In dirittura d'arrivo l'Agenzia europea sui diritti umani
After months of dispute within the Council of Ministers over its powers, the agency, due to be set up in January, will be limited to conducting reviews over community law issues such as discrimination and racism.
Scrutiny of member states’ police and security forces has been ruled out after sustained opposition from a group of states including Germany, the UK, the Netherlands and Ireland. As a compromise with member states, such as France, Spain, Italy and Portugal, that wanted a broader remit for the agency the matter will be revisited before the end of 2009 following the insertion of a review clause.
States that are against the broader remit believe there is no legal basis for an EU agency to have competence over matters such as police and security forces, which remain the responsibility of national governments. They have also voiced concerns of an overlap with Europe’s human rights watchdog, the Council of Europe, a claim supported by the Council itself.
But others see a wasted opportunity to give teeth to the EU’s human rights body.
“It is disappointing that member states don’t seem to understand how important human rights are to European citizens,” said UK Liberal MEP Sarah Ludford, a member of the Parliament’s civil liberties committee. “All the rhetoric of the EU as a human rights beacon fails because when given the opportunity the European governments blew it.”
Amnesty International has appealed to member states to broaden the agency’s remit. In a recent letter, it writes: “There is in any case reason to believe that the legal argument is less relevant in comparison to the reluctance of member states to be held accountable for their justice and police policies by the EU and their peers.”
Olivier de Schutter, professor at the Catholic University of Louvain and the College of Europe, said a body of experts from each member state should be set up, which the agency could consult. De Schutter, who headed up the EU Network of Independent Experts on Fundamental Rights until its mandate ended in September, added that the agency should be able to carry out impact assessments to examine whether legislation proposed at EU level corresponded to human rights obligations. He said a permanent working group should also be set up in the Council to follow up the agency’s reports. “There should be an obligation or at least a moral commitment to follow up what the agency finds. Otherwise member states can marginalise the agency and cherrypick whatever suits their political agenda,” said de Schutter.
The final text to be agreed by justice and interior ministers next week will also include the appointment of an individual by the Council of Europe to the agency’s management and executive boards to avoid overlap.
The agency will take over from the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in Vienna. It will have €13 million at the beginning of the 2007-13 budgetary period and €30m by the end.
States that are against the broader remit believe there is no legal basis for an EU agency to have competence over matters such as police and security forces, which remain the responsibility of national governments. They have also voiced concerns of an overlap with Europe’s human rights watchdog, the Council of Europe, a claim supported by the Council itself.
But others see a wasted opportunity to give teeth to the EU’s human rights body.
“It is disappointing that member states don’t seem to understand how important human rights are to European citizens,” said UK Liberal MEP Sarah Ludford, a member of the Parliament’s civil liberties committee. “All the rhetoric of the EU as a human rights beacon fails because when given the opportunity the European governments blew it.”
Amnesty International has appealed to member states to broaden the agency’s remit. In a recent letter, it writes: “There is in any case reason to believe that the legal argument is less relevant in comparison to the reluctance of member states to be held accountable for their justice and police policies by the EU and their peers.”
Olivier de Schutter, professor at the Catholic University of Louvain and the College of Europe, said a body of experts from each member state should be set up, which the agency could consult. De Schutter, who headed up the EU Network of Independent Experts on Fundamental Rights until its mandate ended in September, added that the agency should be able to carry out impact assessments to examine whether legislation proposed at EU level corresponded to human rights obligations. He said a permanent working group should also be set up in the Council to follow up the agency’s reports. “There should be an obligation or at least a moral commitment to follow up what the agency finds. Otherwise member states can marginalise the agency and cherrypick whatever suits their political agenda,” said de Schutter.
The final text to be agreed by justice and interior ministers next week will also include the appointment of an individual by the Council of Europe to the agency’s management and executive boards to avoid overlap.
The agency will take over from the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in Vienna. It will have €13 million at the beginning of the 2007-13 budgetary period and €30m by the end.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento