[ALBSA-Info] Statement by Th. Pangalos

[Agron Alibali]

Parliamentary Assembly session : 27-31 January 2003   Theodoros Pangalos : the Council of Europe can be of considerable benefit to the European Union
Mr Pangalos, you have just presented to the Parliamentary Assembly a report on the "Contribution of the Council of Europe to the Constitution-making process of the European Union". Underlying the title of the report is the question of the future of the Council of Europe after the enlargement of the European Union from 15 to 25 members. 
Question : What do you see as the answer to this question? 
Theodoros Pangalos : I have been aware, in my discussions in the Council of Europe, of a sense of unease, particularly in the Assembly, its representative body, concerning the future of the Council in connection with the enlargement of the European Union. In geographical terms, the Union is to become bigger. Of the Council's 44 members, 25 will become members of the Union in one year's time, and ultimately 30 or 35. That brings with it a number of problems, first and foremost the question of duplication and overlap. For example, the European Court of Justice is beginning to take an interest in human rights, which has hitherto not been the case; the European Court of Human Rights here in Strasbourg functions in a very effective and positive way. 
In addition, the European Commission is increasingly becoming involved in areas such as the protection of public health, the environment, education and culture, which so far have been the exclusive preserve of the Council of Europe. I do not want to protect private hunting grounds, rather I want to ensure that our efforts are co-ordinated. I think that the Convention on the future of Europe and the Treaty which will emerge will provide us with a very timely opportunity. So we need to be discussing these matters now and define the respective role of each organisation. In certain fields - such as the protection of human rights, the Council of Europe's experience and expertise are widely acknowledged. This is why the Convention should be included into the future European Constitution and it should be made possible for the European Union to accede to the Convention, so that the protection of human rights, which is a political commitment set forth in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union, becomes an institutional and legal reality. 
Question : Apart from this very important field of human rights, what do you feel are the other fields of competence which the Council should retain in the future? 
Theodoros Pangalos : Human rights, of course, with conventions such as the anti-torture convention, the status of foreigners, etc; but in addition, the Council has drafted some extremely important texts in fields such as youth, education and sport, health, not to mention bioethics and cyber-crime. This is not, however, a complete list. 
Question : How is the Council of Europe better suited to deal with these topics? 
Theodoros Pangalos : The Council's achievements, which I have just referred to, are not the result of chance or of greater intelligence. For the European Union, the economic criterion is fundamental given that it represents first and foremost a common market, an agricultural policy, an economic, monetary and structural policy. This criterion is not to be found in the Council of Europe. Which means that the Council may sometimes make mistakes, but it also means that it can be more courageous or imaginative. 
Question : In your report you make an innovative proposal, putting forward the idea of European citizenship. Why? 
Theodoros Pangalos : The thinking behind it is the following: states refuse the idea of European citizenship on the grounds of the principle of sovereignty. They do not yet feel mature enough to relinquish national sovereignty. This is why we are proposing a European citizenship which is based not merely on where or to whom you are born (ius soli or ius sanguinis) but which also takes a residence criterion into account. Obviously, such a criterion would need to be properly defined in relation to concepts of permanent residence, minimum period of residence, integration etc. This citizenship would confer a number of rights, the right to free movement, and economic and social rights. Everything reflected in the body of Community law. Why should these rights be limited to nationals alone and exclude millions of people who have been living among us for years, who are familiar with our laws and the behaviour we expect in order to live in a harmonious society, in short, people who have become fully-fledged Europeans?




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed