Venice Commission's President, Prof. Helgesen to EuroFora : Human Rights Defenders need protection
Venice Commission's President, Professor Jan Helgelsen from Norway, replying to "EuroFora"'s questions.
Therefore, CoE's prestigious Legal Experts' body might undertake to make a Study on this issue covering all its 47 MemberStates, including on the implementation of ECHR's case-law on States' obligation to protect Journalists working on Human Rights' issues and/or fully investigate their murders in order to prevent similar cases in Future, Helgelsen accepted responding positively to "EuroFora"s query.
A decade later, the issue was recently taken up in Europe by CoE's Commissioner on Human Rights, Thomas Hammarberg, strongly supported by a 2009 Resolution adopted by CoE's Assembly on a Report by German ChristianDemocrat MEP, Holger Haibach.
- "As a Human Rights Professor, I think that even today, after a Decade, it's important : You can see that Human Rights Defenders' rights are violated in several parts of the World, so it's still an on-going issue, that I wouldn't exclude to Study in Future on the relations of Governments to Human Rights Defenders"
- Because "it's not only in Totalitarian regimes that you can find that. You can find it also in Democracies" : "There is an interesting conflict between Democracy and rule of Law : More and more Governments, even in Democracies, are really treating Human Rights Defenders harshly, because they claim that Human Rights Defenders tarnish Democracy".
But, "Venice Commission is based on 2 Pillars : Democracy and Rule of Law. And we (CoE) always say that both pillars are equally important. We (CoE) cannot accept that a Democracy violates Human Rights or Minorities' rights".
- "Human Rights' Defenders are close to my Heart... I was, indeed drafting this Declaration at the UN for years", and, even if Venice Commission has not yet specifically done anything in this field, I wouldn't exclude to take this issue on the Agenda for a Report", Helgelsen concluded.
Venice Commission's readiness to extend such studies to all CoE Member States and not only to former "Eastern" European Countries, as in the past, was confirmed also by the experienced Director of its Secretariat, Gianni Buquicchio of Italy :
- "When Venice Commission started, back in 1989, it was conceived to serve all European Countries. But soon Berlin wall fell down, and a huge area opened to help Eastern European Countries' constitutional reforms. However, its competence covers not only Constitutions, but also Elections, Constitutional Justice, Solutions to conflicts, Human Rights, etc", Often "at the invitation of the EU or UNO", whenever needed; fex. in frozen conflicts, we intervene on the sidelines of political negotiations. And recently we dealt also with old democracies such as Finland, the UK, Belgium, etc. but also Turkey.
- Thus, "we (CoE) could do a Study on such kind of issues too", replied Buquicchio to another "EuroFora" Question on the need to ensure efficient investigations on a series of murders of Journalists working on Human Rights, particularly when ECHR has already issued judgements condemning certain States, as f.ex. on Gongadze's case in Ukraine, on Newspaper "Ozger Ozgur"'s staff in Turkey, and on dissident Turkish Cypriot Adali's case in the Turkish-Occupied Territories of Cyprus.
But while in Gongadge's case CoE's Committee of Ministers still keeps a pressure on Ukranian Authorities to find and punish also those who had asked for the murder, well beyond the condemnation of 2 executors to 10 Years of Jail, on the contrary, on Adali's case, sheduled for June, it reportedly has proposed to ... "postpone" anew its examination, from March to June, and now from June to September 2009, surprisingly without giving even the slightesst information on what is going on...
Adali's murder case, in the Past, had been "stuck" also previously, pending
for a too long time inside ECHR's secretariat, but was "unblocked" also after "EuroFora" informed New York based "Committee to Protect Journalists" (CPJ) who called upon ECHR to really examine the case, despite obstacles and harassment denounced by the Victims' Wife, Ilkay, who visited twice Strasbourg.
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
- 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
- PACE President Cox skips Turkey Worst (Occupation) case compared to Russia (DeMilitarisation) query
Statistics
Visitors: 58825952Archive
Login Form
Other Menu
An "Eugenic" loophole Amendment, which might expose to Dangers reminiscent of "3rd Reich's" notorious Genetic Abuses, hidden at the last minute inside an otherwise Good, larger Health policy Package scheduled to be voted on Thursday, was strongly denounced by a coalition of MEPs from various Political Groups and Countries, in a Press Conference held this afternoon at EU Parliament in Strasbourg.
Mainly calling to "Select Human Embryos", via "Genetic Counselling" and "pre-implantation" Techniques including "Genetic Tests", in order to "Eradicate Hereditary rare Diseases", it might open ways to Dangerous Practices in Future, they denounced in substance.
But they also made it clear that a much larger Report inside which this Controversial Amendment "No 15" was added in dubious circumstances, officialy destinated to struggle against "Rare Diseases", and drafted by Professor Antonios Trakatellis, was otherwise "an Excellent Report", aiming at a "completely Uncontroversial target" of Health policy on which "all MEPs and Experts are united, believing that Europe should act" to protect People's Health (See "EuroFora"'s earlier News).
The controversy came at a particularly delicate moment for the EU in relation to Citizens, at the eve of June 2009 EU Elections, and shortly before Ireland re-votes for "Lisbon Treaty"..
- Denouncing risks of "an Eugenic demand, very similar to what we had during the 3rd Reich in Germany, but now coming from some Scientisists themselves", German ChristianDemocrat/EPP MEP Dr. Peter Liese stressed that critical MEPs were against "Eugenic" engineering with "Selection of Human Embryos", and anything which might ultimately lead up to to a "Selection of Human Race". It doesn't help to "eradicate" Human Lives, he added.
Several Experts and NGOs expressed "Deep Concern", as f;ex. DR M.C. Cornel of the "European Society of Human Genetics", which stressed, on this occasion, that "the importance of Non-Directiveness in Reproductive issues is a Central characteristic of Human Genetics, after the Atrocities committed in the name of Genetics in the first half or the 20th Century".
- "This is completely Unacceptable", stressed Italian Liberal MEP Vittorio Prodi, on the Controversial Amendment, also because pushes to "eliminate early Human Life", as he noted.
- "This opens a Dangerous Road, rather a Motorway", denounced Danish MEP Mrs Margrette Auken, from the "Greens", observing that various similar attempts were made in the Past "not only in Germany, but also in several other Countries, "even at the 1970ies", "f.ex. on forced Sterilisation of Roma" People, and other criticisable situations f.ex. in the UK, in Sweden, etc. as she said.
+ Other NGOs, as f.ex. "LebenHilfe" from Berlin, added that, among various other Risks, could also be that, by exploiting the pre-implantation Genetic Diagnostics and the Selection of "healthy" Embryos, some may "propagate" several "Eugenic" aims, starting f.ex. by pushing to eradicate Human Livies which might "Cost too much" to preserve, ultimately exposing to dangers reminiscent of the "3rd Reich"'s atrocious abuses.
In consequence, ChristianDemocrats/EPP and "Green" MEPs "decided by Majority to vote against" this Controversial Amendment, anounced to Journalists the 5 MEPs who participated in the Press Conference, representing a wide spectrum, from Liberals to "Greens" and ChristianDemocrats, and from Hungary, Italy, Germany and Danemark up to Ireland (Gay Mitchell), etc.
----------------------------------
Hungarian ChristianDemocrat MEP Laszlo Surjan said "that it was "Suddenly, at the End of the Procedure" in Committee, that "appeared this (Controversial) Amendment, which has nothing to do" with the main purpose of the Report, on which all agreed.
He denounced an "Unhonest" move, and called to "avoid this kind of unacceptable situations". Nobody should "Select People", Surjan stressed.
