english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow France: Fake News on Polls +Foggy Replies to New Risks on BioEthics =Trend for NO in IVF/LGBT Debate

France: Fake News on Polls +Foggy Replies to New Risks on BioEthics =Trend for NO in IVF/LGBT Debate

Written by ACM
Friday, 12 January 2018
crisp_cas9_400


*Strasbourg/Press Club/Angelo Marcopolo/- The Replies to "Eurofora" and Other Journalists' Questions in a  Press Conference by the "European Forum on BioEthics"' President, Professor Israel Nisand, organized by Strasbourg's Press Club, as well as a closer Analysis on the Facts about Latest Polls, (much Publicized by pro-IVF/LGBTI and even pro-Surrogate Mothers'+Euthanasia's fans), at the Beginning of a Crucial Year for French State's Decisions on Artificial Procreation of Human Beings etc., raise Serious Question-Marks about "Fake News" on such Polls and Vague Responses on New Risks for BioEthics, which might Explain a recent Trend towards More People than in the Past supporting now a "NO" to IVF/Artificial Insemination even to Homosexuals, (while, on the Contrary, some Push the Move even to Surrogate Mothers, Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide, etc)...

--------------------

 

professor_nisand_president_of_efbs_on_polls__agg_eurofora_400

-----------------

 


First of all, it's an Undeniable Fact that the People are quasi-Unanimous about the "Importance" that have Nowadays, the Topical Issues about "Artificial Procreation" of Human Beings, the "New Genetic Technologies", the "End of Life", the "storage of (Personal) Medical Data", etc.: Polls give about 90% against only some 10% on this point.


But, also an Unquestionable Fact seems to be a Recent Trend, for More People than in the Past, Towards Opposing Now the Artificial Procreation even for Homosexual Couples of Women (Lesbians), Contrary to what some Lobbies had notoriously pushed on 2017 the current Government to consider possibly doing in 2018/2019, on the occasion of a scheduled, regular Review of the Legislation on BioEthics :


- F.ex.,  + 4 % More People than Before, Now Oppose the First Point (IVF/Lesbians), and according also to anOther Polls, (Both by "IFOP", from December 2017, published on January 2018), the Number of Opposed People has Grown even Further, up to + 5% More than what they were on July 2017.  


+ At the Same Time, the Number of those who Were "Absolutely Favorable" to Legalize Artificial Procreation of Children for Lesbian couples Falls Dramatically, from 30% Back on July 2017, Down to Only 22% Now, i.e. a Diminution of - 8 % Less than before ! (And such a Low percentage for that group had Not been seen for Many Years in France : since Back on 2013)...


In consequence, these People appear to have Started Recently to Hesitate, since they seem Transfered among those who would be Merely "RATHER Favorable", (instead of "Absolutely", Contrary to the Past).


--------------------------


=> WHY this Surprizing Recent Trend (which is also Noted by "IFOP" itself (But Scandalously Ommitted by most Establishment Medias who stick to the Artificial Procreation/Lesbian lobbies) ?


It can't be excluded that it might be due to a recently Rising and Higher Awareness and Consciousness of the People about BioEthical Issues, which would be Normal Each Time that the relevant Legislation is Reviewed, as it seems that it had Already happened in the Past :


F.ex., between 2004 and 2013, the Majority of the People had radically Changed, from a Previous Small "YES" with 51% against 48%, Towards a Strong "NO" to previous demands to Legalize Artificial Procreation of Children for Lesbians, with 53% against only 47%, (as the History of IFOP's Polls show in the Past).


>>> But, Today's New Facts clearly Converge towards anOther, much More Probable, (or even Additional) Explanation, as it results from the Replies given to "Eurofora"s and anOther NewsMedias', Different but relevant Questions, which Both point, indirectly but surely, towards People's perception of recently Growing big Risks, mainly due to some Far-Reaching and Controversial New Technologies, which notoriously Pose Huge New Challenges to Humanity  (Comp. Supra) :


- "Eurofora" asked President Nisand, in substance, whether he Believed that possible Risks of various eventual Abuses, IF the Artificial Procreation of Children was Legalized even for numerous Lesbians' couples, Could be Faced with Efficient SafeGuards, or Not. And, on this occasion, we observed also the New US Administration of President Don Trump's recent Decision to Design and Fund a New "Security Strategy", including "BioWarfare" (according also to UNO's International Convention on Biological Weapons) , "Bio-Terrorism", and even possible Abuse of some New Bio-Technologies, including by the Private sector, asking Nisand if he thought that EU should also Develop a relevant Scientific/Technological Research to Invent and produce such Safeguards, (f.ex. in the current Context of EU's Security and Defence Policy "Boom", where Medical Issues were already Included, at a Collective Decision taken by 25 EU Member Countries and endosed by their Heads of State/Govrnment at the Latest EU Summit in Brussels : Comp., f.ex.: ..., etc).


 - Professor Nisand's Reply to the above-mentioned Question by "Eurofora", was, in Substance, to -Clearly, but Simply- "Ensure" us that, in such a case, "Everything Will be Done" in order to Prevent and/or Face any such eventual Risks.  


 + When Asked by "Eurofora" if he "Firmly Believed that this would be Technically Feasible", Nisand, briefly but Clearly Replied with a Positive - "Yes !".


- However, he did Not Mention, on this occasion, Anyone of those "Measures" which might Safeguard Human Rights' of all involved, as well as Humankind as such, from possible relevant Abuses. Neither did he gave Any Concrete Example which might have Illustrated his claim, on such a Topical and Serious Issue.


+ Moreover, after a relevant Question raised Afterwards by a Collegue Journalist from a Local French Media (specialized on Medical Science/Technology Issues), about What could be done in order to Alleviate Concerns of several People about the Risks of Abuse, in this area of Artificial Procreation of Children,  by some New Bio-Technologies such as the "Gene-Editing" "CRISP-cas9", (where natural Human Genes can be easily "Cut" and "Replaced" by Other, Different Genes), things much became Foggy :

 - Indeed, Professor Nisand, (who is, personally, an Experienced Specialist in Gynecology), in his subsequent Reply to that Question, apparently trying to be as Honest as possible on the Main Facts, added that, as a matter also of General Principle, in cases of so Radical Technological Innovations in the History of Humankind, "We shall probably see Both the Best, and the Worse !", from that New Gene-Editing Technology... - "However, in the End, we shall Manage, as we did, until now, even for the Nuclear" Bombs and Energy...


 >>> But, precisely, many People, it seems, do Not Want more Dangerous "Nuclear Proliferations", with such Risky "Bombs" interfering even inside Human Beings' Procreation by Artificial Techniques eventually Abusing of Controversial methods, which could Threaten to put all Humankind in serious and Irreversible Jeopardy, able to provoke even Racial and Social Catastrophes...


=> Therefore, the Cause for that Recently Growing Trend towards More "NO" and/or Hesitations vis a vis Attempts to Legalize in France the In Vitro Fertilisations/Artificial Inseminations even for Homosexual Couples of Lesbians, that was Revealed by the Latest Polls (Comp. Supra), could, Probably, be Legitimate Fears or Concerns about that New "Gene Editing" Technology, (CRISP/Cas9+), facilitating Genetic Manipulations of Human Embryos, even on Germ-line, i.e. Risking to provoke Various Separate Races of Beings, (with natural Humans being, as a result, Irreversibly Discriminated and Downgraded) ?  


Many "Classic", World-Famous Intellectuals in the Past (particularly since the Beginning of the 20th Century), as well as, Recently, several Scientists, Politicians, Journalists, Legal Experts, Writers, and other Civil Society Actors, but, particularly, a lot of Simple People, have Notoriously Raised various such Critical Questions, which, Nowadays, (given the Fast-Growing Power of Bio-Technologies, which have Reached a Crucial Level for all Society and Humankind), obviously Need Urgent, Clear and Convincing Answers, responsible Guarantees.


