Support grows for human rights sanctions in treaty

Date: 23/05/1996

By Rory Watson

EU countries face the threat of financial penalties if they systematically violate their citizens' human rights under plans which will be presented to Union leaders at their Florence summit next month.

Growing support for the possibility of sanctions being written into the revised Maastricht Treaty emerged yesterday (22 May) as Intergovernmental Conference negotiators began their second round of discussions on the key issues facing the talks.

“We do not have consensus yet, but this is one area where we have a great degree of consensus. We can now see more clearly what form penalties could take,” confirmed IGC group chairman Silvio Fagiolo.

Participants in the talks say it is now generally accepted that, in future, EU leaders should be able to suspend - in full or in part - member states which consistently and systematically fail to respect human rights.

The proposed new power is being seen as a further way of buttressing such fundamental values as the Union expands eastwards in the years ahead.

Fagiolo indicated that punishment could include suspending the economic benefits accruing from EU membership - implying that governments might consider halting regional, social and farm payments from the Union budget.

The proposal will feature in the interim IGC report which Fagiolo will table at the Florence summit.

Broad support is also emerging for a general non-discrimination clause to be written into the treaty to provide a firmer legal base for the Union's intensifying battle against racism and xenophobia.

After the IGC group's second in-depth analysis of the failings of the EU's current policies on justice and home affairs issues, Fagiolo concluded that “some points of common interest have emerged and are emerging more clearly”.

There is widespread support for simplifying the existing complex and secretive decision-making procedure. A strong majority backs moves to transfer at least three policy areas - asylum, visas and immigration - from the intergovernmental third pillar to full Community competence, opening the door for greater Commission, Parliament and Court of Justice involvement.

But there is much less of a consensus on the merits of including a specific chapter on employment in the new treaty. Germany's Deputy Foreign Minister Werner Hoyer confirmed that the issue continued to fuel “a lively debate”, with Bonn and London arguing against any such addition.

“The IGC is not about negotiating a political programme, but about constitutional change and we should not create the impression with the public that problems which cannot be solved at the national level can be solved at the European level,” Hoyer said afterwards.

As the discussions launched at the end of March enter their second phase, Fagiolo has confirmed that a number of options originally floated in certain areas have already been discarded.

These include the possibility of Union competence for new policies such as tourism, energy and civil protection.

“There is a lot of scepticism about introducing these into the treaty. Our second reading confirmed a lot of people's reservations, said Fagiolo, although he added: “That is not the attitude of the Italian government. It supports greater Union powers in these areas.”