Speeches

Madam President, China is a trading partner of the European Union. I even want to say the European Union’s trading partner. Almost 600 billion trade with China, 20 billion more than trade with the United States. At the same time, the Chinese regime does not share our human rights standards. We talked about forced labour, surveillance regime, sanctions against opponents of Hong Kong and these are just examples. If it is not up to us to change the Chinese regime – it would be naive to think so – we have a responsibility not to be complicit in that regime. So I would have a few questions. What is the Council's position on banning Chinese forced labour products entering the European market? What is the Council's position on a genuine due diligence International companies that would work in China? What would be the mechanism that would ensure, in the context of a trade agreement or an investment agreement, that there is no violation of human rights? Finally, what is the position, at multilateral level, we have on the Treaty of due diligence for which, today, the Commission has no mandate and where is China negotiating? And, Mr High Representative, do not tell me that the solution is the human rights dialogue, because then it would be naive.

Madam President, unlike my predecessor, I am not a footballer and therefore I cannot talk like him about the situation of football. But when I am asked if a World Cup is an opportunity to talk about human rights, I would like to say no. I would like to reply that no country should wait for any event to be able to address the issue of human rights. When, ten years ago, FIFA decided to organise this World Cup in Qatar, we knew that this choice was questionable. We challenged this in a resolution voted here in the European Parliament in 2013. But today, we are there and so it is important, indeed, to be able to take stock of the human rights situation in Qatar, with the visibility given to us by the World Cup, and to be able to see what has been done, what has been violated and what can still be done. I think that is the purpose of the debate today and that is the purpose we had in the Subcommittee on Human Rights last week with NGOs, Human Rights Watch - who was invited to DROI - the ILO, ETUC and, of course, with DROI members. So, yes, you said so, Commissioner, Qatar has made some progress. Today there is no kafala. It is true that the law no longer exists as such. But we know that in some sectors, kafala still exists in a rather special way, especially for people at home. An ILO office was present. NGOs are present. But there have been violations, deaths and compensation is needed. We must work with Qatar to ensure that these compensations take place. Last but not least, there is the future. The future also depends on the responsibility of our companies, because our companies in Qatar have not always met the minimum required by Qatar.

Mr President, the management of the external borders is not without faith and law. I would even say that in these extremely sensitive policies, respect for human rights must be at the centre of the concerns of this agency, which is presented today as essential for the implementation of migration policy. However, we know that, and this is not the first time that Frontex has come under fire, both for its inefficiency, and I refer you to the Court of Auditors’ report, and for its serious human rights violations, referred to here in the OLAF report, which only confirms what we have been saying for months and months: the lack of respect for human rights, which was systematic within that agency. Commissioner, you are responsible for respecting the international treaties and conventions that put respect for human rights at the heart of the European project. The message must be clear. The mandate must be clear. The organisation of Frontex must be transparent. They are laws, they are rights and they are good governance in full transparency. Clearly, this is a long way off today.

Mr President, we strongly condemn the resumption of fighting on 24 August between Ethiopian government forces and the TPLF in the Tigray region. After five months of truce, the civil war in Ethiopia resumed. The conflict has lasted for more than two years and has caused the deaths of thousands of people and the displacement of millions more within the country. Civilian populations, especially women and children in Tigray, Amhara and Afar, are the main victims of this conflict. The Ethiopian government's announcements to open a passageway for humanitarian convoys need to be implemented and strengthened, as more than 5 million people no longer have access to basic services, healthcare or medicines. UN experts reported abuses of human rights by all parties to the conflict, which could be described as war crimes and crimes against humanity. These violations must immediately cease. In both camps, the perpetrators of these crimes must be held accountable through the establishment of independent investigative and judicial mechanisms. The European Union must strongly support the efforts of the African Union to open peace negotiations and welcome the commitment of the Ethiopian Government, which has already accepted this invitation. The TPLF must also engage in these negotiations, which are fundamental: they must lead, in the very short term, to a new truce, which opens up and strengthens access to humanitarian convoys in support of all populations. But they are also necessary for the establishment of an inclusive dialogue, which must be able to lead to a lasting political solution to this conflict.