CoE, the PanEuropean Organisation for Human Rights, Democracy and Rule of Law, (including BioEthics), has Already Warned about "the Need to PROTECT the Identity of the HUMAN Being", and "to Preserve the ... NATURAL GENETIC Combination, that gives it its Freedom and Uniqueness, and to Prevent its Exploitation", as it stressed in the Official Texts of "the 1st and Only International Legal instrument" developed on BioEthics, on the occasion of the "Prohibition of Human Cloning", which has just Celebrated its 20th Anniversary (1998-2018) Last Week in Strasbourg.


20 Years Later, the Risks Threatening, precisely, those "Natural Genetics" of the "Human Beings", have obviously Increased at Worrying proportions (Comp. Supra), particulary when it comes to New "Gene Editing" Technologies emerging, by a "Coincidence", at the Same Moment that some Lobbies Push to Legalize Many Thousands or Millions of "Artificial Procreations" of Human Embryos, etc., even at the Orders of Homosexuals' Choices, (i.e. withOut any Vital Necessity)....


------------------------------


 => Despite this New, seriously Dangerous Context, it's Astonishing to observe, on the Contrary, the scandalously Superficial, Misleading, almost "Fake News" and Irresponsible way, with which a lot of Establishement's Medias at least misregarded or even abused of that Latest Polls on BioEthics, published by "IFOP" at the Beginning of January 2018, i.e. practically at the Eve of the Opening of crucial Public Debates on "Hot" BioEthical Issues (as IVF evenn for Lesbians, Surrogate Mothers etc, Euthanasia, Assistes Suicide, etc), due to be, almost Immediately, Followed by Political Decisions :


- Most of those French Médias, (including, f.ex., from "Liberation", "La-Croix" and other Left-leaning Establishment's Newspapers, to several "LGBTI" and/or Technocratic Lobbies' Groups, etc.), have just designed an overall Picture of almost ...Triomphal and UnHindered, quasi-Linear and Steadily Rising, Super-Winning Big Trend towards a Fast Growing, Massive Popular Support to Opening all Articificial Procreation Techniques ("PMA" in French) even to Lesbian Couples, added to "Surrogate Mothers", etc., not to mention Euthanasia and/or Assisted Suicide, etc...


- According to their overall Presentations, It's as if nothing else happened in this area during the Last Decades, but only a Constant Growth of so-called Popular "Majorities" wishing more and more to Legalize all Artificial Procreation Technologies, even for Lesbians, even withOut any Safeguard against the Obvious Risks of New "Gene Editing" Techniques (Comp. Supra)...


And, in their view, (i.e. as those Establishment's Medias -especially of the Left-present things), the Facts would have been Clearly and Unquestionably Established, in this regard, mainly by a Series of Polls asked to, and made by "IFOP", between 1990 and 12/2017.


-----------------------------------


>>> However, in fact, all these Claims depend from some Too  "Shaky" and UnCertain Bases, blatant MisRepresentations, UnTrustworthy Sources, full of various Contradictions, obvious Risks of Abuse, too open to possible Manipulations, and quite UnConvincing, so that they seem UnFit in order to definitively Judge on so Serious and Far-Reaching, Big BioEthical Issues, as those cited above.

 

fra_bionc_fake_polls..._1__footnotes_400 


Among Others :

----------------------

STRANGE "FUNDERS" : 

--------------------------


- The very Large Majority (6 out of 8 !) among the Funders, who Asked and Paid for those Polls by "IFOP", between 1990 - 12/2017, are from Big "Pharma" Lobbies, various "Leftist" outlets, (such as Globalist "Fashion", an NGO headed by Technocrats and Funded by "Socialist" Politicians, etc.), and even ..."LGBTI" Associations !


F.ex., the Biggest Funder, Buyer and User of those "IFOP" Polls is "ADFH" : an Association explicitly claiming to serve  the Interests of ..."Homosexual" couples ! (3 Times in a Row : on 10/2014, 8/2016 and 6/2017, i.e., practically, when the Program of the New President + Government of France had been Prepared).  It was Preceded by Globalist "Fashion", notoriously superficial Magazine "Elle", only for Women, (4/2004), and Followed by a "Pharma" outlet (on 9/2017), together with a Local  NGO Headed by a Gynecologist and a Genetician,  (recently dealing with "BioEThics"), which is Funded by a "Socialist" Municipality (12/2017)...


-- Only Two (2) (out of a Total of Eight : 8) Funders of "IFOP" Polls on BioEhics, seem to be something Else. (F.ex. 1990's Poll, for an UnSpecified Group, and a 2013 Poll, for Christian Magazine "Pelerin").


=> +By a "Coincidence", it's, precisely, Those 2 Polls (of 1990 + 2013) which are the ONLY ones to Find a Majority of People OPPOSED to attempts to legalize Artificial Procreation of Human Beings even for Lesbians !


- On the Contrary, ... ALL the Other 6 relevant IFOP's Polls, Funded by Leftists, Big "Pharma", and/or mainly "LGBTI" Lobbies, (Both Before and After those 2 Different Funders : Comp. Supra), Routinely Claim that a Popular Majority would have, Suddenly, Changed its Mind, and reportedly Started to Always Ask to ALLOW Massive Artificial Procreations of Human Beings at the order of Lesbian couples, etc.


>>> I.e. an Astonishing, almost 100% "Coincidence" (on Both Sides) between the obvious Interests served by Funders, and Polls' Results...
=> How could, Anyone, seriously Trust such Polls, mainly Paid by "Homosexuals"', Leftists and "Pharma" Lobbies, and Always Reflecting, in their "Results", the Interests of their Funders, (See blatant Facts cited Above), concerning so Critical "BioEthical" Issues, of Crucial Importance for all Humanity (Comp. Supra) ?


---------------------------
+ Controversial "Methods"...
-----------------------------------------


+ Moreover, even the Technical "Methodology" of Each one among those Polls by "IFOP" on BioEthics, looks rather Fishy, and, at least, Controversial :


- F.ex., the Only 2 Polls by "IFOP" on BioEthics which were made according to the Traditional, well-known and Tested Methods "BY PHONE", (i.e. with a Clear Choice of the Individuals who are Interviewed, under the Exlusive Responsibility of the Pollster), have resulted Either at THE STRONGEST MAJORITY of People OPPOSED to Artificial Procreations of Children, even for Lesbians : Up to 70% Against Only 24% (!), OR at just a Small, Tiny, almost INSIGNIFICANT Difference between those supposed too be "in Favour", and those who Refuse : Only 51 % versus 48 %, i.e. Near to the "Statistical Error"'s Margin : About 2%. (Polls of 1990 and 2004, respectively).


- On the Contrary, almost ALL Other such Polls, which were made with a Completely DIFFERENT and Controversial METHOD, that of "On-Line, AUTO-ADMINISTRATED (sic !) Questionaire", gave Radically OPPOSITE Results : With 1 Only Exception (that of 2013/"Pelerin" Christian Magazine : 53% Opposed), in their Quasi-TOTALITY, 6 out of 7 Such Polls, suddenly started to give, for the 1st Time, several UnUsually BIG  MAJORITIES for supposed Fans of Artificial Procreations of Human Beings, (f.ex.: 53%, 59%, 60%, 64%, and again 60%, on 10/2014, 8/2016, 6/2017, 9/2017 and -less- 12/2017, respectively)...


It is Well Known that this Different, "Auto-Administrated", "On-Line Questionaire" Method, is mainly used by some Because it's ... "CHEAPER", (Not Better) !


But it's also UnClear and Controversial, How Pollsters could "ATTRACT" a Sufficient Number of the Right Persons in order to be Interviewed in such a way : Some even speak of ...Commercial "PUBLICITY", Various Other ways to "MOTIVATE" them, and/or Paid AWARDS, etc !


