to condemn the use of ‘administrative detention’ by the Israeli authorities, in the case of Khader Adnan and in general? If not, why not?

5. Is the High Representative willing to call on the Israeli authorities to ensure that persons placed in ‘administrative detention’ are either indicted/put on trial or released? If not, why mot?

6. If the High Representative is not willing to condemn the use of ‘administrative detention’ in the aforementioned case and in general and/or call on the Israeli authorities to ensure that persons placed in ‘administrative detention’ are either indicted/put on trial or released, can she then indicate how she would assess this in the context of the Treaties, and especially of Article 21(1) TEU?

(1)http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/16/khader-adnan-palestinian-hunger-strike
(2)http://www.btselem.org/administrative_detention/statistics

 OJ C 110 E, 17/04/2013
Legal notice - Privacy policy