Speeches

Mr President, () I did not quite understand this memorandum of cooperation about Greece, if you can explain it to us in your second reading, because I did not understand whether Greece is an accession state or a member. I'll explain why I'm saying this. What are the steps to transform a liberal democracy into an illiberal, progressively authoritarian one? I was a journalist. I've been fired a few times over democracy issues. The surveillance scandal in Greece, which we brought to Parliament's bodies, was the surveillance of a journalist. His name is Koukakis, he was investigating the course of suspicious money. Mr Koukakis was considered a national risk because he was also pressing on the issue of money management; the National Intelligence Service was monitoring him, in which, by its own law, the Prime Minister of Greece, Mr Mitsotakis, is responsible. The other victim, journalist Mr Malikoudis, was investigating refugee-related journalistic issues; and this was classified as a national danger by the service headed by the Prime Minister. If I continue with the names, I won't have time. Journalists who exposed the Lagarde list and the Novartis case were brought to justice, mocked, labeled by Greece's prime minister as a "gang", afflicted, acquitted. There is stagnation without any official information. You said the investigation was proceeding. Commissioner, you know what? Because we don't know anything about where we are in Greece. I'm talking about the Karaivaz case. The president of the court changed, I learned, in a case with "greek mafia". Judges leave Greece, prosecutors change country. With the coronavirus we also had lists of sponsored, friendly, media. SLAPPs are an industry in the country. When Mr. Mitsotakis is asked about the 108th place in the freedom of the press, he discredits the institutions and says, "Where did you get these?" In Greece, therefore, anyone can say what they want, it is not a dictatorship, the point is that the journalist cannot find a say in the oligopolies of the press and that is a problem.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we all feel this 'backstabbing' in the joint effort, in Parliament, in democracy, in the rule of law. But because it is not worth sticking only to findings, however shocking they may be, I think that we need to go substantially to measures for the prestige and essence of the institution. Justice will talk about criminal liability. But we must take political responsibility, and that will also be reflected in the resolution we will have tomorrow. We therefore propose the creation of an Independent Ethics Authority for European agencies, with investigative and enforcement powers for all agencies, the reinforcement of existing transparency rules, the reinforcement of the European Transparency Register with a mandatory and legally binding character, a mandatory legislative footprint for MEPs drafting reports or opinions, a revised code of conduct with stricter rules for MEPs and officials, especially for gifts and benefits. Let's look at the issue of waiver of immunity for MPs when they are involved in criminal organizations. We already have one in prison, Rabbit, for participating in a criminal, Nazi organisation; He will be paid as usual, as will the defendant. Also, end the story with former MEPs: their mandate has ended, we thank them very much; to stop this "get-out" in Parliament. Let's go make decisions!

Mr President, once again today we are talking about thousands of lives lost in the Mediterranean – those we know, because there are also some thousands of missing people we do not know. And while Turkey's criminal attack on Ukraine is raging, a few days ago we had Turkey's military attack on Syria. President Metsola spoke of restraint. Whose? - Whose? Turkey, the dead, the missing or the new refugees? Causes are the first issue. The second is our own story. Fortress Europe and promoting the European way of life. How legal is that? How fair and how realistic? The criminalization, then, of the basic principle of rescue, the fundamental principle of the protection of life in a state of emergency? As announced by the four ministers? And here's an issue we don't see for the first time. National policies, either alone or transnational, which go beyond the common European position and stance. Are we sure, then, that the right to apply for asylum will not be criminalized soon? I think, therefore, that as long as the Union is not disengaged from the creation of causes I have mentioned, as long as there are no legal and safe routes for these people to apply for asylum and protection, this crime will continue.

Mr President, I was listening to the representatives of the European People's Party and I got the title 'My nice washing machine'. That is, as if you do not understand what happened in Sweden, as if you do not understand what is happening in Italy. Mussolini's friends have come to things and you consent to it. The extreme right is treated in a way – I will leniently say – ‘apolitical’, both as a narrative and as a practice, with your unhistorical approach and, of course, with this logic of revisionism and revisionism of history. My country had 600,000 dead by Nazis and fascists. Who are you rinsing here? I want to tell you that the right has always invested and continues to invest in creating internal enemies. It criminalizes poverty, criminalizes the different, then the Jews were criminalized by the far right and the fascists and today they criminalize everything that creates a problem in their narrative. The experiences of 1935 should not let us not understand exactly what is happening. We cannot make the same mistakes. We must show no tolerance to fascism, to the extreme right... (The President removed the floor from the speaker)

