english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow Sources: Anti-Corruption Inquiry on CoE Parliamentary Assembly may extend to Other Areas/Bodies

Sources: Anti-Corruption Inquiry on CoE Parliamentary Assembly may extend to Other Areas/Bodies

Written by ACM
Friday, 20 April 2018
coes_corridors_eurofora_400


*Strasbourg/CoE/Angelo Marcopolo/- An Independent Experts' Inquiry on Corruption, exceptionally set up top check Allegations of wrongdoing in CoE's Parliamentary Assembly (PACE), might Extend its Findings and/or Conclusions also to various Other Areas of the 47 Member Countries-wide PanEuropean Organisation, as it results from Converging Sources which spoke to "Eurofora", before a Final Report might soon become Public.


Indeed, a very well informed Source, concerning that Independent External Committee, has Revealed to "Eurofora", already since the Beginning of 2018, that its Investigations had Found that, in fact, Corruption-related Problems go Deeper and would be much More Widely Spread than initially thought, Extending also in several Other among CoE's many Activities and/or Bodies, withOut being Limited Only to certain MEPs.


The initial Time-limit of that Exceptional Independent Investigation, Decided on April 2017 and Set up since June that same year, had been Scheduled for the End of 2017, but, later-on, its Mandate was Prolonged further, also into 2018, resulting nowadays in a Confidential Report that will be Discussed by PACE's Bureau on the forthcoming Sunday, which will Decide on any concrete Measures that might be necessary to be taken.


=> During the regular Press-Briefing of Strasbourg's permanent European Journalists, this Friday Morning, (April 19, 2018), "Eurofora" asked PACE's experienced Secretary General, Wojciech Sawicki, from Poland, whether, in Theory, as a matter of General Principle, it might be Possible for that Special Independent Committee to eventually Conclude that Anti-Corruption Measures should also Extend to several Other CoE's areas of activities, bodies and/or staff, (f.ex. Inter-Governemental or Independent, Secretariat, Ad Hoc Experts, Local/Regional Authorities' representatives, INGOS, etc).


- Given the Fact that both the Activities of that Independent Anti-Corruption Committee, as well as its Draft Report, are, at least until Sunday Evening, strictly Confidential, Sawicki naturally Replied that he canNot Say Anything Now about the Actual Content of that Report.


- But, from a purely "Theoretical" point of view, "Nothing is Impossible", he Carefully added to the amove-mentioned "Eurofora"s Question. The Members of that "Group of Investigation on Allegations of Corruption" (known as "GIAC") are the former President of ECHR, Sir Nicolas Bratza, from the UK, Top Judge Jean-Luis Bruguiere, formerly in charge of Anti-Terrorist Investigations in France during a Long Time, and Anti-Terrorist Expert for International Organisations, as well as for Other States, and Elisabet Fura, former ECHR's Swedish Euro-Judge and f. Parliamentary Head Ombudsperson in Sweden.


Whatever might, eventually, be the Outcome of GIAC's Report, it obviously seems almost certain that it will be Discussed, in one way or another, during PACE's Plenary Session for Spring 2018, Next Week in Strasbourg (from Monday to Friday, included, April 23-27, 2018).
Already, a "Side Event" on the "Follow-up of the Inquiry on Allegations of Corruption inside the Parliamentary Asszembly", is Organized by MEPs Franck Schwabe from Germany, and Pieter Omtzigt from the Netherlands, (a Socialist and a ChristianDemocrat/EPP, respectively), for Monday Afternoon.


Curiously, it was Scheduled at Exactly the Same Day, and even Hours and Minutes, with anOther "Side Event", on "the Turkish (Military) Invasion of (Syria's Kurdish Canton of) Afrin : an Urgent Humanitarian Crisis", organized by MEPs Tiny Cox and Nikolaj Villumsen, respectively from the Netherlands and Denmark, both from the "EuroLeft" Group, of which the First is its Long-Time President.


Thirty (30) various such "Side Events" are currently Scheduled during 4 Days, between Monday and Thursday (included), as usual, at Different Times, (on Various Hours in the Mornings, Noons, or Early Afternoons, even at the Evening).

 

(../..)


-----------------------------------------
Enterprises' Competitiveness for 2014-2020

Statistics

Visitors: 28903981

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

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