newsitems
EU Summit boosts European Maritime Security also on Oil/Gas+Slams Turkish threats v. Cyprus+Greece
EU Summit boosts European Maritime Security also on Oil/Gas+Slams Turkish threats v. Cyprus+Greece

*Brussels/EU Summit/Angelo Marcopolo/- For the 1st time in a joint move, the Summit of 28 EU Heads of State/Governments, officially adopted a new Definition of EU's Security/Defence Policy, which includes European Sea areas and Energy resources (such as Off-Shore Oil/Gas, etc), while also clearly Warning 3rd Countries as Turkey to "avoid any Threats" against "EU Member States" (as Cyprus, Greece, etc) who exerce their "Sovereign Rights" to "Explore and Exploit their natural resources in accordance with the EU acquis and ...the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea".

At the latest in a series of various Harassing attempts, Ankara provocatively sent recently its Ship "Barbarossa" to violate and threaten Cyprus' Exclusive Economic Zone's block No 3, close to Israel, the same days that Cyprus' President Nicos Anastassiades was making his 1st official visit to neighbouring Egypt to meet its Prime Minister Hazem El-Bablawi for the signature of a Framework Agreement on Joint Development of Oil/Gas Resources existing in both sides of the two neighbouring Countries' respective EEZ middle-lines, as well as on Air Transports, etc. according to Official sources.

---------------------
But, on the contrary, December 2013 EU Council's final Conclusions strongly "Stress the Need to Respect the Sovereignity of (EU) Member States over their Territorial Sea", in a crystal-clear Message explicitly addressed to Turkey by the 28's Decisions on EU Enlargement and Good Neighborhood Policies, officially endorsed by the EU Summit of Heads of State/Government, at the same time with the most recent Developments on EU's common Security and Defence policy.
---------------------------------------
=> In consequence, "in this Context", the European "Union expresses ....Serious Concern, and urges Turkey to Avoid any kind of Threat or action directed against a(n EU) Member State, or source of Friction or actions, which could Damage good neighbourly relations and the Peaceful settlement of Disputes".
- "Turkey Needs to Commit itself UnEquivocally to good Neighbourly relations and to the Peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the U.N. Charter, having recourse, if necessary, to the International Court of Justice", Denounced anew the 28 EU Heads of State/Government, Endorsing the draft Decisions prepared by their Foreign Ministers just a few Days earlier here.
+ "Moreover, the EU stresses again all the Sovereign Rights of EU Member States which include, inter alia, entering into bilateral agreements, and to explore and exploit their natural resources in accordance with the EU acquis and international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and also ...the need to respect the sovereignty of Member States over their territorial sea". ----------------------------------
- Speaking on Friday to Journalists in Brussels, including "EuroFora", the incoming EU President-in-office for the period of January - June 2014, Prime Minister of Greece, Nicos Samaras, (Comp. also other Statements by Samaras, in reply to a Different topical Question by "Eurofora", at : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/samarasmerkelhollandeoneurussia.html ), expressed Satisfaction for the fact that, for the 1st time, EU's Definition of "Security" is Modernized, updated and Enlarged, by Extending it to a series of "New Challenges", and particularly about the Sea, such as off Shore Gas/Oil Energy Resources, Ship Transports, etc.
Well beyond Cyprus and Greece, it's mainly France (thanks also to its DOM - TOM posessions also to the Pacific Ocean, etc), Italy and Malta, Spain, Denmark, Portugal and the UK, etc. are among the biggest potential beneficiaries of EU's Maritime Security policy's forthcoming development, which would naturally benefit also to main Energy consuming EU Countries, such as Germany, Poland, Austria, etc.

