7. Calls on the Commission to draw up, without delay, an evaluation of the application of Directive
75/129/EEC and to make proposals for measures to ensure compliance;
8. Welcomes the forthcoming European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, which will support workers and
improve the social and educational infrastructure with regard to collective redundancies, and calls on theCouncil to adopt a common position as soon as possible after Parliament's first reading and to ensure that it
can apply retrospectively where the effects of current closures carry over to 2007;
9. Expresses its solidarity with all workers, their families and their communities affected by redundancies;10. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments
and parliaments of the Member States, the European Trade Union Confederation and the Union of
Employers' and Industrial Confederations of Europe.
P6_TA(2006)0316
Extraordinary rendition
European Parliament resolution on the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the trans-portation and illegal detention of prisoners, adopted midway through the work of the Temporary
Committee (2006/2027(INI))
The European Parliament,
—having regard to its resolution of 15 December 2005 on presumed use of European countries by the
CIA for the transportation and illegal detention of prisoners (
1),
—having regard to its decision of 18 January 2006 to set up a temporary committee on the alleged use of
European countries by the CIA for the transportation and illegal detention of prisoners (2),
—having regard to Rule 175 of its Rules of Procedure,
—having regard to the interim report of the Temporary Committee on the alleged use of European coun-
tries by the CIA for the transportation and illegal detention of prisoners (A6-0213/2006),
A. whereas the main aim of the work of the temporary committee is to establish whether, in the context of
the allegations, the action of the European Union (EU) and its Member States complies with the founding
principles set out in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and guarantees, in particular, theprotection of fundamental rights as defined, inter alia, by the Convention on the Protection of HumanRights and Fundamental Freedoms, adopted by the Council of Europe on 4 November 1950 (the‘ECHR’),13.12.2006 C 303 E/833 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN
(1)Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2005)0529.
(2)Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0012.
B. whereas in Europe the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (1), proclaimed by the
European Parliament, the Council and the Commission at the European Council meeting in Nice on
7 December 2000 and incorporated in Part II of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe,constitutes one of the reference texts not only for the Court of Justice of the European Communities,but also for constitutional courts and other courts in the Member States,
C. whereas the fight against terrorism cannot be won by sacrificing the very principles that terrorism seeks
to destroy, notably that the protection of fundamental rights must never be compromised; whereas
terrorism must be fought by legal means and it must be defeated while respecting international andnational law and with a responsible attitude on the part of governments and public opinion alike,
D. whereas the principle of the inviolability of human dignity appears in the first article of the Charter of
Fundamental Rights and underlies every other fundamental right, in particular the right to life (Article 2),
the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 4), the right toprotection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition (Article 19) and the right to an effectiveremedy and to a fair trial (Article 47) and whereas this principle may not be subject to restrictions, evenfor the purposes of security in times both of peace and of war,
E. whereas, according to international human rights standards, such as those laid down in the United
Nations (UN) Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and PoliticalRights and its related instruments, and in particular in the ECHR, the Member States are under an obliga-tion to ensure that any person under their jurisdiction enjoys the fundamental rights granted at interna-tional level, including the prohibition of transfers where there is a risk of torture or other cruel,inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,
F. whereas European and international human rights law prohibits enforced disappearances, including
secret detentions, in which an individual is held incommunicado, without information about his or herfate or whereabouts being revealed to his or her family or the public, outside the purview of any legalprocess,
G. whereas, in addition to the provisions of the ECHR, the allegations may give rise to liability on the part
of the Member States as parties to:
—the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,
adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1984,
—the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted by the United Nations General
Assembly on 16 December 1966,
—the Chicago Convention of 7 December 1944 on International Civil Aviation, and in particular Arti-
cles 3, 4 and 6 thereof,
H. whereas the closest possible cooperation between European, American and all governments in the world
committed to the same cause is necessary to combat terrorism,
I. whereas the closest possible consultation and cooperation is necessary between the temporary
committee and the Council of Europe, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and
the authorities of the Member States, and in particular the national parliaments,13.12.2006 C 303 E/834 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN
(1) OJ C 364, 18.12.2000, p. 1.