Madam President, Commissioner, we could not help but support you in this endeavour. The title is "Missing persons: Wanted or unclaimed? As far as the refugee issue alone is concerned – I would add my colleagues – there have been 25,000 missing persons in the Mediterranean since 2014 and they are mostly children. In Greece, a few days ago we again had a shipwreck in Kythera; We'll add another 15 people. And here I have to ask: Why did the search for these people stop? No one's looking for them? When we first raised the issue of missing persons, already before the pandemic, the families of missing persons told us that they were desperately looking for their people from a police station to a police station and from a cemetery to a cemetery, without a common database and without the ability to communicate information. That is why we will support this initiative by the Commissioner and the Commission. Interview number 32 – a brother talks about his sister from Syria: Yes, I need to know where my sister's body is. Now I can find it on Google Maps and visit it occasionally. This, I admit, was a dimension I hadn't imagined. We therefore call for the establishment of a European mechanism based on a common database, accessible to the authorities of all countries, that can provide the necessary information to European citizens or refugees and migrants – those seeking their people. To illuminate what we call the "last right".

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, let us first thank OLAF for confirming what we knew. But why not let the world know? Why is this report hidden and why should citizens learn about it through the press? Mr. Leggeri resigned, or we "resigned". In Greece, Mr. Leggeri was awarded for exactly the same reasons. Here, then, is a contradiction, and I want to note a few things: 92 people naked in Turkey, 120 people in the presence of Frontex in Italy, 75 Afghan refugees returned from Bulgaria to Greece, 10 dead in Kythira and at least 15 missing. The ships are coming, Commissioner, from Izmir to wherever they arrive, to burst at best on the rocks and drown people or some to be saved and some to be lost in international waters. What is happening today is genocide. People are drowning in the Aegean, people are drowning in the European sea. And here's the thing about Frontex. Is there search and rescue in this organization? What exactly does he do when he sees a boat coming from Turkey to Europe? We leave them in international waters and then what? So this is the big issue for me. And of course we must not stop this story here, but move on.

Madam President, Commissioner, five years after the murder of Daphne, we are again here to discuss Malta, the rule of law and the safety of journalists. Let us be clear that the Maltese case is going too late in the first place. There are serious issues that we saw during our visit to Malta and, of course, I would like to note – to catch up – that Daphne Galizia’s relatives cannot yet be tried in lawsuits today. This story has to end. But I heard Mr Weber and he was very strict. Let us be clear here, then, whether we will be more lenient when the government is right-wing and somewhat different in seeing whether the government is social-democratic. The murder of a journalist is a blow to democracy. Of course, we expect to see the same for the killers of Karaivaz in Greece, Marinova, Kuciak, de Vries in the Netherlands. The European Parliament – and I say it as a former journalist – cannot pour water into its wine in matters of democracy. This game of impressions has to stop. We will continue until justice is done for all the journalists who have been murdered so far, but also for the brains, for a system of power so that no one dares to speak.

Madam President, it is a little scary to hear fascism in the European Parliament, but to come to the point. The instrumentalization, which sounds very loud here, must also have an identity. So Turkey is not instrumentalizing the issue? I would say that this is an ideological battle and I think we have understood it – or we have understood them. For years now we have been trying to explain and convince that the only realistic solution to the phenomenon we are discussing today is legal and safe channels for applying for asylum, the forced and equal relocation of all refugees to the Member States and real integration policies. We now know that the far right knows that this is realistic, but it does what it does not understand. Because it does not fit and does not "button" the narrative of the far right in Europe and its allies, because in this way they will lose the possibility of instrumentalizing the refugee and migrant issue, the instrumentalization of pain, that is, the need of people to live. I agree with Mrs Sippel, I agree with the Socialists, I agree with Renew, I agree with Mrs Strik from the Greens and I try a little to take the thought further. Without the instrumentalisation of these people, how will the "internal enemy" be created that suits the extreme right-wing rhetoric and polarisation of potential voters? That's what we've been living for, days ’35. You know, ladies and gentlemen, yesterday we had the debate on surveillance in Greece in this Chamber. One of the victims of surveillance in Greece is journalist Malichoudis, who did journalistic research on the refugee issue. He is an enemy for Mr. Mitsotakis, as are the Socialists, the Greens, Renew, NGOs, humanitarian organizations. Here, then, our views – where we ally or agree – would not be described as ‘left’ or ‘radical’ or ‘humanitarian’, but as realistic, meaningful and fully in line with the decisions and values of our Union. And we all know here very well that apathy at sea will always have fatal results, as will fences. They do not prevent people's need to leave war zones. We cannot allow rights to be circumvented by grey procedures as a means of deterrence. Our Europe has nothing to do with America, it won't be Russia, it won't be China, it's what we call the Lighthouse of Democracy. That's our point of view.

Mr President, how can such a scandal be contained now in a minute? But it fits into one name: Mitsotakis Because what we are facing today is not about software in general, Commissioner, and companies that trap our phones. We have the prime minister of a democratic country, Greece, who by his own law is the head of the National Intelligence Service and who monitors his political opponent, Nikos Androulakis, who is an MEP. And through Mr Androulakis we are watching all the MEPs who are talking to Mr Androulakis. And the day before yesterday you would have heard that Mr Spirtzis, a leading member of the main opposition party, SYRIZA, is also being monitored. Therefore, it is not possible for Mr. Mitsotakis to create internal enemies and create a new type of rule of law as he serves. That is why I think Mr Mitsotakis should give us answers here in the European Parliament. Why is he following us through Mr Androulakis? Let me tell you one last thing: The problem in Greece is that there is no investigation to reveal why surveillance is taking place, but to reveal where the leak came from and we found out.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Schmit, I am very pleased to see you and I must tell you that we very much like to work with you. I think we're in a very good direction and we're going to share some thoughts, see if we can help. The social economy functions over time or should function over time as a support of society and in times of crisis. We lived through the great decade-long crisis in Greece with the bankruptcy and the memoranda. We also experienced it in the Union – you all did – with the COVID-19 pandemic. We are living it now in Europe where we have to deal with a crisis from Putin's war, with the war in Ukraine. Look, the social economy can act as a complementary but parallel model of economic development; a bottom-up model, contributing to social cohesion, tackling unemployment, real inclusion of the vulnerable – what we say, invisible people. And here I want to give you an experience: For 33 years I was in the therapeutic rehabilitation communities in Greece as a volunteer. We worked on these social economy models with clients and it went well. People were helped and leaned on their feet. And the units were viable, they just need to be strengthened here, what we are saying, both by the states and, let alone, by our Union. I also raise other issues, such as respect for labour rights, always with solidarity and democracy in mind. Not to transform the social economy into a competitive environment, as the Right envisions. We think the opposite, that is, that this is not a social laundering. The imposed financial incentives to support it should not become an opportunity for large private companies to speculate again. And one last one; I think that in this battle too Parliament can play its part, as can the Commission, in keeping people at the centre.

Madam President, I have been doing this work for thirty years, I am a journalist, and we will miss some colleagues today who cannot commemorate World Press Day. To be called Daphne, to be called George Karaivaz, to be called by their names, those who perished on the fronts of Ukraine? However, in Europe there is a big question – this is the issue – who dominates whom: Do media magnates dominate political power through the press, or does political power through the owners try to impose policies? From Berlusconi's victory in Italy, it was clear that a bell was ringing. That is, that economic interests have control over the media, and of course power. This is a serious matter of political interference in our democracy. Oligopolies and tycoons, from South to North. We see that this phenomenon tends to become a new reality. A new reality, a peculiar regime in the media space. And this is not enough, from the persecution of journalists, from the dismissals of journalists, we have reached the murders, the economic strangulation of the non-systemic media, as the oligarchs, after being allowed to do so by the legal framework, have in their possession the entire production process of the news, from production to the agency. Here we are talking clearly about an overconcentration of power, but on the other hand, a blurred landscape is created, where the basic concept of the separation of powers is lost. Monopoly economic interests and power, media and political power, political power and justice. What I am describing to you, tell me which country brings you to mind; Hungary, Poland, Greece, Italy? I think it is now a new regime in Europe and we need to take it very seriously. Let me tell you something more specific: Murder of journalists. Ours is called George Karaivaz. Surveillance by the National Intelligence Service, which is under the authority of the Prime Minister. Our journalist's name is Koukakis. Persecution of journalists. Her name is Gianna Papadakou. His name is Kostas Vaxevanis. And, of course, the intimidation of those who dare to ask questions with the now settled position of SLAPPs, lists of financial support, which is called to us Petsa list. To close, for the protection of the people of the press, for Eleftherotypia, for Democracy, for the colleagues who were lost, who were murdered, for Tintin who raised us. A motto can be heard: Legislative measures now and freedom for Tintin! Tintin wouldn't find a job in today's conditions.