=> The incoming 2014 Greek EU Presidency intends to table "an Horizontal Initiative" on All issues of "EU Sea Policies", "in all its aspects", from Growth and Development, including Energy, up to Security EU strategy, reportedly stressed to his pairs Prime MInister Samaras yesterday, pointing at possible relevant Decisions at the Horizon of the EU Summit of June 2014.
Thus, the collective Conclusions of the December 2013 EU Summit launched a "Call for .... an EU Maritime Security Strategy, by June 2014, .... to Respond to Maritime Challenges".
Indeed, "New Security Challenges continue to emerge", while "Europe's Internal and External Security dimensions are increasingly interLinked", so that "EU and its Member States" must be "enabled(d) .. to Respond" to them, according to the EU Summit. Such moves should be done "on the basis of a joint Communication from the (EU) Commission and the (EU's) High Representative, talking into account the Opinions of the (EU) Member States", but also "the subsequent elaboration of Action Plans to Respond to Maritime Challenges", the full Conclusions say.
+ Significantly, this move goes hand by hand, together with the Parallel "further Strengthening (of) Cooperation (among EU Member States) to Tackle ENERGY Security Challenges", EU Summit 's Conclusions add here.
-------------------------------------
=> The December 2013 EU Summit, (which was the 1st to be Focused on Security and Defence since the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, providing also for possible "Reinforced Cooperations" between willing EU Member States), stressed anew the principles of "Complementarity", between EU's CFSP and NATO, but also of "Autonomy" in the "Decision-Making" and "in compliance .. with Procedures of each".
>>> This is so more indispensable, still, as the concrete Example of Turkey shows, its absence could lead to absolute Blockades and Hindrance to act, by Ankara's notorious Political Blackmails, as things stand : German Chancellor Angie Merkel Denounced the well-known Fact that, despite many efforts to convince Ankara to start playing according to the Rules of the game, nevertheless, "a Difficult Problem remains in the fact that, Cyprus' conflict having not yet been solved, we (EU) have a common European Interest to Solve it, because, via Turkey's NATO Membership, while Cyprus is an EU Member State, Tensions still exist", raising some Difficulties in EU - NATO cooperation.
Indeed, as EU Summit's endorsed final Conclusions remind, at another case of Turkey's isolated Refusal to recognize Cyprus, resulting in Ankara's "VETO" to the application of certain key European/International rules, the European "Council notes with Deep Regret that Turkey, despite repeated calls, continues Refusing to fullfil its obligation of full, non-discriminatory implementation of the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement towards all (EU) Member States", (i.e. still Hindering the Free Movement of Ships and/or Airplanes related to Cyprus)... . In the absence of progress on this issue, the Council will Maintain its Measures from 2006, which will have a continuous (Negative) Effect on the overall progress of the Negotiations" on EU - Turkey relations."Furthermore, Turkey has Regretfully still Not made progress towards the Necessary Normalisation of its relations with the Republic of Cyprus". Therefore, EU's collective Decision to "Freeze" a number of Chapters in EU - Turkey negotiations is maintained, and the EU "Council invites the (EU) Commission to continue to Monitor closely, and specifically report on all issues covered by the (Collective) Declaration of the European Community and its Member States of 21 September 2005", (which notoriously replied to Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan's provocative Claims against EU Member Cyprus, at the end of his controversial and too "Hot" visit to the then UK former Prime Minister Blair), "in accordance with (EU's) Conclusions of ... December 2006 and ... 2012". Once again, EU "Council reiterates (also on December 2013) its Call for progress (by Turkey) without any further delay"....
(../..)
Main Menu
Home Press Deontology/Ethics 2009 Innovation Year EU endorses EuroFora's idea Multi-Lingual FORUM Subscribers/Donors FAQs Advanced search EuroFora supports Seabird newsitems In Brief European Headquarters' MAPs CoE Journalists Protection PlatformBRIEF NEWS
- 00:00 - 02.06.2021
- 00:00 - 18.10.2020
- 00:00 - 19.06.2020
- 00:00 - 18.05.2020
- 00:00 - 20.04.2020
- 00:00 - 02.02.2020
- 00:00 - 09.12.2019
- 00:00 - 27.11.2019
- 00:00 - 16.11.2019
Popular
- Yes, we could have prevented Ferguson riots says World Democracy Forum's Young American NGO to ERFRA
- Spanish People Elect CenterRIGHT Majority with 1st Party and Total of 178 MPs (6 More than the Left)
- Pflimlin's vision
- The European Athletic "Dream Team", after Barcelona 2010 Sport Championship Results
- Source Conseil d'Europe à ERFRA: Debatre Liberté d'Opposants à Loi livrant Mariage+Enfants à Homos ?
- Head of BioEthics InterGroup, MEP Peter Liese : "Embryonic stem cell research reaching its END" !?
- Spain: Jailed Turkish Terror suspect with Explosive,Drones,Chechen accomplices stirs Merah+ Burgas ?
- UN Head Ban Ki Moon at CoE World Democracy Forum : - "Listen to the People !"
Latest News
- Test Photos (f.ex.+ Invit to EU + Korea Peace meeting)
- EUOmbudsmen Conference 2022: Digital Gaps affect People's Trust threaten EF Project on EU Future ?
- French Election : Black Out on Virus, but Obligation for Fake 'Vaccines" Challenged
- Both French Presidential Candidates point at "Humanism" in crucial times...
- France : Zemmour = Outsider may become Game Changer in Presidential + Parliamentary Elections 2022
Statistics
Visitors: 61776972Archive
Login Form
Other Menu
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", ...

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..

"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

"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"

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.

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

