J. whereas this consultation and cooperation should take account of activities and investigations already
carried out, and in particular:
—the final reports of the Swedish Ombudsman (1) and the Swedish Parliament's Constitutional Affairs
Committee (2) and the reports still awaited from the United Nations Committee against Torture (3),
which refer inter alia to the rendition to Egypt of Muhammed Al Zery and Ahmed Agiza,
—the information memoranda of 22 November 2005 and 22 January 2006 on ‘Alleged secret deten-
tions in Council of Europe member states’ by Senator Dick Marty, chair and rapporteur for the
Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly,
—judicial investigations in progress in various Member States, in particular the conclusions reached in
Italy in the investigation by the Deputy Public Prosecutor of Milan (4) on the illegal abduction and
rendition to Egypt of the Egyptian national Abu Omar, and the ongoing investigation in Germany bythe Munich Public Prosecution Office on the alleged abduction and detention of the German citizen,Khaled El-Masri,
—parliamentary inquiries in progress or already concluded in various Member States and accession
countries,
—statements made by the authorities of several Member States, in particular Germany, the United
Kingdom, Spain and Ireland, regarding landings of civil aircraft used by the Central IntelligenceAgency (CIA) which have taken place on their territories,
K. whereas, in the same way, special importance must be attached to the interim report by the Secretary-
General of the Council of Europe (
5), drawn up as part of the inquiry conducted under Article 52 of the
ECHR, and the statements made by the Secretary-General at the press conference on 12 April 2006 inresponse to the detailed replies provided by the Member States of the Council of Europe (
6), including
the EU Member States; whereas the Secretary-General has stated that it is clear that rendition flights
have taken place, that ‘virtually none of our Member States have proper legislative and administrative
measures to effectively protect individuals against violations of human rights committed by agents offriendly foreign security services operating on their territory’g and that he has received ‘official acknowl-
edgement of the “handing over” of individuals to foreign officials through procedures which do not
comply with the standards and safeguards required by the ECHR and other legal instruments of the
Council of Europe ’(
7),
L. whereas this initial phase of the temporary committee's work has made it possible to assemble a
coherent dossier of information deriving, in particular:
—from the hearings held on 13 and 23 February, 6, 13, 21 and 23 March, 20 and 25 April and 2 May
2006 with lawyers, journalists, representatives of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), alleged
victims of extraordinary renditions, representatives of the public authorities of the Member States
and representatives of the European institutions,13.12.2006 C 303 E/835 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN
(1) Parliamentary Ombudsman, ‘A review of the enforcement by the Security Police of a Government decision to expel
two Egyptian citizens’, reference No 2169-2004 (22 May 2005).
(2) Swedish Parliament, ‘The Swedish Government's handling of matters relating to expulsion to Egypt ’, Scrutiny report
2005/06-KU2
http://www.riksdagen.se/templates/R_PageExtended_7639.aspx.
(3) Decision of the Committee Against Torture, Communication No 233/2003, Mr Ahmed Hussein Kamil Agiza/Sweden
(20 May 2005),
http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/MasterFrameView/3ef42bcd48fe9d9bc1257020005533ca?Opendocument.
(4) Milan Court, Sezione Giudice per le indagini preliminari, Reference numbers 10838/05 R.G.N.R and 1966/05 R.G.GIP.
(5) Secretary-General's report under Article 52 ECHR on the question of secret detention and transport of detainees
suspected of terrorist acts, notably by or at the instigation of foreign agencies,
https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=SG/Inf%282006%295&Sector=secPrivateOffice&Language=lanEnglish&Ver=origi-nal&BackColorInternet=9999CC&BackColorIntranet=FFBB55&BackColorLogged=FFAC75.
(
6) http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/Files/Events/2006-cia/annexes.asp.
(7) Notes for the press conference given by Terry Davis, Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, on Wednesday
12 April 2006,
http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/Files/PA-Sessions/April-2006/20060412_Speaking-notes_sg.asp.
—from written contributions from guest speakers and official and other documents to which the
temporary committee has had access to date,
—from statements by representatives of the United States government who acknowledged the practice
of rendition while at the same time denying the fact that torture had been used or outsourced,
M. whereas, in the absence of any quasi-judicial investigatory powers and in the face of alleged activity by
intelligence services being kept secret by national authorities, the temporary committee has gatheredcorroborated information that some illegal practices have taken place on European territory affectingEuropean citizens and residents and has therefore shifted to European governments the burden ofproving whether, in fact, their human rights obligations under Article 6 TEU and the ECHR have been
met,
N. whereas the work carried out to date by the temporary committee confirms the validity of Parliament's
decision of 18 January 2006 to set up the committee but has also shown the need to carry out furtherchecks and gather additional information, and whereas it must therefore be allowed to continue its workso that it can fully carry out the mandate conferred on it,
O. whereas paragraph 3 of its decision of 18 January 2006 stipulates that the temporary committee is to
present an interim report to Parliament, with detailed proposals on how it will continue its work,
P. whereas, in the present resolution, ‘European countries’ should be understood as meaning Member
States and accession, candidate and associate countries, as outlined in the mandate of the temporary
committee adopted on 18 January 2006,
Q. whereas the present resolution covers three different types of arrangement which the USA appears to
have:
—extraordinary rendition, in which individuals are transferred to another government for
interrogation;
—secret detention, in which individuals are transferred to locations under the control of the USA; and
—proxy detention, in which individuals are transferred to the custody of a third country for detention
at the behest of the USA; while no public record exists of a European country holding an individualat the behest of the USA it is very possible that individuals may have passed through European coun-
tries on their way to such detention,
On the information obtained to date by the temporary committee
1. Endorses the conclusions of the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe following the inquiry
conducted under Article 52 of the ECHR;
2. Notes also, in this context, Opinion No 363/2005 delivered by the European Commission for
Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) (
1) to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe,
and in particular the following points:
—active and passive cooperation by a Council of Europe member state in imposing and executing secret
detentions engages its responsibility under the ECHR,13.12.2006 C 303 E/836 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN
(1) http://www.venice.coe.int/docs/2006/CDL-AD%282006%29009-e.asp#_Toc130704767.
—a Council of Europe member state's responsibility is also engaged where its agents (police, security
forces, etc.) cooperate with foreign authorities or do not prevent an arrest or unacknowledged detention
without government knowledge, acting ultra vires;
3. Regrets that the rules governing the activities of secret services seem inadequate in several Member
States, which means that more effective controls must be set up, in particular as regards the activities offoreign secret services on their territory, and also at foreign military bases, and considers that rules of coop-
eration should be established at EU level;
4. Regrets that the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) has denied the temporary committee
access to the full text of the NATO Council Decision adopted on 4 October 2001 on the implementation ofArticle 5 of the Washington Treaty; urgently invites NATO to grant access to the full text of the Decision to
clarify the matter;
5. Understands the importance of close co-operation between the intelligence services of the Member
States and those of its allies, but stresses that such cooperation should not be confused with the abandon-ment of sovereignty over European territory and airspace;
6. Notes the contributions made by the EU Coordinator for Counter-Terrorism, Mr De Vries, and by the
High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, Mr Solana, who both stated that theywere not aware of any violation of national, European or international law by Member States cooperatingwith the CIA, while adding, at the same time, that under EU law they were not competent to request rele-vant information from Member States;
On the illegal seizures, removals, arrests, abductions, extraordinary renditions and secret detentions
carried out by the CIA, other US agencies or services or other third-country security services
7. Is concerned that, according to the information which has already emerged in the Member States, the
Council of Europe and the work of the temporary committee, serious and inadmissible violations of funda-mental human rights have, since 11 September 2001 and as part of the essential action to combatterrorism, taken place on several occasions, in particular with reference to the ECHR, the United NationsConvention against Torture, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the InternationalCovenant on Civil and Political Rights;