 I.e., the Real Conditions, under which is operated the Choice of those whose Views are Counted, or not, in in such "Auto-Administrated" On-Line Questionaires, obviously appear much More UNCLEAR, UNCERTAIN, and/or Controversial, than what it's in the Traditional, Well-Tested Methods, as "By Phone" etc. under the Direct Responsibility of the Pollster. (F.ex., it's easy to imagine what Falsifications might result from a Poll Asked and Paid by a LGBTI, "Pharma" and/or "Socialist" Lobby, if it was conducted Only by such an "Auto-Administrated" Method, in Only 1 of 2 Days, When it's mainly the Fans of that Lobby who were Timely Informed about the Existence and the Importance of such an "On-LIne Questionaire", while its Adversaries and/or Various Other People with Different, Critical Beliefs, knew Nothing !)...

+ And it would be FALSE to eventually Claim that those "Auto-Administrative" Polls, might, perhaps, be more "MODERN", than those traditionaly made "By Phone", according to Well-Tested Methods, under the Direct Responsibility of the Pollster , (Comp. Supra), so that the First might have Succeeded, Recently, to the Latter, almost Everywhere.


Indeed, recent Facts reveal that even "IFOP" Continues to use Nowadays such Traditional "By Phone" Methods, also in its Newest Polls, (on various Other Issues), as, f.ex., even on January 2018 !  (i.e., for "Paris-Match" and "Sud Radio", on some "Political" matters)...      

Why, then, some, suddenly, Started to use Exclusively Contradictory, Uncertain Methods, Only for Topical BioEthical Issues (Comp. Supra) ?


-----------------------------    
"TRICKY" QUESTIONS ?
-----------------------------------     
             
* DOUBTS, inevitably, Grow, when observers Examine also the Precise Content of the Questions raised by those Controversial "IFOP"'s Polls on BioEthics :

- F.ex., Initially that Question concerned, Explicitly, all "Artificial Procreation Techniques", (currently "PMA" in French) i.e. Both In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF), and Artificial Insemination, etc.


=> Indeed, that was the case at that "IFOP"'s Poll which Scored ...THE BIGGEST "NO", with 70% of People OPPOSED ! (f.ex. on 1990).


- But, Later-on, "IFOP" started to raise Only a Question mentioning Simply "Artificial Insemination" for Lesbian couples, with Nothing Else...


=> Such a Move coincided with absolutely Different Results in its Polls : With only 1  Exception (of 2013), ...ALL Other such Polls gave various Majorities of "YES", more or less, (f.ex. on 2004, 2014, 2016, 6/2017, 9/2017, and -Less- on 12/2017).

>>> A Point is that "IVF", (which was Ommitted to be mentioned in those Controversial recent "IFOP"s Polls), is, notoriously, the Most Exposed to various Risks of eventual Abuse by "GENE EDITING" Recent Techniques, (as, f.ex., that of "CRISP-cas9", etc.: Comp. Supra).
In Consequence, that strange and unexplained Ommission to even mention it, in those "IFOP"s Polls, inevitably Affects their Credibility, with even More Question Marks...


--------------------------------


+ Moreover, Recent "IFOP"s Polls made also AnOther Strange OMMISSION : They curiously ERASED the Mention of "a DONOR EXTERNAL to the Couple" (or Taken "OUT of the Couple") :

- A Polls which had INCLUDED an Explicit Mention of that Fact, has Resulted in the Biggest Majority of "NO", with 70% of the People OPPOSED  to such "Artificial Procreation Techniques" against Only 24% "For", (1990). On the Contrary, Recent "IFOP"s Polls on similar BioEthical Issues EXCLUDE Any Mention of that, and (with 1 Exception) Result in various Majorities of "YES", (47% to 60% at the Latest : Comp. Supra).

>>> The Point is that, Among Various Other Factors, In Addition to the Core of Christian People, several Jewish, Most of the Right side of the Political Spectrum, Real "Greens", Real "Humanists", Real "Progressive", "Anti-Establishment" People, some Enlightened/Conscious "Intellectuals", etc., it's Also a Large part of MUSLIMS, who should, normally, be Opposed at least to those Artificial Techniques which threaten to Introduce +Third Individuals (i.e. Strangers) inside a Couple in case of Artificical Procreation, (f.ex. a "Sperm Donor" with Gametes External to the Family, a "Surrogate Mother" who Lends her own Body, etc). Some sources already spole about Eminent Islamologues' relevant "Opinions", and/or of a "Fatwa", etc. But, by Ommitting Any Mention of that Fact, "IFOP"s Recent Polls, obviously Hinder them to Realize what is really going on, on such delicate BioEthical Issues...

----------------------------



=> All that, Taken Together, when, according to some Polls (f.ex. by "OpinionWay" for a Disident NGO, on 2017), while a Large Number of People : 47% or 45%, Expect from the French Government to "Fight against UnEmployment" and "against Terrorism", on the Contrary, just a Tiny Minority of ... Only 2% is Interested on "Opening the Debate" on Artificial Procreation for Lesbians, (i.e., at the LAST Level, near the "Reform of Transport policies" !), naturally Diminishes the "Triomphal" Boasting of some Establishment's Medias on those Controversial "IFOP"'s Polls, (that Others have also Found to be Grossly Abused by some, almost to a level of "Fake News")...


------------------------------------



More could and should be Added, sooner or later, But, Already, at least One Conclusion clearly Results from All Facts and Logical Arguments that are Published here:


Too Many Legitimate Question-Marks are raised on those Misleading Claims about some recent Polls with which some Technocratic Lobbies obviously Seek to "Burry" any Real Democratic Debate, even Before it Starts in France, from the 18th of January 2018, in view of Final Political Decisions Later this Year...

(../..)

---------------
 
(NDLR : Graphic on CRISP-cas9 from "QUANTA" Magazine, specialized on Science/Technology news)
 
+ (In Part : Fast Translation from Original in French)
 
***


EuroStars-Eureka

Statistics

Visitors: 26758943

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

imag0634_400

People in Europe and the World expect from CoE to make a succes of its "Monitoring" for Human Rights and Democracy, despite difficulties, said Finland's President Tarja Halonen to "EuroFora" at a crucial moment for the mecanism built 15 years ago by the paneuropean organization which celebrates its 60th Anniversary in 2009.

Halonen, known as "Mother" of CoE's "Monitoring" mecanism, a long-time MEP and former Foreign Minister before becoming Finland's President, holds a long experience in the mattter, after also serving twice as CoE and EU Chairwoman in the past. That's why she is well placed to judge how CoE's "monitoring" should deal today with some crucial issues of importance both to CoE and to the EU.

The move came just a Month before a crucial, last visit to Turkey, scheduled for June, by the President of CoE''s "Monitoring" Committee, Ukranian MEP Serge Holovaty, to finalize his Report on Ankara, the CoE Member State with the longest Monitoring procedure. From its results depends its overall credibility.

This is a Test-case, because, in fact, it's in order to avoid Sanctions threatened against Turkey by a CoE's Assembly's April 1995 Resolution for grave Human Rights violations, Democracy gaps, the continuing Military Occupation in Cyprus, the unresolved Kurdish problem, Aegean differend with Greece, etc., that MEPs decided to create, for the 1st time on April 1996, a "Monitoring" proces, allegedly destinated to check, without excluding Countries who did not fulfill all CoE's standards.

In the Past, the obliged withdrawal of Greece's Military regime and of its "Civil" cover-up out of the CoE had helped bring back Democracy in 1974. But, on the contrary, since April 1996, the idea was to "monitor" Human Rights' respect while keeping most concerned Countries inside the CoE. After Turkey's oldest example, this was extended also to several former "Eastern" European Countries, even if CoE's Assembly has imposed to some of them (fex. Ukraine, Russia, etc., after Belarus, Serbia, etc) various "Sanctions", that Ankara always avoided. Curiously more succesful even than .. USA itself, (a CoE "Observer" since 1995), which has been at least threatened with sanctions some years ago..

EU-effects of CoE's Monitoring process became obvious between 2001-2008, since the "closure" of this procedure, when CoE felt that a Country had met most of its Human Rights, Democracy and Rule of Law obligations, (i.e. the "Copenhagen Criteria" for the EU), helped trigger Negotiations with the EU for "Accession" or other closer relations : This occured already before the 2004 and 2007 EU Enlargements to former "Eastern" European Countries, as well as for the commencement of "accession" negotiations with Croatia, and of "open-ended" negotiations with Turkey in 2005.

