english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow FrancoGerman leaders Sarkozy-Merkel sources to EuroFora: €uroArea Summits might go Political...

FrancoGerman leaders Sarkozy-Merkel sources to EuroFora: €uroArea Summits might go Political...

Written by ACM
Monday, 30 January 2012
20120130_12.34.15_400

*Brussels/EU Summit/Angelo Marcopolo/- The 17 Member Countries-strong €uroArea Governance's Attractive Force may augment considerably in the foreseeable future, among the 10 EU but not yet €uro Member States, if one judges both by the latest developments in Brussels, and by the statements of key-players' French President Sarkozy and German Chancellor Merkel's councillors to "EuroFora" :                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
- The 1st revealed that many EU but not yet €uro Area Countries were anxious to search a way for their fullest possible Participation into the €uroArea Governance   Summits, even before their accession to €uroZone.


*- The 2nd lets suppose that nothing could hinder €uroArea's Heads of State/Government from discussing also other, various Urgent Political matters, when they meet between them, in €AG format. Should €uroArea's Political Leaders loose a rare chance to debate and eventually agree on key political, pressing issues, only for some merely bureaucratic formalities ?


  => Obviously, at least on a Medium-Longterm Future, this may practically lead towards far-reaching GeoPolitical consequences.   
--------------------
    Already from the outset, it became immediately obvious that something unusual or unexpected was probably going on inside the Justius Lipsius EU Council building :


    - Polish and Hungarian Prime Ministers, Donald Tusk and Victor Orban, werez First to rush in, even before the scheduled official Arrival Time-frame (about 15 m. earlier), followed by Swedish Prime Minister Reinfeld, and afterwards his Czech Republic's counterpart, etc., the latter being unusually long to speak to surprised Journalists waiting as usual at EU Council's doorstep... UK Prime Minister Cameron wasn't far away, and, all being EU but not yet €uroArea Members, it was obviousy easy to guess the direction towards which such movesd might indicate..


    Nevertheless, EU Countries were able to quasi-Unanimously confirm that they had agreed and were, indeed, Ready to Sign officially the full, detailed New Treaty creating the €uroArea's Governance in just 1 Month : As early as from the 1st of March.
------------------
    Running energetically very Fast to enter afterwards as a Rocket the EU Council's building, French President Nicolas Sarkozy was also, unusually, the 1st to start giving his Press Conference earlier than others and earlier than expected by some Press collegues , who rushed to join the meeting afterwards...


    - Explaining in a crystal-clear way "the Architecture" of €uroArea's Governance, Sarkozy concluded that "there are 3 Levels of (EU Heads of State/Government) meetings :"

 

20120130_21.43.32_400

 


    a ) "When it's about the (EU's) Common Market, we'll sign all 27", he characteristically said.


    b) "When it's about the "€uro+ Pact", i.e. for all those who want to enter inside €uroArea or are already inside €uro, then, we'll be 25 or 26 (Countries) to meet", he added.


    c) But, "when it's about €uro-Issues, we'll meet between the 17" (€uro Member States), Sarkozy concluded.


    - "That's how things are going to work, from now on".


    => "It doesn'y mean that there ate many Speeds ; it doesn't mean that there will be People, Countries, which would be left aside", he denied.


    >>> Because, "on the contrary, it means that there will be INTEGRATION LEVELS, which are not the same (as he said by referring to the "Europea,j INTEGRATION concept, which started to be officially adopted as a Strategy for the Future by the Franco-German Summit of Freiburg, since December 2010 (See "EuroFora"s NewsReports from Offenburg and Freiburg)


    + "As well as that Everyone is free to choose", the French President stressed.

--------------------------------
20120130_22.01.18_400

    - "The problem that was discussed" today, at EU Summit, "is that of €uroArea'"s= Governance's) meetings" :


    - I.e. "At what moment they should be among 17" €uroArea Members only ? From which point should they be Enlarged (also) to those (Countries) which are not yet €uroMembers, but would like to participate ? This was one of the issues under discussion, and we (EU Summit)=settled it according to the above mentioned Modalities", Sarkozy revealed.


    - "At any case, I think that it's much Better to have a Clarification, and that Europe gets out of any Ambiguity :"


" Those who agree for this New Treaty must say so, and put it into Practice with all due Energy. And those who disagree, or have Reserves, should say : - "We have some Reserves, we don't sign", and I think very serioury that this Clarification work is necessary", he pointed out.


    So, "from now on, it will be like this with the Czechs, at any case for the moment that we are speaking, because, even there, they explained to me that there would be some "Coinstituitional problems", but I'm absolutely ready to say also that Czechs are our Friends", as he observed.            
-----------------------------
    An impotant Innovation in €uroArea Governance Summits is that, In conformity with what was agreed by EU Council since December 9, 2011 (and the Franco-German proposal of December 5 ; See "EuroFora"s News Reports from Brussels and Elysee Palace in Paris, respectively), they are due to be held "at least Twice a Year", (i.e. as EU's official Councils), and "regularly", (f.ex. once each Month, as the original,

    + But it's also important to note that, questioned by "EuroFora" to clarify whether €uroArea Governance Summits would also discuss in the foreseable Futrure, at least in case of Urgency or Need, some topical Political issues, (or should they be for ever hindered from doing so), a Sarkozy's Counsellor did not deny...  


    A similar impression was given to "EuroFora" also from points of view close to German Chancellor Angie Merkel, shortly afterwards :

20120130_22.39.42_400


    - F.ex., Raising the same Question (See above) also to the experienced, long-time MEP , President of EU Parliament"s Foreign affairs Committee, German MEP Elmar Brok, (and EU Parliament's representative to Institutional EU Reforms, including vis a vis this one, about the €uroArea Governance), we didn't get any Negative answer at all.

20120130_22.55.02_400


    Naturally, Brok didn't gave any indication to refuse EU Heads of Satte/Governments' freedom to eventually discuss, f.ex, in case of Urgency, any Topical Political issue he might find useful or even urgently needed to submit to their attention, f.ex., also as President of EU Parliament's Political affairs Committee, etc., particularly when it might even be closely related to €uroArea's main aims, as to foster Growth, (f.ex. an urgent need to protect Enerhy findings in EU territory, etc.)..


    Indeed, it would obviously be a counter-productive waste to eventually hinder European Top Political Leaders, Heads of State/Government, even to speak between them and discuss an urgent, topical Political issue of relevance to €uroArea, (while they also represent a Majority even inside the EU), and consequently oblige them to postpone eveything for another, later meeting, after 1 or 2 or 3 or even more Months, just because of some Bureaucratic formalities...


    Efficiency and Simplification would certainly plead in favour of lettting Heads of State/Governmment Free to discuss and decide on any topical, at least Urgent issue, be it Political or Economic, of relevance to the €uroArea Countries' interests, (Even if they might, eventually, have to complete their Final Decisions, later-on, in an EU format)...  


    => Such possibilities for the Future should, normally, incite a large number of EU Countries to try to stick to their initial, December 2011, decision to join the €uroArea Governance already from the earliest possible moment, (i.e. practically from March the 1st) ....

                                                          
   (../..)


***

(NDLR : "DraftNews", as already sent earlier to "EuroFora"s Subscribers/Donors. A more accurate and/or complete, Final Version may come asap).

***

Enterprises' Competitiveness for 2014-2020

Statistics

Visitors: 61932196

Archive

Login Form





Remember me

Lost your Password?
No account yet? Create account

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

Other Menu

 

pace_freeze_meps_400_01

They voted to "freeze" UK Government's draft to put People in jail for 42 Days on "anti-terrorist" suspicion without charge, or they abstained. Don't they look suspect ?
-------------------------

CoE's debate on UK controversy stirs PanEuropean check of anti-terror suspects' imprisonment

Former Leftists of the Sixties would boil in hot water if they heard PACE's debate on the controversial 42 days detention without charge, currently drafted by the British Government :

A "Socialist" Government, a Socialist PACE Rapporteur and a Socialist Chair of PACE's Legal Committee, opposed a .. "Conservative" amendment (supported by .. Liberals, Democrats, etc), to freeze the measure, in order to protect Citizens' Freedom, by "waiting" until CoE's Venice Committee checks its conformity with Human Rights' principles.

"Left"'s support to Conservative-Lib.Dem's criticism, wasn't enough to obtain a majority, nor to make things as they were back in the good old days, when "Left" and "Right" had a clear meaning, as "liberty" and "restrictions"...

