english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Haupt arrow newsitems arrow CoE: Life-long Genetic AppartHeid accepted + incited by Report drafted in Strange Context ?!

CoE: Life-long Genetic AppartHeid accepted + incited by Report drafted in Strange Context ?!

Geschrieben von ACM
Wednesday, 11 October 2017
bionc_novels_hgwells__zamiatin_huxley_orwels_eurofora_400


*Strasbourg/CoE/Angelo Marcopolo/- A very "Tricky" CoE Report, Debated and Voted Tomorrow, on the "Hottest" BioEthical Issue: that of "new  Genetic Technologies" that could be "used" (sic!) "in Human Beings", with notorious Risks for all Humankind in case of possible Abuse, despite some False,  superficial Appearances, contains, in fact, so Many and Big "Loopholes", even  indirect but real Attempts to ...Impose them, that, instead of "Protecting" Humanity, as it claims, on the contrary, it thrreatens to slyly Doom it !


The Time Deadline for Tabling written Amendments Ending Today (Wednesday) Afternoon, in a few Hours (17h), this Note is obliged to be Short, (and should be UpDated Later-on) :


- In fact, that Draft Asks Only to "Ban a Pregnancy with GermLine Cells (transmissible to Next Generations), or Human Embryos having undergone Intentional Genome Editing", as it says.


=> But, it curiously leaves Open any Other Genetic Manipulation, even if it might have ...Life-long Effects !


+ Moreover, Even if it might be Transmissible to Next Generations, such a Genetic Manipulation is Accepted, if Critics canNot Prouve that it is "Intentional"...


++ Going even Further, its Author Repeatedly Claims, vaguely, that "Recent Technologies ... related to Human Genome" would have big "Potential Benefits" (sic !).


However, it's also a Fact that, even More than 8 Years Later, towards the End (October) of 2017, despite many Millions $ spend, there is Not yet Any Major Medical Breakthrough to mark since the Early (March) 2009 Decision of Obama to Lift the Prohibition of Federal Funding for Projects using Genetic Manipulation of Human Embryos, (that former US President GWBUsh had OutLawed Shortly before 9/11, in the Middle of August 2001).


+Going even Beyond that, it also Asks a CoE's  "Recommendation", and/or "Legal Framework", explicitly Authorizing (i.e., in brief : Imposing) such "New Genetic Technologies"...


For the rest, that Controversial Draft speaks also about some undetermined "Public Debates", etc., before Final Decisions, (which seem to arrive Soon, given that "New [Genetic] Technologies are Developing very Rapidly", as it warns.

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

pace_vicepresident_valeriu_ghiletchi__agg_eurofora_400


PACE's vice-President, Experienced mainstream MEP Valeriu Ghiletchi told us that the overall line due to be followed Tomorrow by 5 critical Amendments due to be tabled asap, would be, mainly, to "Defend the (CoE's 1998) Oviedo Treaty" on BioEthics.


But, when it had been Drafted, back on 1997 at the CoE in Strasbourg, "Eurofora'"s co-Founder remembers well that the 2 German Experts participating in that huge Collective endeavour, had, astonishingly, Left that Meeting Shouting, and run to Alert the Journalists working in the CoE that the adopted Text for that particular version of the BioEthical Convention had Big Loopholes on Dangerous Issues, (f.ex. Human Embryo,  well Informed Acceptance, etc.) and should be Rejected. That's why Germany,, and some Other Countries had Refused to sign then...


As for the MEP who Drafted that Nowadays Report,  Petra de Sutter, a Socialist from Belgium, she has become Notorious for provoking, Earlier, a Strong Popular and MEPs' Protest against a Previous Report she had Drafted, also alone, on anOther BioEthical Issue (including "Gender", etc), resulting in a Referal Back to Committee and afterwards in Strong Amendments.


But, this Time, such an even much More Important BioEthical Issue was, apparently, treated rather Superficially, behind Closed Doors of an obscure Social and Health Committee Meeting, back on April 2017...


... I.e., by another "Coincidence", almost Precisely at the very Moment that an UnPrecedented Harassment started against the then President of CoE's Assembly, ChristianDemocrat/EPP MEP Pedro Agramunt, under various Other Pretexts, in order to make him ...Resign, exactly when that Controversial Report is now going to be Debated and Voted by that Assembly : October 2017 !


+In Addition, at the Same Time, his Group: that of ChristianDemocrats/EPP, traditionaly Interested in BioEthical Issues, was, suddenly ... Divided by 2 Different Candidates for Agramunt's Succession, inevitably Weakening and/or Diverting the Attention of that Group Elsewhere, at the most Crucial moment...

 

Meanwhile, the only Public Debate and Vote on such a "Hot" and Controversial Issue of great and Topical Importance for all Humankind, was Scheduled on PACE's Agenda just After several among the Most Important Reports of this Autumn 2017 Session, such as : on ISIS' Crimes against Humanity, an Exceptional Top Level Meeting between CoE's Committee of Ministers and MEPs on Russia, the recent and still on-going Developments on Catalonia's attempts for Secessionism, Ukraine, etc. : I.e. after many obvious Mediatic HeavyWeights... Moreover, on the Top of all this, was even Added, immediatly afterwards, also  Debate against so-called "Discriminations" of ..."Trans-Gender" individuals, (which currently Rocks amidst the Anti-Trump Establishment from Calif ornia up to Wash.DC) !

So that, for any Journalist, eventually ambitioning to at least Follow, and if possible Cover seriously for the Press, all those Topical Debates and Votes scheduled for Today up to 8 o'clock p.m. at the Evening, almost at the Same Time as the above-mentioned Crucial BioEthical Issue for all Humankind, (Comp. Supra), he should, apparently, have already become a ... "Mutant", (or, Otherwise, he would be obviously Hindered, in real Practice)...

 


(../..)


Enterprise Europe Network

Statistics

Besucher: 28929772

Archive

Login Form





Daten merken

Passwort vergessen?
Noch keinen Account? Account anlegen

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 ?

Resultate

SMF Recent Topics SA

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