Mr. President, this "real refugees" and "real refugees, while the others are not" has been said by the Greek Minister of Immigration. Let's watch out for this poison! Refugees are refugees. Pain is pain and if this directive was not activated in 2015 – I am from Greece and a million people were then in our waters, at our borders, and we were asking for solidarity – we understand why. Because you disagreed and did not want to support the government of the Left and you pushed us, one with the refugee issue and one with the memoranda, but now you did the right thing. The Temporary Protection Directive for Ukrainian refugees is quite rightly activated and it is clear that the false narrative of Fortress Europe has already collapsed from the dramatic events. In the one minute I have, I have only this to say: that the architecture of the new migration plan has been overtaken by the events themselves. On the basis of our principles we must agree on a new plan, human, fair, democratic, European.

Mr President, of course we agree with the rapporteur, with Mrs Sophia in 't Veld, without asterisks. The dossier we are debating today is one that unites logic, because events have passed us by, ladies and gentlemen. Today we say clearly that an elite of oligarchs is arming and of course arming and helping the authoritarian, undemocratic Mr. Putin to strike women, men, children, civilians in Ukraine. That's the truth. But these elites are not just in Russia. These oligarchs have equal responsibility for crime, you know that very well. The crime against humanity, but also the constant crimes against democracy and within their countries. Such lists of oligarchs existed and exist outside Russia and outside the dramatic events that bring us the news in front of the face, violently, and of course outside the European Union. Is it possible that Member States of our Union are washing machines for those who finance and support such extreme anti-democratic powers? I don't need to mention anything else that everyone here will agree with: It is inhumane and out of every rule to have people tortured, tormented, dying in the cold or drowning in our seas or coming from war zones or being killed by landmines on European borders, and on the other hand to open the door to an elite, to oligarchs, supporters of mostly illiberal regimes that simply have the logic of laundering black money. We've been through this before. We are now more determined and really waiting for the legislative initiative. This is what all democrats and Democrats across Europe expect.

Madam President, a few hours ago, the plenary session of the Court of Justice of the European Union dismissed Hungary's and Poland's appeals against the conditionality mechanism. This is a very interesting development. Let this decision be the opportunity to reach the ears of every woman, every man, everyone, everything, Poland and Hungary, every European citizen, that the rule of law, the core of democracy, will be protected at all costs, no matter how many battles we have to fight. It must be made clear today that the mechanism linking the Union budget to respect for the rule of law does not exist to punish or blackmail, as the political leaders in Warsaw and Budapest believe. It exists to protect, where political leaders themselves fail to protect the citizens themselves; to protect basic human rights, freedoms, justice, the functioning of justice, judges, prosecutors, the functioning of journalism, journalists and their media; to make the separation of powers, the rule of law and democracy itself very clear. I think it's a very interesting start. I hope the message reaches the capitals clearly.

Mr President, Minister, this time you have not brought us a video. We saw you live. And we have all accepted here that the European Union lives with its contradictions. But this also gives a particular political interest to our Union. But the case of Mr Janša is, I think, a superlative overrun, as on the one hand he presides over an institution which on the other he discredits. What do I mean. I would like to remind you that Mr Janša and the Minister for Justice have acted on the right to disconnect - I thank you - in the wrong way and for the wrong reason, when, when asked by our committee to answer the questions that also concern our meeting today, he demanded instead of answers that we play a video in committee and then, when we refused, he disconnected. On our recent visit to Slovenia by the committee responsible, in which I participated, I must tell you that I had a different image from Mrs Kanko. I must tell you that the Prime Minister cancelled contact with our committee at the last minute. The institutions presided over by Mr Janša are completely discredited. I will not comment on the unhistorical and unacceptable attack by the Prime Minister of Slovenia on my political group, which President Sassoli has responded adequately and rigorously. In the three days we have been in Slovenia, we have seen that there is a major problem concerning justice. I think Slovenia will either comply or it will have to move forward with Article 7.