Mr President, the Human Rights Committee was in Pakistan two weeks ago, and we had the opportunity to meet the team of the National Disaster Management Authority and the communities affected by the floods. What they showed us was simply terrible, terrible in terms of the intensity of the phenomena that occurred. In April, the highest temperatures ever recorded in Pakistan – 51 °C in Sindh – caused a 65% decrease in the flow of Indus, from which the Pakistani population draws 90% of its water. This has led to food shortages, deaths and a significant loss of livestock for meat production. In September, heavy rains engulfed a third of the territory, leading to everything in their path: bridges, schools, hospitals, houses, human lives... As Mr Guterres said, this is a "climate carnage". While Pakistan emits 1% of greenhouse gases, the G20 emits 80%. However, it is Pakistan that is the first to fall victim to these climate changes. We must help Pakistan. It is not generosity, it is justice.

Mr President, we can no longer, as has been said, continue to regard the European Union's trade instrument in a relationship purely inscribed in a contract which promotes the maximisation of the profits of the strongest at the expense of the weakest. As we have seen, trade has adverse effects on the environment, human rights and sometimes labour rights. As the Ombudsman said, the European Union's trade policy today has nothing to do with human rights. And so, we welcome with great interest the issue of TSD, the sustainable development chapter, but unfortunately, the issue of human rights is not in this TSD. And so I ask that this TSD can be corrected with the proposals that have been made by the mediator. I think that this mediator is useful and that she has no interest on the right, on the left or in the centre, but that she has the interest of the European citizens at heart, and I think it is important that you can correct the situation with this very objective.

Madam President, Commissioner, located at the crossroads between the Middle East and Africa, the Horn of Africa is at the centre of varying geopolitical challenges and is plagued by many intersecting and intertwining evils. In Sudan, waves of protests for the return to civilian government following the military coup have added to a dramatic economic situation, in a country that is already among the poorest in the world, and where the price of bread has increased tenfold since the putsch, plunging people into extreme poverty. Ethiopia, it has been said, is in the midst of a civil war, which has led to a humanitarian crisis in the Tigray region, but also in the Amhara and Afar regions. The security situation in Somalia remains precarious and represents a destabilizing potential for the entire region. These are just a few examples of the political situation in the region, which is home to more than 100 million people and is also experiencing the worst climate emergency in 40 years. After several consecutive seasons of drought, severe water shortages and poor harvests, nearly 20 million people in Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia and Eritrea are now at risk of hunger. Thousands of families have lost everything: their fields and their livestock, leaving them without any means of subsistence. Yet the Horn of Africa is also one of the most important oil straits in the world. Every day, about 52 ships and 5 million barrels of oil cross this strait. Finally, this part of Africa is characterised by a set of lucrative trafficking (arms, drugs, human beings) between the east and west of the continent. So we need to focus on this region. This is a priority for us Europeans. Mr Castaldo has defined all the actions that are in the report, which I ask you to fully support, because of course there are African populations, but there is also the stability of Europe vis-à-vis Africa.

Mr President, since the death of Mahsa Hamani, a 22-year-old victim of the Iranian morality police and for wearing her veil badly, dozens of people have died and thousands have been arrested for protesting for their rights. And contrary to what the Iranian supreme leader claims, who sees these demonstrations as foreign manipulation, these women, these young people, these courageous men ask only one thing: the end of the regime that oppresses them, that locks them up, that massacres them. The European Union has levers for discussion with this regime and we must use them by expressing our solidarity with these demonstrators, by demanding the immediate release of all demonstrators but also of all human rights defenders in this country, by supporting the demands of these demonstrations, by calling for targeted sanctions and by placing human rights in all the discussions and agreements we have with Iran.

