english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow EUParliament vicePresident Charanzova to EF on Digital Act+Press Freedom/Classic Vaccine: "Not Easy"

EUParliament vicePresident Charanzova to EF on Digital Act+Press Freedom/Classic Vaccine: "Not Easy"

Written by ACM
Tuesday, 14 December 2021

 ep_hybrid_press_conf__euparliaments_vicepresident_to_agg__ebs__eurofora_400


*Strasbourg/Angelo Marcopolo/- The "Hot" Topical Issue of EU's Digital Act against DisInformation, and respect of ECHR's well Established case-law on Democratic Freedom of Expression, particularly when it comes to Delicate Issues, such as, f.ex., Press Liberty, and EU's Strange Insistance to still Delay any Authorisation of Not even 1 "Classic" Technology Vaccine, (of the kind invented by Louis Pasteur and Tested during 2 Centuries), against the Deadly Virus, Despite the existence of Many, including 3 already Officialy Recognized by the WHO, "is Not Easy !", acknowledged EU Parliament's vice-President, and Shadow Rapporteur, Czech MEP Dita Charanzova, in Reply to an "Eurofora" Question at an Hybrid Press-Conference Today, together with the President of mainstream "ReNew" (Liberal) Group of MEPs, Stefan Sejourné from France.

    With more than 255 Amendments Tabled in Plenary, (All of them in "RCV"), just for the "Market" Part, followed by about ...3.200 Amendments in Committee, for the "Services" Part, more Crucial for EU Citizens' and/or Press Medias' Liberty, (Now Voted in Committee, and due to be Voted in Plenary on January 2022), the overall EU "Digital Act", (Drafted, respectively, by German MEP Andreas Schwab, a Christian-Democrat from nearby Baden-Wurttemberg, [Comp. Schwab's past Statements to "Eurofora", f.ex. at http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/schaublemnacehollandecontretraiteeurzone.html, http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/eucommissionermimicaondigitalnetworksandconsumerstravelapp.html, etc], and Danish SocialDemocrat MEP Christel Schaldemose), is a Huge "Submarine", whose Votes extend from Tuesday to Wednesday, 14-15 December 2021, up to 18-19 January 2022 included, i.e. Starting Negotiations with EU Council's Member States' Governments during the incoming French EU Presidency, (January - June 2022).

 including a lot of possible Variants, particularly on so-called "GateKeepers", and/or "Compliance Officers", etc., around various eventual "Complains", concerning Member States, EU Commission, etc., often complicated... But its Supporters' basic Claim is that People feeling that they might have, eventualy, be Unfairly Treated, particularly by Content Suppression and/or Internet Accounts' Freezing, etc., would, at least, have "a Complain" Mecanism at their disposal, (but mostly Avoiding to go into Concrete Details now at this Delicate Issue : See also Infra).

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

ep_hybrid_press_conf__euparliament__agg__ebs__eurofora_400 

    - "Eurofora"'s Question, pointing at the Fact that "ReNew"'s President Sejourné had Spoken Both of the forthcoming EU Brussels' Summit of Heads of State/Government, particularly on "Vaccines", (also Discussed in EU Parliament on Wednesday), AND of that "Digital Act", raised a Couple of Topical Issues of Crucial Importance for EU Citizens :

⦁        (A) Whether, in order to Alleviate a Current Mistrust vis a vis the only Available 4 Vaccines inside the EU, (All Based on Novel Tools, such as "mRNA", "Virus vector", etc), it might be Helpful to Facilitate Vaccinations also by Authorizing for EU Citizens at least 1 new Vaccine based on the "Classical" Technology Invented by World-Famous European Louis Pasteur (former French Professor at Strasbourg University), well Tested and widely Used in massive Practice during around 2 Centuries now :

⦁    By a Timely Coincidence, the WHO has Just Authorized also a 3rd such "Classical" Vaccine against the COVID Virus, on November 2021, added to 2 Others, which had Already been Authorized many Months Earlier, (i.e. 2 from China, and 1 from India = 3), which had, apparently, some Positive Effects, and Started to Circulate throughout All Continents of the World, (probably Followed by Other 2 from Cuba soon, etc).

china_12.2021_infections__deaths_who__eurofora_400_02

 india__infections_after_classic_vaccine_who__eurofora_400

who_map__cuba_after_abdala_soverena_vaccines_classic_type_who__eurofora_400

myanmar_meets_who_criteria_against_virus...._who__eurofora_400_01

+ Moreover, it's Also a Fact that the Absolute Majority of 180 Vaccines which have Reached a crucial "Phase 3" Trial until recently, were, precisely, Based on a Similar "Classical" Technology, (wich does Not Affect the Human Genome : See http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/majorityvaccinesclassicbutnotyeteu.html)...

⦁    However, Curiously, EU's EMA Still Persists to Abstain from Authorizing Not Even One among all those "Classical" Technology Vaccines, thereby Insisting into practicaly Submitting all EU Citizens only to a Few Controversial Novel Tech. Vaccines, (which all Affect the Human Genome, either through the "mRNA" or the "Virus Vector" New and Controversial Tools, which have Notoriously Started recently to Show their Limits and/or Open Question Marks : See Facts, inter alia, also, f.ex., at : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/fewfakevaccinesfascismcrashes.html + http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/germanpeoplevoteotherright.html + http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/pfizerfakevaccineboomsvirusinaustralia.html, etc). And this, Despite also the fact that those Few (4) Authorized Fake-"Vaccines" notoriously proved Unable to face New "Variants" of the Virus, unless they are Modified and/or Repeated, again and again, during the Forthcoming Months, f.ex. via a 3rd or Even 4rth "Dose", in Addition to a "Booster", etc., each 3 Months, (something Unheard of in the whole History of True Vaccines !), and Nonobstant "Variants", as that of "Delta", or particularly the Latest "Omicron", which apparenly risk to make those few Controversial "Vaccines" almost Inoperant, by seriously Altering the 1 Protein of the "Spike" of the Virus, notoriously Targeted by those "mRNA" Novel Tools, (while, on the Contrary, the "Classic" Vaccines aim at a much Wider OverView of the whole Virus, reportedly being Able to Spot it Also in Various Other Ways).

    + (B) On this Occasion, We Also asked which were "the Essentials" in those "Complain" Mecanisms, thanks to which, EU Citizens eventualy Feeling that they might have been Treated "UnFairly", (f.ex. by excessive Censorship, etc), could, reportedly, Ask an efficent Redress, according to the well Established Case-Law of the PanEuropean, CoE's Human Rights' Court, in Strasbourg, and/or EU's Act on Rights, monitored by EU's Court of Justice at nearby Luxembourg, particularly as Journalists' Freedom is concerned in "delicate" cases.

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

ep_hybrid_press_conf__renew_group_president_to_agg_00_ebs__eurofora_400 

    - Mainstream "ReNew" (Liberals) Group of MEPs' President, Stephane Séjourné, immediately Replied that he took "Eurofora"'s Question as raising an Issue about "Vaccines and Press Freedom", as he Resumed the overall move, (also excusing himself for having mainly missed its first part, particularly after a rapid switch-over from an Initialy English to a finaly French presentation of the above-mentioned points), and urged EU Parliament's vice-President Dita Charanzova to react on that entire matter, (Kindly Adding that he would be "Glad" to, eventualy, Personaly Reply Also to the Part that he had Missed, if we Noted it at the Video-Chat linked to that Hybrid Press Conference).

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

 ep_hybrid_press_conf__euparliaments_vicepresident_to_agg_ebs__eurofora_400

    => Vice-President Charanzova, (who participated, just a few Minutes Later, Also to a Specific Press Conference dedicated on EU's Draft "Digital Services Act" : Comp. Supra), agreed with "Eurofora" that : - Indeed, "the Biggest Discussion we (EU Parliament) had around that topic, was how to Find the Right Balance between the Freedom of Expression, between the Freedom that we have now at the Internet, and the spread of DisInformation and Fake News on line".

     - "It's Not an Easy Task !", she acknowledged...

    -  "But (EU) Parliament went Further than the (EU) Council, because We (MEPs) Wanted the (Web) Platforms to take a much More Responsible stance !".

    => "So, they (Web Platforms) will have to go through the Risk Assessment : To see What is actually happening in their Websites. How it Influences the Society as such. How Far they (Internet Users/EU Citizens) have gone, and What they have actually done".

    - For that purpose, "there is a Lot in our hands, and there will be Legal Pressure on them (Web Platforms) to do so", she Warned.

    >>> "And I will be Happy to see - Because, I think, one of the Topics was on Vaccination politics (Comp. f.ex. also "Eurofora"'s Question's 1st Part, above) - that Fakes and DisInformation on Vaccination Stops on line : It's one Example of what will Happen, If this New Legislation (Digital Services Act) is adopted", Charanzova vowed.

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

     Surprizingly, however, "Eurofora"'s above-mentioned Question did Not receive a real Answer, now in Strasbourg, Neither on whether the Authorisation, by the EU, of a "Classical" Technology Vaccine (among the 3 Already Authorized by the WHO, which do Not Affect the Human Genome, etc) might Facilitate Vacinations of still Hesitating EU Citizens, Nor on What are the Essentials of that "Complain" Mechanism in the Draft Digital Services Act which would Respect ECHR's case-Law on Press Freedom of expression, avoiding Eventual Abuse of Censorship by some uncontrolable, Big private Web Platforms, (Comp. Supra)...

-----------

ep_hybrid_press_conf__agg_quest_to_renew_pres_sejour_repeated_at_his_demanc_ep__eurofora_400 

ep_hybrid_press_conf__digital_act_agg__text_part_avant_ebs__eurofora_400 

    + Indeed, Not Even a Written Reminder of that 1st Part of Our original Question, Added also through that "Hybrid" Press-Cnference's "Chat", (as "ReNew" Group President Séjourné had Proposed : Comp. Supra,and Attached Herewith), did Not Receive any Answer Today, Despite also the Fact that this is a Topical Issue, and integral part of the Forefront in the forthcoming EU Summit's official Agenda for Heads of State/Governments in Brussels, just a couple of Days Later-on (16 Dec. 2021) !

    => How could, then, in Consequence, EU Citizens Believe such Blatant "Fake News" and "DisInformation", as some (Other) Establishment's Politicians served them, through Big Medias, by Claiming, Recently, that, on the Contrary, EU Countries would "Give a Free Choice" to the People about "What kind of Vaccines" they Prefer (i.e. Including Between "Classic" Technology, Already Tested during 2 Centuries since Louis Pasteur, which do Not Affect the Human Genome and do Not have too Many Risks to provoke UnKnown yet, seriously Negative "Side Effects" some Years Later,  or, on the Contrary, some "Novel Tools", as "mRNA" and/or "Virus Vector", which notoriously May Affect the Human Genome, and/or, Perhaps Reveal some Never Seen Before "Side Effects" during the Next few Years) ?

    >>> Let's leave the Answer to that Question to current and future Readers, on such a Topical and Crucial Issue for Human Health and even Life, as well as Democratic Press Freedom, particularly in Europe Nowadays (for the 2nd Time at the EpiCenter of a Deadly Pandemic), which Obviously Deserved a Serious, Urgent, Science-Based and Crystal-clear Public Debate by All involved, instead of Risking to be Swept Under the Carpet...

 

(../..)

 

("Draft-News")

 

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

 

 

EUHorizonSMEtool

Statistics

Visitors: 56527697

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

 sarko_merkel_mieux

The official presentation of a "Program" respecting People's choices voted in the June 7, 2009 EU Elections, to be debated in EU Council and EU Parliament during its 1st Session on July in Strasbourg, is the No 1 Priority, according to Democratic principles, for the Franco-German axis, said the main winners at the ballot box, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angie Merkel.