8. Is led to believe on the basis of evidence presented to the temporary committee that, in some cases, the
CIA or other US services have been directly responsible for the illegal seizure, removal, abduction and deten-tion of terrorist suspects on the territory of Member States, accession and candidate countries and for theextraordinary rendition of, amongst others, European nationals or residents; recalls that these actions do notcorrespond to known international law concepts and are contrary to the fundamental principles of human
rights law;
9. Regrets that the agreements of understanding between the USA and European countries have not been
made available to the temporary committee;
10. Condemns the practice of extraordinary renditions, which is aimed at ensuring that suspects are not
brought before a court but are transferred to third countries to be interrogated, where they could betortured, and detained in facilities controlled by the USA or local authorities; considers unacceptable thepractices of certain governments consisting in limiting their responsibilities by asking for diplomatic assur-ances from countries in respect of which there is strong reason to believe they practice torture, which viewwas also expressed in the conclusions of Manfred Nowak, UN Special Rapporteur on torture; considers,
moreover, that the extraordinary rendition of persons to places where torture is endemic is a violation of
the principle of ‘non-refoulement’, as laid down in Article 3 of the UN Convention Against Torture;13.12.2006 C 303 E/837 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN
11. Considers diplomatic assurances, insofar as they request an exception to the norm, to be a tacit
acknowledgement of the existence of torture practices in third countries and therefore contradictory to the
EU's responsibilities as set forth in the ‘Guidelines to EU policy towards third countries on torture and other
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’, adopted by the Council on 9 April 2001;
12. Is disturbed by the testimony given to the temporary committee by the Canadian citizen, Maher Arar,
who was arrested by the US authorities, transferred by the CIA through a European airport and detained fortwelve months in Syria, where he was subjected to torture; notes at the same time the statement given byUS legal adviser, John Bellinger, who stated during the visit of the temporary committee delegation to theUSA that the Arar case was dealt with under US immigration and customs law and had nothing to do withthe alleged cases of rendition;
13. Is deeply concerned that all the work of the temporary committee so far seems to indicate that Euro-
pean airspace and airports have been used by CIA front-companies in order to bypass the legal obligationsfor state aircraft as set out in the Chicago Convention, thus enabling persons suspected of terrorism to be
transferred illegally to the custody of the CIA or the US military or to other countries (including Egypt,
Jordan, Syria and Afghanistan) which frequently use torture during interrogations, as is recognised by theUS government itself (
1);
14. Notes that the work of the temporary committee has so far not revealed any evidence or proof of the
existence of secret prisons in the EU; considers, however, that in the following months, the work of thetemporary committee will focus more closely on this subject;
15. Welcomes the reaction of the US Congress, which has implemented the McCain Amendment designed
to ensure better protection for alleged terrorists from illegal treatment by state agencies;
On the possibility that Member States and accession and candidate countries have, through their actions
or by omission, been involved or complicit in arrests, illegal seizures, removals, abductions, expulsions,
extraordinary renditions and secret detentions
16. Considers it implausible, on the basis of the testimonies and documents received to date, that certain
European governments were not aware of the activities linked to extraordinary rendition taking place ontheir territory; in particular, considers it utterly implausible that many hundreds of flights through theairspace of several Member States, and a similar number of movements in and out of European airports
could have taken place without the knowledge of either the security services or the intelligence services and
without senior officials from those services at least giving thought to the link between those flights and thepractice of extraordinary rendition; notes that this assumption is supported by the fact that senior figures inthe US administration have always claimed to have acted without encroaching on the national sovereignty ofEuropean countries;
17. Considers it equally implausible, in the light of the results of the judicial enquiries and of the testimo-
nies and documentation examined, that the abduction, by CIA agents in Milan on 17 February 2003, of theEgyptian national, Abu Omar, who was subsequently taken to Aviano and later to Ramstein, could havebeen organised and carried out without the Italian authorities or security services being informed thereof in
advance;
18. Calls on the Italian Government, assuming that the conditions which prompted the earlier decision are
no longer deemed to apply, to seek the extradition of the 22 CIA agents implicated in the abduction of Abu
Omar in order to assist the judicial proceedings in progress and help establish the truth;13.12.2006 C 303 E/838 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN
(1) See US Department of State country reports on human rights practices (2003).