Madam President, Commissioner, it is well known that Uganda is not a land of human rights. Everyone knows that. Mr Museveni, who has been in office for 36 years, and those around him are responsible for violent repression of all opposition groups, whose members are arbitrarily arrested, abducted, unfairly prosecuted or even massacred. Recently, this outburst has targeted NGOs working on issues related to oil projects in the region. These NGOs are simply defending the right of families and communities who are displaced by the decision to install this pipeline, which is a 2,000-kilometre pipeline between Uganda and Tanzania. Behind this project we have a company, which is a European company called Total Energy. That undertaking obtained the operating licence. So, of course, Total Energy is complicit in what is happening and what we have seen on the ground is simply unacceptable. Victim families who are not compensated for their losses, children who can no longer go to school, families who are no longer fed. All this is Total’s complicity. It is a European company. We want corporate responsibility, due diligence. These companies must pay and stop their actions, which are unacceptable today in Africa and elsewhere.

Madam President, first of all, thank you to the rapporteur for the constructive approach to this report. So, as we know, there have always been strong cultural and economic links between the different shores of this Mediterranean Sea, which is called the dividing sea and the sea that unites. Unfortunately, in recent years, we can say the sea that kills, in connection with migratory phenomena. In November 1995, the European Union laid the groundwork for multilateral collaboration with the countries of the Mediterranean basin by adopting the Barcelona Declaration. The spirit on which the declaration was based is that of solidarity in the interests of peace, stability and development in this region. More than 25 years later, the idea of a strong partnership between the European Union and the neighbouring countries of the Mediterranean remains a priority more than ever. Ten years after the Arab Spring, the challenges are enormous in terms of democratic development, economy and people, governance, security, respect for human rights, to which are of course added the challenges of climate change, migration and, today, the energy issue. It is in this context that the new partnership for the Mediterranean with Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Jordan and Syria is binding on us, with no doubt special relations with each other. Because these countries, while resembling each other, are not quite alike. In this report, we are sending a strong message on key issues and I will take five. First, strengthening dialogue and cooperation to promote peace, human rights, conflict prevention and security. Second, strengthening strategies to combat poverty through the recognition of socio-economic challenges, climate change, access to resources for all. Thirdly, the promotion of a migration policy based on respect for human rights, including the principle of non-refoulement geared primarily to the very causes of these migration issues. Fourthly, promoting environmental protection and supporting people directly affected by these changes. And finally, confirmation of the EU’s readiness and willingness to support the Middle East peace process based on the two-state solution, in compliance with UN resolutions.

Mr High Representative, with regard to African countries, thank you very much for meeting with a number of these countries. There is the Global Gateway strategy, which is now being put in place by the European Union, we know that it is a medium-term strategy and we congratulate you on this strategy. But in the short term, there is also a need to meet needs in relation to the price of food, to ensure that these countries and their populations are not suffering and thus respond, as Europeans, to the imminent needs in these countries. So what is in place in relation to these emergency measures?

Mr High Representative, I will ask three questions. The first concerns Ukrainian children, who are now particularly vulnerable. They are kidnapped, they are abused. Have you put in place any specific follow-up with regard to these child victims? The second question concerns crimes of aggression. We know that there was a request for an ad hoc court. What are the main obstacles to the establishment of this court? And the third question relates to the fact that we must do everything so that Putin does not win this war, but especially so that Putin does not win the war of ideas. So for this, we must organise solidarity with European citizens, for the indirect effects of this war, but also with countries outside Europe that are our allies, that were our allies, but unfortunately are sometimes convinced by Putin’s technique. You have toured African countries: What about it? Have you been able to convince them and how have you been able to convince them, if so.

Mr President, it has been said that the fight against deforestation is crucial in the fight against climate change and for the protection of biodiversity. But the fight against deforestation is also the fight for the rights of indigenous peoples and environmental defenders. Between 2010 and 2020, more than 1540 murders of its defenders were recorded, mainly in the Amazon and Indonesia. These indigenous peoples make up 5 per cent of the world's population and live mainly in these forests. Their culture is threatened, their survival is threatened, their knowledge of these forests is threatened. States and businesses must guarantee the rights of these peoples. Access to justice must also be guaranteed and the text provides for this. But I also ask my colleagues to support Amendment 243, which reinforces this, and to reject the amendments on voluntary certification, which is not effective. Studies show this and we call for more robust corporate responsibility. While there is a need to support deforestation-free products, today there is also a need to support products that are free from the killings of these populations.

Madam President, Commissioner, in Nigeria, the wave of violence does not stop. In 2021, more than 2,600 civilians were killed, an increase of more than 250% compared to 2020. This insecurity is generally seen as a result of the threat posed by Boko Haram. However, such a design underestimates the complexity and multifaceted nature of security challenges in the country. In addition to the insecurity generated by Boko Haram in north-eastern Nigeria, criminal gangs in north-western Nigeria, taking advantage of a security vacuum, have led to a wave of kidnappings for ransom, which have become a commercial resource for criminal gangs that also act in the same way in the Gulf of Guinea. Added to this is the fact that the land available for grazing in Nigeria’s central belt declined by more than 38% between 1975 and 2013, while agricultural plots almost doubled. These dynamics have been generated by climate change, land exclusion policies and population growth. And all this leads to conflict between two communities: farmers and herders. Often this is mistakenly summed up in ethnic or religious conflict. As can be seen, the diversity of security threats in Nigeria requires a set of innovative solutions, adapted to each context, and involves understanding the local dynamics of each of the threats and integrating them into a multidimensional security strategy. The shortcuts that lead us to read Nigeria with our reading grids lead us to make the wrong observations and to provide the wrong answers.

Madam President, once again, as we can see, the crimes committed by the Chinese regime in Xinjiang show the world the cruelty of this regime towards minorities, and the Uyghur minority in particular. This is not the first time we have spoken out here about this unacceptable situation of serious human rights violations in China. But what to do? Clearly, we do not have the capacity to change the Chinese regime. On the other hand, we have the capacity here in Europe to do a lot of things. First, do not sign the investment agreement with China. Secondly, to move as quickly as possible on this regulation of due diligence, the responsibility of companies that are complicit in this forced labour. Thirdly, prohibit the entry of these products of forced labour into European territory. And finally, to continue relentlessly to denounce in all forums, including multilateral forums, the situation that is now being experienced in Xinjiang.

Mr President, Commissioner, I must say to you that I personally feel uncomfortable with this title 'How to attract qualifications and talent to Europe?' I am uncomfortable, not, as Mr Zimniok said, because I personally also have no difficulty in having an African colleague beside me who can actually share a number of things and values which are universal values, and which are not your values specifically, Mr Zimniok, but which are values which we share here today in Europe, which are the values of solidarity and dignity. So having an African next to me is absolutely no problem for me. On the other hand, this proposal suggests that, since we want to attract skills and talents, people who do not have these talents and qualifications would be unwelcome in Europe, and that is not the message we want to give to these countries. It also gives the impression that there is a mix between the protection legislation that we owe to a certain number of people, because they are threatened, and the question of residence. When you are threatened, it has nothing to do with the issue of talents and qualifications. We're threatened, we need to be protected. It also suggests that we would empty these countries of their skills and talents. And here too, there would be a problem because, if there were not these talents in these countries, well they would be even more in difficulty and there would be even more migratory phenomena. Therefore, this proposal poses difficulties in relation to the objectives it may have. One last element. When I hear that Mr Várhelyi goes to Tunisia and makes agreements with Tunisia conditional on the conclusion of readmission agreements, I also find this conditionality problematic, where I say I take one, you take one. Here too there is a difficulty. So I think it is necessary to review the proposal as it was put on the table.

Commissioner, I also wanted to ask you a question. We are talking here about their use by the public sector in public spaces, but these chemical pesticides also have private uses by private households, which are just as destructive of biodiversity. Do you also consider restrictive measures in this case?

Madam President, Commissioner, in order to reduce the use of pesticides, we must – as you have said – enshrine in law mandatory reduction targets at Member State level. But we also need to identify which substances will be targeted as a priority and we need to ban the most harmful substances, especially when they are listed as candidates for substitution. Will the Commission oblige Member States to include a substance substitution plan in their national action plans, starting with the most toxic ones? If so, within what period? Beyond reducing the use of pesticides in agriculture, other measures could be taken, such as banning pesticides in public spaces, in children’s playgrounds. This is already the case in Belgium and France, while in other Member States such pesticides are still used in these areas. Are you considering banning these pesticides in public spaces?

Madam President, as my colleague Mr Nacho said, the human rights situation in Turkey is catastrophic. According to the reports available to us, more than 87 journalists are in prison for terrorism, simply for doing their job. More than a thousand people have been arrested for posting posts, defamation, insult or terrorist propaganda. Life sentences without recourse for Mr. Osman Kavala. Students arrested for demonstrating for LGBT rights or femicide, many today in Turkey. Party bans at the dawn of elections, not to mention Turkey's role in Syria, Libya, on our doorstep. And again the fact that Turkey attacked one of our colleagues, Evin Incir, who is here, also for alleged links with terrorist organizations. Yes, Turkey has broken with the values that are European democratic values. You spoke, Commissioner, about the freezing of Turkey's accession. Of course, but there are also other instruments that are on our doorstep. Today we have at our disposal the Customs Union, which is an economic tool with Turkey, from which Turkey benefits. And I think that this customs union needs to be reviewed as well.

Mr President, Commissioner, we are witnessing a tragic event. Every day, in the world, there is a proliferation of war crimes, territorial and maritime aggression, systematic violations of fundamental human rights. Russia’s aggression in Ukraine confronts us with this reality in the strongest possible terms. The horrors experienced by the Ukrainian people despite their formidable resistance, the serious violations of international humanitarian laws leading to massacres, rapes, kidnappings can be qualified as war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. As you said, these crimes cannot go unpunished. It is necessary to put in place a flawless collection of all this evidence. The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court must have as much information as possible to carry out his/her investigation. However, national courts with universal jurisdiction must also be able to deal with them. But, as we know, the ICC is unfortunately not competent here for the crime of aggression. This gap must therefore be filled by the creation of a special court with jurisdiction to try the Russian authorities for this crime of aggression. The fight against impunity is crucial and urgent. The survival of the people is at stake. It is about the security of the world that cannot and should not be governed by the wild laws of the strongest.

Mr President, Commissioner, the G5 Sahel, as you said, Mauritania, Burkina Faso, Mali, Chad, Niger, but to which we can add Nigeria or Côte d’Ivoire or other countries, of course have common realities but also their specificities. In my opinion, summarising the policy we must pursue in the Sahel in the fight against jihadism is probably not enough. And as we have seen, our nine-year presence in the region has shown its limits in the fight against jihadism. The common realities of these countries are important and require common responses. For example, Sahelian regions are affected by climate change and severe droughts that increase resource pressures – less land for farmers, less pasture for herders, less water for everyone – and all this leads to inter-community conflicts. If they are not managed properly, they lead – also thanks to the weapons that have arrived particularly from Libya – to inter-community massacres. Better management of these phenomena also leads to a de-escalation of violence in the region today. I believe that it is through development and your action, Commissioner, that we can solve the Sahel problem.

Madam President, Commissioner, every year in the world there are more than 10 000 illegal organ transplants and this generates a profit of EUR 1 billion per year. In China, the low rate of voluntary donors, but also the authorisation of non-consensual harvesting and the lack of transparent mechanisms guaranteeing the traceability and origin of these organs, despite being requested by the WHO, are all damning indications of China’s practices with regard to forced organ harvesting. On several occasions, UN human rights experts have expressed concern about forced organ harvesting in China and called on the Chinese government to comply with the requirements of the WHO and its conventions against torture that China has signed. All this has so far remained unanswered. And in 2021, the Independent International Tribunal for the Removal of Forced Organs in China concluded that in China, forced organ harvesting practices have indeed taken place, continue to take place and particularly on communities, such as Falun Gong. Let us recall here that forced organ harvesting is a serious violation of human rights. Let us also remember that the EU-China relationship must be based on respect for these values and the international conventions to which we are a party. We therefore call for China to comply with the requirements of the WHO and the Convention against Torture. We also call for the introduction of monitoring of these removal practices by independent international experts, but also for the abolition of the law allowing the removal without consent of the organs of executed prisoners. We call for the European Union and the Member States to publicly condemn these practices, take measures that prevent organ tourism, but also ensure that our research and transplantation institutions do not collaborate with Chinese bodies that are likely to perform these forced transplants.

Madam President, Commissioner, behind this nice little word called POP, which might seem nice, are substances that are particularly dangerous, carcinogenic, toxic for reproduction and that disrupt our endocrine system. They are chemical molecules found in dioxins, pesticides, insecticides and flame retardants. They are also, and are said to be, very persistent in the environment. They contaminate us today and they contaminate future generations and they contaminate as far, far away from where they were emitted. Deciding on lower concentration limits, as we did in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, therefore directly contributes to better protecting citizens, but also to a cleaner environment for future generations. Some raised during the discussions the fact that lower limits of these concentrations on recycled materials would lead to more incineration, thus more pollution. However, this is not inevitable, as more and more techniques that do not require combustion are now available and make it possible to destroy these substances, which are still present today, without emitting dioxins. It is therefore these sectors that we must support by imposing more stringent limits rather than incentivising the incorporation of these toxic substances into recycling. Our committee also calls for an alignment of the hazardous waste threshold with the limits set out in Annex 4, for better management of this highly toxic waste, as we revise the Waste Export Regulation, because we also need to be vigilant about what we do outside the EU. I would point out that too low limits of persistent organic pollutants in waste are contrary to the objective of the Stockholm Convention, and therefore it is now a matter of being consistent. I therefore invite you to support this text, which also calls on the Commission to increase its ambitions during the trilogue in order to contribute to the achievement of a non-toxic environment without delay.

Mr President, in 2005, an institute for studies on the Russian regime wrote: “To install his plebiscite dictatorship, Putin decided to break with liberalism and replace it with an ideology of another order. Putin has brought his regime into patriotic, anti-Western, imperialist, clericalist, militarist, authoritarian and xenophobic nationalism. It is this brutal face that we see today in Russia. This regime has stepped up police repression, set up a justice system at the orders of the government to destroy any protest and covers arbitrary arrests, such as that of Alexei Navalny. Exile today has become the only way to demand a Russia with a human face. Ladies and gentlemen, dictators do not listen to us, so we must speak to free voices. It is these free voices that we must help. It is these free voices that we must protect when they ask for it.

Madam President, 44 years of conflict make Afghanistan one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the world. But the seizure of power by the Taliban on 15 August 2021 marked the return to the situation that characterized the country 20 years ago, cancelling the few advances in human rights and especially women's rights. They have been systematically denied access to education. Even access to healthcare is only open to women if they are accompanied by a guardian. The Taliban have established a system that Afghan women activists have called a gender apartheid regime. This debate is now all the more timely and necessary given that, on the morning of 23 March, the Taliban communicated to Afghan students over the age of 12 that their doors will remain closed. In this Parliament, we listened and exchanged with many extraordinary women such as Shaharzad Akbar or Sima Samar, both chairpersons of the Afghan Independent Commission for Human Rights, Zarifa Ghafari, Mayor of Maidan Shar, and others. They have expressed their deep concern on several points, such as fear of what they perceive as a dangerous normalisation of the relationship with the Taliban, and the falsity of the Taliban who have been open to dialogue and, at the same time, have shown their brutal ability not to respond to the democratic civic space. They told us about the destruction of the social fabric or the lack of accountability of this brutal regime. With this resolution, we reaffirm that taking power with violence and weapons does not make the Taliban legitimate; whereas the EU intervention in Afghanistan will ensure that women are involved in the planning, monitoring and management of aid programmes; whereas we will ensure access to quality education; whereas we will show no tolerance for corruption or discrimination; we will ensure that civil society and the media are protected. We will commit to giving protection status to Afghan refugees. We will commit to finding appropriate approaches to help and support women who are in Afghanistan because they have been unable or unwilling to leave.