They stressed  that the New EU Commission's President must have a "Program" in favor of an EU which "protects" its Citizens, regulates financial markets and aims at a "Political" Europe" : a wording they have used as incompatible with Turkey's controversial EU bid.

They also declared ready for a "political" endorsment of "Mr. Barroso's candidacy" in June's EU Council, considering that an official decision would have to be made after EU Parliament's debates and votes, possibly from next month (July), with the legally necessary final acceptance shortly after Lisbon Treaty's entry into force, hoped for September or October.


- "A Program, and Mr. Barroso" : This resumes, in substance, the anouncements made by Sarkozy and Merkel, on the question of current EU Commission's President, Barroso's declared wish to succeed to himself for a second mandate, to be extended during the following 5 years.

 In their 1st meeting after EU Elections, they observed that "the Franco-German axis counted in European Elections' campaign... But, we both keep a realistic view : We saw the number of those who abstained, and we must absolutely give them an answer. We also see the disilusionment of an important number of Europeans vis a vis Europe, and we are aware of the responsibilities we have".

sarko

 - The "Duty" of the new EU Commission's President, after June 7, 2009 EU Elections' result, "is to act for a Europe which protects the Europeans, to commit himself into working for a better Regulation of Financial transactions, ... and to have a Political will for Europe", underlined Sarkozy.

Therefore, "we have asked M. Barroso... to clarify, to officialy present the intentions he has", he anounced.

- "We want to speak also about the Programme", explained Merkel.

- "It's important that for the next EU Parliament's mandate (2009-2014) we take the right Decisions for Europe.  Obviously on Persons, but mainly Decisions on Issues", she stressed.

- "It's not simply a question of a Person, it's also a question of a Programme". We are "really asking Mr. Barroso to commit himself on a Program, and on Principles, on Values", Sarkozy added.

EU President-in-office, Czech Prime Minister Jan Fischer, accepted the Franco-German stance :

- "Barroso must present his Programme. The Czech Presidency agrees with that", Fischer reportedly said later, after meeting Sarkozy.

But Press reports from Brussels claimed that Barroso had preferred to be officially appointed by EU Council since June, (i.e. next week), "because this was implied by the current Treaty of Nice, according to him", and considered any delay until the possible ratification of the new, Lisbon Treaty on September/October, as "undemocratic".

- "At any case, independently of what Germany and France ask, it's also EU Parliament's wish". "We shall propose Mr Barroso's candidacy... But even in the framework of Nice Treaty, EU Parliament has to be associated in this Decision", the French President observed.

If this is correctly done, then "we support Mr. Barroso's candidature", and "if the (EU) Parliament agrees, we might ratify this decision since July", (i.e. next month), they both said.

smerkem_400

- "France and Germany support Baroso's candidacy, But we want to speak also on the Program. We believe that this Program should be established in close cooperation with EU Parliament, and that's why we have followed an appropriate way", said Merkel.  - If EU Parliament wants, this election can take place on July,  but this must be done in full agreement.

- "We shall support Mr. Barroso's candidacy, without doubt", said Sarkozy. "But we have asked from Mr. Barroso, as I told him yesterday, to put into detail.. his intentions, at the eve of his 2nd mandate, if the situation avails itself.


    France and Germany "don't want to take an Official Legal Decision by writting" during "the next (EU) Council" (on June 18-19), declared Sarkozy.  Because they prefer, at this stage, only "a Political decision" on June, "so that we (EU Council) can work together with EU Parliament", which starts to meet only Next Month, since July in Srasbourg, "leaving a Legal decision by writting for later".

    - "If the Conditions are fuillfiled in EU Parliament, we (EU Council) are ready to give the agreement and make it offficial", said Merkel

    - "But, now we are working in the base of Nice Treaty. If tommorow we want to work in the spirit of Lisbon Treaty, we have to find a proper way", she added.

    - "Of course it's Legally complicated, because we are going to make a Political proposal to the forthcoming Council, for an EU Commission's President, on the basis of Nice Treaty : So, we (EU Council) will not appoint the Commissioners. Only the President.  If EU Parliament agrees, it could endorse this position on July", explained Sarkozy.