Madam President, we have also heard this: 'They will not freeze, they will not die at our borders, but at the borders of others'. But this is the question, in whose borders and in whose soil will people die or will they die? The current situation at Poland's border with Belarus is the result of the European Union's political stalemate on the refugee issue. The instrumentalisation of refugees by the Belarusian regime is fully in line with the dead-end Brussels policy and the European Union-fortress narrative. We live them in Greece. As in the case of Erdoğan's miserable policy. But here we have another bad factor, the Polish government. Both cases, as well as the crises that occur daily at the borders within the European Union, Slovenia-Croatia, Bulgaria, Greece, justify our decision to be opposed to this policy. And I heard that, "Let's get them back." But where do we get them back? Afghans in the Taliban and Kurds in Erdoğan? Did we remotely draw the conclusion from the warm room in Brussels that they are not entitled to asylum? Is this the European Union we want? Well, our proposal is this, legal pathways, safe channels at the external borders, lawful asylum examination procedures and immediate assistance to people. Now, now, now! I do not care at what border it is, whether it is from here or there.

Madam President, today's debate is very timely, and congratulations, Commissioner. The fascist is ashamed to say that he is a fascist, but, because the events of Rome come in conjunction with the events of Athens – you will find out that the Nazis took to the streets and beat people again in the last few days, while a Nazi was also released from prison – I want to put the matter a little differently: Is this the right-wing aesthetic issue? If someone with Nazi symbols on his body, with a shaved head and with all the accessories that create a concept of a barbarian, where his narrative is the purity of race, of hatred towards foreigners, to different people, to what he considers should not exist, to live and breathe; and another, well-dressed, well-educated, accepts the essence, the core of these perceptions and places all this on the central agenda of his policy; Which of the two is more dangerous? Which one of you gives cover to the crime? Which one poisons people's souls? Both of them. Because one is the narrative and the other is the weapon. That is why I call on you, especially the PPE, because there are parties that cover these views, to wear on your lapel this triangle that I and my comrades have, which shows that we are against Nazism and fascism.

Mr President, Mrs von der Leyen, our inaction, the inaction of the European Commission, I think has brought us here and we have a responsibility for that. We saw, on the other hand, an Alt-Right show with the prime minister. What has happened here today, in the European Parliament, is an ideological struggle. Why has the European Union been built? We need to get things back on track. The concepts of human rights and the rule of law cannot be interpreted 'a la carte' to serve the interests of governments, Prime Minister. This decision was an on-demand decision by the Polish government to confirm its own ideologies concerning citizens' rights, with the tool of the so-called constitutional court. For the democratic arc, for the left, one thing is non-negotiable: rule of law and human rights. For other issues related to economic policy or the green transition we can negotiate, but we do not negotiate issues related to human rights and the right of every woman to do what she wants with her body. The same applies to the inalienable right of every human being to be identified and defined as he wishes. Poland must stay in Europe, but with the values of Europe, not with the values of Alt-Right.

Madam President, Commissioner, this has been a very good job and we would like to thank the rapporteur for helping to achieve a very good result with both dialogue and composition. In our opinion, this report is in the right direction. It is a common finding that in the post-COVID era – we are still in the midst of the pandemic – bold policies and changes in the economic governance of the European Union are needed to help our society cope with the effects of the crisis. This is a matter of the happiness of all people, not just some. As we go through the green and digital transitions, which are evolving in parallel with an ageing population, we understand that the European economy, industrial relations and social affairs will need to adapt accordingly and very quickly. The question is in which direction. With this report, with this composition of all members – or at least most of the democratic arc – we have found in which direction. I would like to say, therefore, that safeguarding workers' labour, social and trade union rights, including those working in digital, is at the heart of our proposals. Man must be at the center, women, disabled people, all people. It is a good day today for workers in the European Union.

Madam President, the title of Politico is very harsh: The United States imposes sanctions on Bulgarian high-ranking officials, but the United Europe does not give a damn. Something's going on here. If the United States of America attacks a Member State of our Union, we must see how we support the Member State but, if the Americans are really right, who are right, then in this case someone is not doing his job well. This is a huge hypocrisy, on an issue where, as I pointed out, America is right. The European Parliament has been shouting about this issue for a long time and is right, and as for Mrs von der Leyen, Mrs Johansson, and the Commission, I think they are not doing their job properly. We in the European Parliament had early become aware of the issue of corruption in Bulgarian government offices. In our resolution of October 2020, we referred to institutionalised corruption in the judicial system, the misuse of European funds, the silencing of press freedom and, more generally, the collapse of the rule of law. That's what we said. The Commission's reaction was very, very lukewarm, because in both annual Rule of Law Reports, this year and last year, the harshest expression it used was that the situation was of concern. But really for whom? For those who break the law, it does not inspire any concern at all. There are clear signs that European funds are feeding corruption channels, especially with the support of media outlets that are mouthpieces of the government. However, Mrs von der Leyen, in her reply in the last week of August, claimed that Parliament had not put forward any concrete proposals. But that is the job of Mrs von der Leyen and the Commission. For more than two years, Parliament has identified the problem, and the mechanism of development and its treatment, but the Commission is systematically evading it. Let me remind you one last thing: A few years ago, in 2015, because the then government had a different understanding of economic policy, you were so strict with my country that you wanted to throw it out of the European Union. But when it comes to the rule of law, democracy, freedom of the press, I see that you are very relaxed and very lenient. I think, on the Bulgarian issue as well as on that of Poland, that you should take measures. Right away.

Madam President, what is happening in Poland is particularly worrying because the circumvention of basic principles of the rule of law strikes at the core of our principles, democracy and Union. The alt-right's attempt to take for granted, as a de facto right of a Member State, and in particular of a Member State's government, to blacken democracy, is, I think, something that cannot but be stigmatised, it is something that must of course be condemned. What European Union tolerates the systematic prosecution of magistrates in its Member States? What is the European Union that swallows the brutal violations of the human rights of the citizens of the Union, that tolerates being targeted and persecuted by the alt-right, that is, by the extreme right, everything that from its own ideological point of view is considered different and minority? What European Union is this, where the people of the press, the journalists - I am a journalist and I feel it - are with their backs against the wall and for the monopolies of the press? The Polish authorities are deliberately and repeatedly violating the rulings of the European Court of Justice on the rule of law and the Commission continues to act as an irritated observer only. Of course it is a non-negotiable and inalienable right for Poland and Polish citizens to vote and elect what they think, but it is also our right to defend our beliefs about the European Union, democracy, it is our right not to tolerate policies that, a century ago, led Europe into deep darkness. Europe cannot go back. And I think Poland should not go back. He must join us in a democratic Europe. There is no other way. We must act decisively here.

Madam President, this is not where the friends of the platform clash with the enemies of the platform. Here the friends of progress do not clash with the others who are in the previous century. Here comes the question of who are those who do not want rights for workers. The fear of the past, which I have heard many times, is that people should have rights and people should have rights in the new conditions. There is a need for a legal framework that protects workers. Self-regulation, which I have heard very often in recent years, means that the powerful will win. A framework providing for collective labour agreements and the fulfilment of social security and tax obligations of platforms. It will not be possible for the algorithm to fire and hire, but it will be human-responsible and will regulate how platforms manage the data generated by workers and consumers, while workers retain control of their data, whether they are still working on the platforms or have left them. There will be trade union representation. It is a prerequisite for the proper functioning of democracy. Here, then, we can ally with many and we are bound to clash with others.

Mr President, first of all I should like to express my great sadness and concern at yesterday's murderous attack on my fellow journalist in the Netherlands. And get to the point. Homophobia kills! The lack of freedom of the press, the refusal to protect journalism kills! Samuel died yesterday in Spain. In Greece we lost Zak, Zak and Dimitra were murdered, victims of homophobia. We hear terrible and terrible things here. It is the right of the state, he says, of every state to violate rights. Where does that come from? Homophobia kills when LGBTIQ people in Hungary are criminalised, targeted and discriminated against by their own state. It is a matter for Europe, then. This is not a matter for the government of any country. In Poland, LGBTIQ-free zones, same discrimination, same violation of rights and a government war of threats and manipulation. Without justice, there is no democracy. The delay is complicity and I think we should get into the sanctions process immediately.