19. Condemns the abduction by the CIA of the German national, Khaled el Masri, who was held in
Afghanistan from January to May 2004 and subjected to degrading and inhuman treatment; notes further
the suspicion —not yet allayed —that Khaled el Masri was illegally held before that date, from 31 December
2003 to 23 January 2004, in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and that he was transported fromthere to Afghanistan on 23-24 January 2004; considers the measures that the Former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia claims to have taken to investigate the matter to be inadequate;
20. Welcomes the parliamentary inquiry in the German Bundestag and awaits the final results of its
committee of inquiry;
21. Emphasises the need for more democratic and judicial scrutiny of EU counter-terrorism measures;
takes the view that the Council's Working Group on the fight against terrorism should systematically deal
with the protection of human rights during its meetings and publish an annual report on this matter;
22. Calls on the future Fundamental Rights Agency to pay particular attention to cases involving the extra-
dition of alleged terrorist suspects from Member States to third countries;
23. Deplores the fact that the Swedish state relinquished control of law enforcement on 18 December
2001 at Bromma airport when the Government's decision to expel two Egyptian citizens, Mohammed Al
Zary and Ahmed Agiza, was executed and US operatives were allowed to exercise public authority onSwedish territory, which, according to the Swedish Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman, is not compatible withSwedish law;
24. Deplores the fact that Sweden's expulsion of the Egyptian nationals, Mohammed Al Zary and Ahmed
Agiza, in December 2001, was based solely on diplomatic assurances from the Egyptian government, whichdid not provide effective safeguards against torture;
25. Urges that investigations be continued to clarify the role of US soldiers, who were part of the NATO-
led Stabilisation Force (SFOR), in the abduction and transfer to Guantánamo Bay of six Bosnian nationals
and/or residents of Algerian origin, contrary to a binding interim decision by the Human Rights Chamber
for Bosnia and Herzegovina and despite the decision by the Bosnian Supreme Court to release the suspects,as testified by Manfred Nowak, who was a member of the Human Rights Chamber for Bosnia-Herzegovinaat that time; calls for the possible role of the Bosnian government in this case to be examined further; high-lights the need for more information on the possible involvement of NATO and the United Nations
International Police Task Force (IPTF) in this connection;
26. Urges that investigations be continued to clarify the alleged existence of a secret detention facility in
Kosovo and the possible involvement of the Kosovo Force (KFOR) in the illegal detention of terroristsuspects;
27. Proposes to invite the Secretary-General of NATO to a hearing of the temporary committee to clarify
inter alia the possible involvement of SFOR and KFOR forces in the illegal arrest, handing over and detentionof terrorist suspects;
28. Reminds the Member States that, under the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, States
have substantive and procedural positive obligations as regards human rights, are required to take legislative
measures to prevent human rights violations taking place on their territory and must also investigate allegedviolations and punish those responsible where such violations have taken place; further notes that, in theevent of violations of the ECHR, they may be held liable for failure to comply with those positive obliga-tions; stresses, consequently, that the Member States have an obligation to carry out investigations to ascer-tain whether their territory and their airspace have been used in the commission of violations of human
rights, by themselves or by third countries with their necessary direct or indirect cooperation, and that they
must also take all legislative measures needed to prevent the recurrence of such violations;13.12.2006 C 303 E/839 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN
On the use of torture
29. Stresses that the prohibition of torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment as defined in
Article 1 of the United Nations Convention against Torture, is absolute and allows no exceptions whether in
times of war or threat of war, domestic political instability or any other emergency; recalls that cases ofincommunicado detention, abduction or extraordinary rendition constitute violations of fundamental rightsunder international law, in particular Articles 3 and 5 of the ECHR, especially since these acts are synon-ymous with torture or inhuman and degrading treatment;
30. Recalls that information or confessions extracted under torture or by means of cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment may under no circumstances be considered as valid evidence, as laid down in theUnited Nations Convention against Torture, nor should they be used in any other way; reiterates commonly-held scepticism regarding the reliability of confessions obtained through torture and their contribution to
