BETA

16 Amendments of Jas GAWRONSKI related to 2008/2031(INI)

Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. whereas sanctions are one of a range of instruments which the EU may use to implement its policy on human rights; recalling that the use of sanctions must be part of an integrated and comprehensive policy approachconstitute the final attempt, in the list of priorities, to pursue the specific objectives of the CFSP and must be consistent with the Union's overall strategy in the area concerned,
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas restrictive measures may be targeted at third countries' governments, but also at non-State entities and natural or legal persons (such as terrorist groups or groups supporting them and individual terrorists),
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
L. whereas EU sanctions themselves are founded on a variety of legal bases, depending on the exact nature of the restrictive measures and on the legal nature of the relations with the third country concerned, as well as on the sectors and objectives in question; whereas these factors determine both the procedure for adoption of the sanctions – which often, but not always, require a CFSP Common Position and therefore unanimity in Council – and the legislative procedure to be followed in order to make the sanctions legally binding and enforceable, the common procedure being that set out in Article 301 of the EC Treaty,
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
N. whereas, according to the above- mentioned Basic Principles on the Use of Restrictive Measures (Sanctions) as well as the relevant Guidelines, targeted sanctions can make a difference as comparedare definitely preferable to more general sanctions, firstly because they avoid possible adverse effects on a larger group of people and secondly because they directly affect those responsible or in charge and are thus likely to be more effective in terms of bringing about policy changes,
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Q. whereas relations between the EU and third states are often governed by bilateral or multilateral agreements which allow one of the parties to take appropriate measures in cases of violation by the other party of an essential element of the agreement, namely respect for human rights, international law, democratic principles and the rule of law (the human rights clause), the Cotonou Agreement being a prominent example,
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
R. whereas the introduction and implementation of restrictive measures is based on a series of principles such as respect for international law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, including due process and the right to an effective remedy, as well as proportionality, and must provide for appropriate exemptions to take account of basic human needs of the targeted persons, allowing a minimum flow of goods and services such as access to primary education, to drinkable water and to basic medical care,
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Regrets that the existence of intra-EU disagreements on policies towards a given country such as Cuba or the reluctance of Member States to antagonise major partners such as Russia have led the EU to adopt only 'informal sanctions' in Presidency Conclusions, reflecting an unbalanced or inconsistent application of EU sanctions; recognises, however, that measures included in the Council conclusions, such as the deferral of the signing of agreements with countries such as Serbia, could be a useful tool in order to pressure third countries to fully cooperate with international mechanisms; observes that, with regard to Cuba, the Common Position adopted in 1996 and periodically renewed implies a roadmap for peaceful transition to democracy on the island, is being fully implemented and is not the subject of controversy in the European institutions; notes that the differences within the European Union arise from the measures adopted in June 2003 to complement the Common Position; stresses that certain measures such as the suspension of high-level visits to Cuba, the reduction of cultural cooperation and the incitement of dissidents by the EU Member States to engage in organised initiatives have to a degree penalised the Cuban population; expresses concern that, following their adoption, the Cuban authorities unilaterally decided to end cooperation with the EU; urges that any decision regarding the authorities of that country should be accompanied by firm, concrete and tangible requirements regarding human rights and that such requirements be binding also on the European Union institutions in their relations with the Cuban regime; accordingly calls for the immediate release of all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience together with the immediate recognition of the freedom of all Cubans, including the Sakharov Prize winners Oswaldo Payá Sardiñas and the Ladies in White, to enter and leave their own country;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the argument of the 'ineffectiveness' of sanctions cannot be used in favour of lifting them as it might encourages those targeted to simply resist pressure, and should be accompanied instead by a redirection and reassessment of the sanction itself; takes the view, moreover, that the continuation or not of sanctions should depend solely on whether their objectives have been achieved, and that their type may be strengthened or altered on the basis of their evaluation; considers that, to this end, sanctions should always be accompanied by clear benchmarks;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that a sanctions policy leads de facto to the isolation of the country concerned but should under no circumstances isolate the population; stresses, therefore, that any sanctions taken against government authorities should systematicalpossibly be coupled with political and financial support for civil society in the relevant country;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Takes the view that coordinated action by the international community and by the EU has a stronger impact than disparate and uneven actions by States or regional entities; welcomes, therefore,reiterates the notion expressed in the Basic Principles that UN Security Council sanctions should be preferred to EU sanctions and that the EU sanctions policy should continue to be based on the notion of a preference in favour of the UN regimexcept in cases where the purpose of the restrictive measures is to disseminate values specific to the EU or where the requirements and characteristics of the case in question make Community action more appropriate;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
31. Considers that economic sanctions used in isolation from other policy instruments are extremely unlikely to force a targeted regime to make major policy changes; stresses, moreover, that far-reaching economic restrictions may entail excessively high economic and humanitarian costs, and therefore reiterates its call for more carefully designed and better targeted economic sanctions, designed to have an impact primarily on key leaders of targeted regimes and perpetrators of human rights violations;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Considers that economic and financial sanctions, even when they are targeted, must be applied by all natural and legal persons pursuing commercial activities in the EU, including citizens of third countries, and European citizens or legal persons registered or established in accordance with the legislation of an EU Member State who pursue commercial activities outside the EU;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Calls for a limited application of the 'extraordinary exemptions' to the freezing of assets; calls, however, for the introduction of 'humanitarian exemptions', such as a system to permit access to basic medical care; calls for the creation of a specific procedure for objections in the event that a Member State wishes to grant an exemption to the freezing of assets, since the efficiency of the restrictive measure is undermined by the lack of such a procedure given that the Member States are only required to inform the Commission in advance of such an exemption;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
48. Deeply regrets that none of the judicial bodies is in position to assess the appropriateness of blacklisting, givenNotes that the evidence leading to blacklisting is based purely on information held by the secret services; calls in this regard on EU Member States to allow an effective parliamentary control over the work of the secret services which operate, as such, in secret; considers, however, that this fundamental discretion should not be transformed into impunity in the case of breaches of international law;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
50. Considers that EU sanctions policy is more effective where it remains explicitly transformable into a policy of positive measures; considers that a strategy of openness and a policy of sanctions are not mutually exclusive; in this respect, notes with great interest the cycle of sanctions imposed in respect of Uzbekistan from November 2007 to April 2008: while continuing for one year the sanctions imposed for failure to satisfy initial criteria pertaining to investigations into the Andijan massacre and respect for human rights, the Council decided to suspend the implementation of the visa ban, leaving the Uzbek regime six months in which to fulfil a set of human rights criteria, and with the looming threat of the automatic re- establishment of the visa ban; notes that the mix of engagemregrets, however, that there have not yet beent and sanctions produced some positive developments, thanks to the possible automatic re- establishment of the sanctions and the definition of precise conditiony positive developments and that the lack of cooperation with the Uzbek Government continues; underlines that these conditions must be capable of being satisfied within a limited time frame and relevant to the general sanction regime;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
51. Urges that sanctions be systematically accompanied, in the context of a multifold strategy, by enhanced positive measures to support civil society, human rights defenders and all kinds of projects promoting human rights and democracy; calls for the thematic programmes and instruments (EIDHR, non-state actors, investing in people), including humanitarian aid, to contribute fully to achieving this objective;deleted
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET