Question by Sahra Wagenknecht, 5 July 2005

The Colombian government has recently passed a law through Congress, with the resounding support of Members with links to paramilitary groups, guaranteeing paramilitaries de facto impunity and thus also enabling known drug traffickers to escape justice.

This law has been strongly criticised by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights' representative in Colombia and by all human rights organisations.

At Cartagena the European Union, and the United Kingdom in particular, made it clear that the continuation of aid to Colombia was conditional upon a legal framework for the demobilisation of paramilitaries.

What stance does the Council intend to adopt towards the Colombian government following its decision in support of the perpetrators of crimes against humanity and which represents a serious attack on the rights of victims to secure truth, justice and compensation?

Does the Council believes that it can continue to encourage police cooperation with a country that makes such generous concessions to known terrorists and drug traffickers?

Excerpt from protocol of the debate in the European Parliament on 7 September 2005

Douglas Alexander, President-in-Office of the Council. The Council has been informed of initial reactions to the justice and peace law by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, who drew attention to insufficiencies of the law as concerns impunity, provisions on investigating heinous crimes and due restitutions or reparations for victims.

To prepare a thorough and comprehensive assessment of the situation by the Council, European Union Heads of Mission were asked to produce for September a considered analysis of the law and recommendations for the European Union's policy, taking into account the Council conclusions of December 2004. In this context, they will consult widely, including the government, civil society, the group of 24 and the United Nations.

As concerns police cooperation, the Council is convinced that training police in Colombia in accordance with the values and standards of the European Union will contribute to security and greater respect for human rights.

Vittorio Agnoletto (GUE/NGL), deputising for the author. – (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the answer seems very vague to me and puts off a decision sine die.

What we have here is a law that in practice regularises paramilitaries, offering organised criminals and drug traffickers the possibility of turning themselves into paramilitaries and thus taking advantage of this law. By the way, the law was also severely criticised by Amnesty International, which says that the demilitarisation and demobilisation have not actually taken place.

I therefore call for an extremely specific answer on the matter of funding: does the European Union still intend to finance this kind of project, which formally aims at demobilisation, whereas in actual fact it ends up providing support for the paramilitary groups?

Douglas Alexander, President-in-Office of the Council. I have listened carefully to the terms of the questioner's supplementary. I would respectfully suggest that if he is concerned about and desirous of a thorough answer, then that rather vindicates the point that I sought to make in terms of the need for EU heads of mission to prepare a very thorough statement in terms of what should inform the European Union's decision-making process.

Of course it is the case that the Union is committed to helping Colombia to resolve inter-related problems of internal armed conflict, trade in illegal drugs and human rights abuses about which he is rightly concerned. The Council conclusions back in December underlined the importance of the establishment of a proper legal framework that addresses the issues of truth, justice and reparation for the victims of that armed conflict.

However, I would reiterate the point I made in my initial answer, that we have a responsibility, given the need and seriousness of the issues that the questioner raised, to make sure that our decisions are informed by a thorough analysis of the true situation in Colombia at the moment.

José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra (PPE-DE). – (ES) Mr President, I would like to ask the President-in-Office of the Council whether he agrees with the statements by the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy and Secretary-General of the Council of Ministers of the European Union, Mr Solana, in support of the peace efforts by President Uribe in Colombia, and whether he believes that the laying down of arms by people responsible for horrendous crimes, such as the paramilitaries, is good or bad news. I would also like to know whether he is of the opinion that a decision taken by a democratically-elected body, such as the Colombian Parliament, could be illegitimate.

Douglas Alexander, President-in-Office of the Council. I am aware that the European Union could be more formally involved through timely political endorsement for the ongoing peace process to which the honourable Member referred. But that would take place once the Colombian Government has set out a comprehensive legal framework. This position has not changed and the Union is currently studying carefully the new Colombian legislation, the 'Justice and Peace Law' agreed in late June, to gauge whether these conditions have now been met.

James Hugh Allister (NI). – President-in-Office, in dealing with a sovereign government, is it not important, unlike the initial questioner, to always keep a sense of balance? In that regard, has the Council yet discussed and acted upon the disgraceful fact that three convicted international terrorists, who are fugitives from justice in Colombia, are now enjoying sanctuary in a European Union Member State, namely the Republic of Ireland? Is the Council content with this situation and, if not, what action is proposed?

Douglas Alexander, President-in-Office of the Council. In the course of my replies to questioners this afternoon, I have already been clear as to the distinction that is appropriately drawn between those matters for which a reply can reasonably be expected from the Presidency and those matters which instead lie within the domain of individual Member State governments.

The case to which the honourable Member refers, the so-called Colombia three, is a matter between the Irish Government and the Colombian Government. It is for the Irish authorities to pursue any extradition request with the Colombian Government if that is what they choose to do, but it is essentially a matter for the Irish authorities. In that regard, I think that is all it would be appropriate for me to say at this stage.