Conservatives and most Democrats were joined by the Left in voting for the "freeze", as well as Liberal Paul Rowen, while Socialist MEP Ivan Popescu, an experienced MEP from Ukraine (PACE Member since 1996-2008) abstained. But most Socialists, added to a few Liberals and EPP's Right, voted against.

Fortunately, someone inside PACE had the wise idea to shorten the Debate for less than 1 Hour, and put it on the Agenda only at the end of an exceptionally busy day, towards the end of the Evening, when most MEPs had already gone to taste wins and foods at various Receptions all around Strasbourg's "European" area : As a result, not even 42 MEPs weren't present..

Socialist Lord Tomlinson accused the leaders of the PanEuropean Assembly, in its highest body : the "Bureau", to "lack wisdom" by deciding to hold a Debate on an issue that neither the Socialist Chair of the Legal Committee, nor its Socialist "reluctant Rapporteur", did "not want to do", ...

tomllinson

Finally, everybody (critics and supporters alike) was happy to agree, in substance, that the controversial measure "may" gravely violate Human Rights, and therefore, PACE asked Legal Experts of Venice Commission to check UK Government''s plans.

But this might take more than .. 42 Days to do, since PACE's Rapporteur asked the Experts to enlarge their study in a PanEuropean comparison of all that is happening on "anti-terrorism" legislation in 47 CoE Member Countries, including Russia, Turkey and Azerbaidjan..

Bad lack : "The existing 28 days’ detention without charge in the UK is, in comparison with other CoE member countries, one of the most extreme : In Turkey, the period is 7,5 days, in France 6 days, in Russia 5 days, and in .. the U.S. and Canada just 2 and 1 days respectively", denounced Democrat MEP Ms WOLDSETH from Norway..

woldsteth

"Numerous respected human rights organisations, including Liberty and Human Rights Watch, have expressed serious concern" "The proposed legislation ...could easily lead to extensive abuses. ...Detention for 42 days means six weeks in which one is taken away from one’s family, friends, home and livelihood only to be let off without being charged. That will destroy lives and isolate communities", she added.

- "3 years ago, the UK Government sought to increase the period of pre-charge detention from 14 days to 90 days. Not long before that, it had been only 7 days. There was a vigorous debate ...and a ...compromise was reached of 28 days. We have to ask whether there are proper safeguards in place to extend the period to 42 days. I suggest that there are fatal flaws", reminded British Conservative Clappison.

- "What sort of society holds someone in detention for 42 days and does not have to tell the person who is in prison why they are there, or explain the suspicions that arose and led to their detention? What sort of society believes that that is the way to treat its citizens? That is an appalling injustice, ...A 42-day detention period will not make the UK safer. Instead, it will be the first step to giving in to terrorists; it is saying that we are prepared to sacrifice our democratic rights and the principles for which we have stood for centuries", criticized British Liberal Michael Hanckock

hancock

"Comments made ...by Norwegian delegates are unfortunate", replied British Socialist MEP Ms.Curtis-Thomas, accusing them to "besmirch the reputation of our police force, which is one of the Best in the World", as she said, believing that "there are significant safeguards ...to ensure that individuals are not subjected to unlawful detention"

curtis

PACE "has serious doubts whether ...the draft legislation are in conformity with the ...case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. A lack of ..safeguards may lead to arbitrariness, resulting in breaches of ... liberty and ...right to a fair trial". PACE "is particularly concerned that: ..the judge ..may not be in a position to examine whether there exist reasonable grounds for suspecting that the arrested person has committed an offence;"; that "... representation by a lawyer may be inappropriately restricted or delayed;" that "information on the grounds for suspicion of a person ...may be unduly withheld.. ;" that this "may give rise to arrests without the intention to charge;", and; in general, that "prolonged detention without proper information on the grounds for arrest may constitute inhuman treatment", says Klaus De Vries' Report, adopted with 29 votes against zero.

vries

Records don't say if it took him 42 Days to draft his Report, but, at least, he knew why...

Polls

2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?

Results

SMF Recent Topics SA

PHP WARNING 
PHP WARNING 
PHP WARNING 
PHP WARNING