    But a stricking new development are Holovaty's recent findings that on core Human Rights issues as Torture and Freedom of Expression, Turkey, even "5 Years after" CoE closed its "Monitoring", back in 2004, inciting EU to start accession Negotiations in 2005, still presents grave problems.

    His findings are of crucial importance after a 2008 CoE Resolution called, "if need be", to "seriously consider the possibility of Re-Opening the Monitoring procedure for Turkey" : A move which might affect Ankara's controversial EU bid, since EU Accession Negotiations are based on the Hypothesis that the Candidate fullfils the "Copenhagen Criteria" (See above)..
-------------------------
    Holovaty expressed his will to check  "Matters still Outstanding" and  those that he "didn't have an opportunity to discuss" at an earlier visit this year, "in order to discuss the more complex issues in greater depth", at his forthcoming New Visit to Ankara, before the December 2009 EU Summit.  This is all based on the 2004 CoE Resolution which stresses that, CoE "will continue.. post-monitoring Dialogue with the Turkish authorities,...in addition to a 12-points list,..and on any Other Matter that might arise in connection with Turkey’s Obligations as a CoE member state".

    CoE's Resolution also asks  from Turkey "to secure the proper Implementation of Judgements, particularly in the Cyprus v. Turkey InterState case", of 2001, which concerns also the plight of many Hundreds of MISSING People. It adds Turkey's obligations to "execute" ECHR's Judgements in the Loizidou case,..and in particular adopt General Measures to avoid repetition or continuation of Violations found by the Court" to the detriment of Refugees.

    Nevertheless, Holovaty said to "EuroFora" that "MISSING" persons,"might be included" and cannot be excluded, but he has yet to examine the situation "to find out  which issues will be raised" to the Turkish Government.

    Therefore, "EuroFora" asked Halonen, as the Historic "Mother" of CoE's Monitoring mecanism, if she thought that, "whenever there are grave Human Rights Violations, as fex. "MISSING" persons, attested even by ECHR's judgements, they should be always checked by a Monitoring process. Or could they be forgotten ?"
    
     - "We (CoE) must be, at the same time, Fair, Realistic, but not in the mind that "now we have Forgotten", etc., replied to "EuroFora"'s question Halonen, speaking as a matter of general principle.

    - "When we think of those People that are suffering from the lack of Democracy, of Human Rights, and of the Rule of Law", "we should find a base on how to deal with the (Monitoring) system more rapidly"', she stressed.

    - "Sometimes it's very difficult to combine Transparency and Effectivenes together, particularly in this specific case", she went on to say. But, "I have not found a (CoE Member) Country who could be insensitive in this sens", Halonen answered concerning grave Human Rights violations attested by the ECHR.

    - "I have no ready-made answer. I have the expectations that you, in the CoE, will, step by step, find the different types of the monitoring systems."

    Also "because this is a part of the UN's Post-Conflict system, (fex. when it comes to Cyprus' MISSING persons), and it's a more Global system". So that, "If we make a succes in Europe, the others will follow", throughout the World.  "But they expect that we (Europe) are this opportunity, this Opportunity to make a Succes", Halonen concluded.

    In addition, she advised to extend CoE's Monitoring to all its 47 Member States, "because, as long as we hear that, all these monitoring systems are "OK for the neighbor, but not for me", "it's very difficult" to understand. Something which could make easier to Compare...

    Finnish MEP Jaako Laakso, former CoE Rapporteur on the Occupied Territories of Cyprus and one of the 5 Signatories of the Historic CoE's call to create the "MONITORING" mecanism since 1996, was more specific :  - "We (CoE Assembly) have to find a way for the issue of Cyprus' MISSING People to be better followed", he stressed, anouncing his intention to "speak to Mr. Holovaty" about that. "There might be also other ways", added Laakso.

    - The 2008 "Year had been a very Bad one for Turkey with regard to Human Rights in general, and Freedom of Expression in particular", denounced, meanwhile, Holovaty's preliminary Post-Monitoringh Draft Report by Holovaty, published by the CoE on April 2009.