- "We (MEPs) had No Chance to Discuss" this last-minute Amendment earlier added at a Committee's level, said German MEP Peter Liese
Speaking to "EuroFora", Dr. Liese, the Spokesman of the ChristianDemocrat/EPP Group in EU Parliament, said that MEPs didn't oppose other references of the Report f.ex. on "Genetic Tests", because they were "no proposals" to impose them, while, on the contrary, there was "a Problem" if anyone attempted to "impose" f.ex. this or that Genetic Technique and "Genetic Counselling", etc. to the People on human reproduction.
-------------
The precise Text :
-----------------
Controversial parts of Amendment No 15 ask mainly "to lead finally to the Eradication" of "Hereditary" "rare diseases", "through Genetic Counselling .., and ..pre-Implantation Selection of healthy Embryos".
But EU Rapporteur Professor Trakatellis, said to "EuroFora" that fears should be alleviated by Guarantees that all this should be done only "where appropriate", when it's "not contrary to existing National Law", and "always on a Voluntary basis", according to other Parts of the Amendment.
He stressed that the main aim was to allow "a free and informed choice of persons involved", without imposing them anything : - "It's not an obligatory, but advisary" text, he said.
To make that point clear, he was ready, in agreement with many MEPs, to eventually drop at least that part of the controversial Amendment which initially called for "efforts to ..lead finally to the Eradication of those rare diseases" "which are Hereditary".
But, until late Wednesday evening, reportedly together with many other MEPs, he stood by all the rest of the controversial Amendment, (fex. on the "Genetic Counselling" and the "pre-implantation Selection of healthy Embryos"), so that critical MEPs, going from ChristianDemocrats as Dr. Liese, to "Greens" or "Ind/Dem", observed to "EuroFora" that "this was not enough" to close the dangerous loophole.
Particularly since, as Professor Trakatellis noted himself, "this is already allowed to the U.K.", and "other National Legislations would probably follow, sooner or later" in a similar direction. As for a general call to "Eradicate Hereditary rare Diseases", this "should happen, at any case, in practice, de facto", to protect public Health.
On the contrary, "our goal should be to help patients suffering from rare diseases, not to eradicate the patients. In case of genetic disease risk, the decision should not be guided by scenarios" made by politicians. "Perents who may decide to accept a child, even if handicapped or with genetic disease, must be respected and supported with solidarity", critical MEPs stated.
- "Any Pressure" to "a patient or couple (who "should be able to make an informed choice consistent with their own values"),"from health Professionals, Public Health Policies or Governemental Institutions, or Society at large, should be avoided", stresses the "European Society for Human Genetics".
----------------------------------
Each MEP's vote will be registered !
-----------------------------------
The Socialist Group requested a "Split vote" on the Amendment 15, first without, and afterwards with the words "lead finally to the Eradication" etc.
But the first "split vote" leaves intact all the other parts of the Controversial Amendment, (i.e. "Genetic Counselling", "Selection of healthy Embryos", etc).
That's why, 3 Groups of MEPs : ChristianDemocrats/EPP, "Greens/EFA", and "Ind/Dem", have asked for "Roll Call Votes", on everything regarding the Controversial Amendment No 15, and on the final outcome of the resulting Report as amended, which will register all the individual positions to be taken by each MEP.
Something which will obviously make each MEP think twice before voting for one or another choice, to be sure that he/she will make the right choice in front of EU Citizens, particularly at these pre-Election times...
Crucial Votes were scheduled between 12 Noon and 1 p.m. local Strasbourg time, in the middle of a long series of various other Reports, and after a long Public Debate on the larger Health policy package, from 9 to 11.50 am.
The specific Report inside which was hidden the controversial Amendment is due to be debated between 11 and 12 am.
So that more last-minute Surprises may not be excluded a priori...
Particularly at the present Historic moment, when even the Institutional Future of the EU depends on the result of a second Referendum on "Lisbon Treaty", later this year, in ...Ireland, a mainly Catholic country, where People are particularly sensitive in such kind of socio-cultural and values issues...