the prevention and combating of terrorism, as testified, among others, by the former British Ambassador to
Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, in a hearing before the temporary committee;
31. Urges the Member States and accession and candidate countries to strictly comply with Article 3 of
the UN Convention against Torture, in particular the principle of ‘non-refoulement’ according to which ‘no
state party shall expel, return (“refouler”) or extradite a person to another state where there are substantial
grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture’ ; calls also on the United
States to review its interpretation of the principle of ‘non-refoulement ’, as set out in Article 3 of the
Convention;
32. Calls on the Member States to reject altogether reliance on diplomatic assurances against torture, as
recommended by Manfred Nowak;
33. Calls on the Council to adopt a common position against the use by Member States of diplomatic
assurances from third countries, where there are substantial grounds for believing that individuals would be
in danger of being subjected to torture or ill-treatment;
On the use of European airspace and European airports by the CIA
34. Believes that many of the flights by aircraft owned or hired by the CIA using the airspace and airports
of Member States and accession and candidate countries have involved repeated violations of the ChicagoConvention because the obligation to obtain authorisation, as laid down by Article 3 of that Convention inrelation to state flights, was not complied with;
35. Deplores the fact that no Member State or accession or candidate country has adopted procedures
aimed at verifying whether civilian aircraft are being used for purposes incompatible with internationallyestablished human rights standards;
36. Considers European legislation on the single European sky, the use, control and management of
national airspace, the use of Member State airports and European carriers to be totally inadequate; stressesthe need to establish new national, European and international standards; calls on the Commission to imme-diately improve legislation by bringing forward a directive aimed at harmonising national laws on thesurveillance of non-commercial civil aviation;
37. Calls on the Commission to bring forward recommendations for Member States on improving stan-
dards of monitoring the activity of privately chartered aircraft using EU airports and airspace;
38. Considers it necessary to shed light on the true substance of the agreement relating to the new transat-
lantic agenda initialled in Athens on 22 January 2003, which speaks of increased use of European transitfacilities to support the return of criminal/undesirable aliens;
39. Considers it necessary to establish how airspace, civil and military airports, and NATO and US bases
have actually been used by the US secret services;13.12.2006 C 303 E/840 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN
40. Considers it necessary to ascertain whether there is any evidence to confirm that secret prisons have
been operating in some European countries, as has been alleged in several investigations by journalists and
authoritative NGOs;
On the official delegation visits undertaken so far by the temporary committee
41. Considers that the two official delegations to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the
United States of America have been a source of essential information for the work of the temporarycommittee and have made it possible to directly ascertain both the political authorities' version of eventsand the view held by civil society;
42. Condemns the fact that the German national, Khalid El-Masri, was held illegally in Afghanistan for
more than four months in 2004; deplores the reluctance of the authorities of the Former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia to confirm that El-Masri was in Skopje and was probably being held there before his renditionto Afghanistan by CIA agents;
43. Regrets the US government's strongly restrictive interpretation of the United Nations Convention
against Torture, and notably of the prohibition on any renditions that may lead to extradited prisoners beingsubjected to torture or, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment;
On the future work of the temporary committee
44. Notes the need to continue the work of the temporary committee and further examine the relevant
events in order to ascertain whether there has been a violation of Article 6 TEU by one or more Member
States; stresses also that the investigations should be extended to events and countries which have not been
explicitly mentioned in this resolution;
45. Decides therefore that the temporary committee will continue its work for the remainder of its estab-
lished twelve-month term, without prejudice to the provisions of Rule 175 of its Rules of Procedure on thepossibility of extending the term;
46. Considers that preparatory legislative work at EU and Council of Europe level should be initiated as
soon as possible in order to provide adequate legal protection for persons within the jurisdiction of MemberStates and to ensure effective parliamentary scrutiny of intelligence services at national and European level;to that end, considers it essential to set up the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and make it
operational;
47. Regrets the clear differences of approach that have emerged to date between the American and
European legal models regarding the matters falling within the temporary committee's remit; recognises,however, that international terrorism represents one of the key threats to the security and stability of the EUand the international community as a whole and that this threat can only be fought by legal means in closecooperation with the USA; points to the urgent need for extraordinary renditions to be clearly prohibited ininternational law and for the European institutions to adopt a common position on this matter and address
this issue with the third countries concerned;
48. Considers that the temporary committee should also, on completion of its work, suggest the principles
to be adopted, in particular:
—concerning the need for internal EU monitoring arrangements to ensure that Member States meet their
human rights obligations,
—as regards new rules on the exchange of information between intelligence services,
—as regards agreements with third countries and international organisations on combating terrorism;13.12.2006 C 303 E/841 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN
—as regards agreements with third countries in connection with the European Neighbourhood Policy, the
most important underlying principle of which should always be respect for human rights;
49. Calls on its Bureau to take the necessary measures to enable the temporary committee, in view of the
very specific nature of its powers, to fully carry out the mandate conferred on it by granting any appropriate
derogation from Parliament's internal rules until completion of its work, in particular with regard to:
—the number of experts invited to hearings of the temporary committee and entitled to reimbursement of
their expenses,
—the number of visits and members authorised in the context of official delegations of the temporary
committee,
—the drafting of verbatim reports of hearings conducted by the temporary committee, as well as the trans-
lation of those reports into the languages of those EU countries that are affected by the investigations;
50. Welcomes the work done by the Council of Europe, and in particular by the rapporteur of its
Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, and the cooperation established between the Council ofEurope and the temporary committee;
51. Calls on the Council and each of its members, and in particular its Presidency, to lend their full and
unconditional support to the work of the temporary committee, in accordance with the principle of loyalcooperation as defined by the Treaties and the decisions of the Court of Justice of the EuropeanCommunities;
52. Calls on the Member States to take a stronger stance on the closing of the detention centre in
Guantánamo Bay and to take a pro-active role in finding a solution for detainees against whom no legal
proceedings will be brought and who cannot return to their country of origin or residence because they
have become stateless or face torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment;
53. Urges Member States to provide all European citizens and all those having resided in the EU who are
currently detained at Guantánamo with all necessary support and assistance, in particular legal aid;
54. Encourages the Council of Europe Committee for Prevention of Torture (CPT) to work towards
ensuring that each Council of Europe Member State complies with its obligation (
1) to inform the CPT of
any detention facility on their territory and allow access to such facilities;
55. Encourages the Commission to give its backing to the temporary committee in all the steps it is
required to take;
56. Recalls the vital importance of working in full cooperation with the parliaments of the Member States,
accession countries, candidate countries and associate countries, in particular with those which have under-taken work on the same subject;
*
* *
57. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments
and parliaments of the Member States and accession countries, candidate countries and associate countries,the Council of Europe and the Government and both Houses of the United States Congress.
(1) European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Ref.: CPT/
Inf/C (2002) 1 [EN] (Part 1) - Strasbourg, 26.XI.1987, Article 8.13.12.2006 C 303 E/842 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday, 6 July 2006EN