    "Amnesty International believes that freedom of expression is not guaranteed given the various articles of the Criminal Code that restrict it. .. "For example, 1,300 Websites are said to have been closed down by the (Turkish) authorities in 2008" ! While "the new Turkish Criminal Code was used to bring a total of 1,072 proceedings between June 2005 and April 2008, and led to the conviction of 192 people", for expressing views. "Representatives of the Özgür Gündem newspaper, which specialises in Kurdish affairs, ..complained about Numerous Attacks on their Freedom of Expression ...as was everyone who advocated a settlement to the question by means other than the intervention of the army" "According to their figures, 19 Newspapers had been suspended 43 times between 4 August 2006 and 4 November 2008" !...

    Moreover, on 2008,  CoE's "Ministers adopted its 4rth Resolution on the execution of the judgments of the ECHR, ...and outstanding issues regarding 175 Judgements and decisions relating to Turkey delivered between 1996 and 2008...  concerning Deaths resulting from the excessive use of force by members of the Security forces, the failure to protect the right to life, the DIisappearance and/or death of individuals, Ill-Treatment and the Destruction of property". CoE's " Ministers urged the Turkish authorities ...to ensure that members of Security forces of all ranks can be prosecuted without administrative
authorisation" for "serious crimes". Holovaty reminded.

"Nonetheless", Holovaty heard anew of "Several cases of Violence committed last year (2008) by the (Turkish) security forces". Amnesty International speaks of Many Cases of ill-treatment and Torture in the prisons and by the police". "Including, fex."'the death of Engin Ceber, a young man of 29 who died on October 2008 as a result of the TORTURE allegedly inflicted on him by police officers, prison staff and members of the gendarmerie. He was part of a group of people arrested on September 2008 during a demonstration and Press Conference in Istanbul'. Proceedings against suspects are "on-going" in this case.

- " I therefore noted an Obvious Contradiction between the Government’s stated “zero tolerance” policy.... of Torture and other forms of ill-treatment, and the different testimonies given", denounced CoE's Rapporteur.  Turkish "authorities must make considerable efforts to guarantee that proper investigations are carried out into allegations of abuses by members of the security forces and that perpetrators are effectively punished" "In this respect, I have requested detailed Statistics on the number of Investigations, acquittals and convictions in cases involving allegations of abuse in order to show the positive impact of the measures taken to date", Holovaty said, repeating a permanently unsatisfied CoE's demand to Turkey since a Decade...

    - "The Political Crisis that shook the country in the spring of 2008 highlighted the Weaknesses of the (Turkish) Constitution", which comes from the Military regime of 1982, "and the Urgent Need of Reforms", stressed from the outset CoE's Rapporteur in 2009. In particular, "the ...Democratic functioning of state institutions, including the independence of the judicial system, are crucial", he observes.

    But, "the Electoral  system and the ways in which it is circumvented do not appear to give those elected complete Legitimacy, and tend to pervert the course of direct universal suffrage", denounces Holovaty, observing that, even 5 Years later, Turkey did not yet change the 10% nationwide Threshold for a party to take any seat, which is "far higher" than the "3%" maximum in Europe and already condemned as contrary to European Standards by the CoE.

    + Moreover, EU Parliament's 2009 Report on Turkey, drafted by Dutch MEP Ria Oomen-Ruijten and adopted in Strasbourg on March, expresses "Concern over the Failure of the (Turkish) Judiciary to prosecute cases of Torture and Ill-treatment, the Number of which is Growing". EU also "is concerned about continuing Hostility and Violence against Minorities" in Turkey. It also "calls on the Turkish Government to launch, as a matter of Priority, a Political Initiatve favouring a lasting Settlement of the Kurdish issue, (while "condemning violence.. and terrorist groups"). EU "regrets that No progress has been made on establishing full, systematic Civilian suprevisory functions over the (Turkish) Military".

    The final results of Holovaty's 2nd and last visit to Turkley will be known later this year, and, at any case, before EU's December 2009 Summit.

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

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.