    But, on Autumn, "if Ireland ratifies Lisbon Treaty, there will be, at any case, a 2nd Decision, to appoint the Commission's President, this time on the basis of Lisbon treaty, and then, we, the EU Member States, would have to appoint (also) the EU Commissioners", he added.

    As for the precise Timing :  - "Everything is suspended until the Irish vote... Now, we must all make everything possible to help Ireland to say "Yes"" to Lisbon Treaty... The Irish Referendum, ..will take place either on September or on October. It's a Question which depends on the Irish. And,  then, we shall have the Choice of the Candidates for the permanent Institutions of Europe".

    However, "if Ireland says No, we, French and Germans, have to assume our responsibilities, and we'll do so", he concluded.

    But British and Swedish governments were reportedly eager to have a final EU Council decision on Barroso since this month, on June's European Council. While the other EU Member Countries are divided, several of them preferring to wait until EU Parliament pronounces itself, on July, and/or until Lisbon Treaty might be ratified by Ireland at the beginning of the Autumn. Barroso's current mandate ends on November.

    There are also various, contradictory and/or unpredictable reactions inside EU Parliament vis a vis Barroso's wish to continue a 2nd mandate, because many MEPs are openly or secretly opposed, reluctant, or hesitating.

    In the biggest EU Countries, as France and Germany, EU Citizens voted on June 2009 EU Elections for a renovated, non-technocratic but Political Europe which cares for its Citizens, with an Identity, Values and Borders, declared incompatible with Turkey's controversial EU bid, by mainstream, pro-European Governing Parties. Similar choices were also supported in several other small or medium EU Countries.

    On the contrary, whenever, in other Countries, Governing and other mainstream Parties didn't make these choices or eluded them, EU Citizens massively voted for euro-Sceptics whenever they were the only ones to to promise anti-bureacratic change and oppose Turkey's demand to enter into the EU, (f.ex. in the UK, Netherlands, etc).

    It's seems to be an Open Question whether Sarkozy and Merkel's conditions will be really accepted by Barroso, who was appointed on 2004 in a different political context, (with Socialist Prime Ministers in Germany, France, etc), had rejected in the Past the idea of EU becoming "equal to the USA" as "ridiculous", and pushed for Turkey's contoversial EU bid, trying to "soften" or contain the changes desired by the People who voted for Merkel and Sarkozy with another policy vis a vis Turkey on 2005 in Germany and on 2007 in France, as they did all over Europe on 2009.

    In addition to many EPP Governments, it's 3 remaining Socialist Prime Ministers : Gordon Brown in the UK, Zapatero in Spain, and Socrates in Prortugal, who support Barroso, as well as Liberal Swedish Prime Minister Reinfeldt. But their Parties lost the June 2009 EU Elections.

    Questioned whether there was still "Time" for "other" possible "Candidates", Sarkozy and Merkel did not deny, nor made any comment on that, but simply said that "it's not for us to make publicity for any candidates. We anounced our choice ("A Program, and Mr. Barroso"). But we respect any other candidate".

    Among various other names cited are former Belgian Prime Minister Verhofstadt, former UNO's Human Rights Commissioner Mary Robinson of Ireland, Italian former EU Commission's vice-President Monti, etc. Meanwhile, Luxembourg's PM Juncker, (who had been unanimously accepted by EU Council for EU Commission's Presidency on 2004, but refused), announced his intention to resign from "EuroGroup"'s Chair. Thus, he might be available for another Top EU job.

    As "EuroFora"'s "opinion" said (See publication dated 9/6/09) : - "If the current candidates (i.e. Barroso, etc) to the Top EU jobs promise and guarantee to respect People's democratic choices, then, it's OK".

"Otherwise, Europe must find new candidates, really motivated and able to implement these democratic choices of the People."

    Because, "in Democracy, the forthcoming choices for EU's Top Jobs,...should be made according to EU Citizens' Votes in June 7, 2009 European Elections, and main EU Governments' strategic policies".
        

***

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.