Human Rights in a growing together Europe

by Heidi Alm-Merk, Minister of Justice and European Affairs, Lower Saxony

- non authorized translation -

Ladies and Gentlemen,

it is a pleasure for me to speak at the opening of your conference "Conscientious Objection in Europe" about Human Rights in a growing together Europe.

In 1998 Osnabruck is celebrating the 350th anniversary of the Westphalian Peace. The end of the Thirty Year’s War - negotiated in Munster and Osnabruck - counts as the hour of birth of today’s Europe. Religious freedom and a climate of tolerance were the consequences. The town remembers this important event with congresses, concerts and other events.

Precondition for peace is dialogue. Osnabruck, in its tradition as a town of peace gives this idea again and again new stimuli. Especially in the anniversary year of 1998 so many new stimuli for peace and tolerance are given. In Osnabruck, in Europe, all over the world. In the run-up to the celebrations of next year your event presents an important contribution to the discussion on war and peace in Europe.

In 1998 Osnabruck celebrates another outstanding anniversary: The 100th return of Erich Maria Remarque’s birthday who gained world-wide fame with his anti-war novel: All Quiet on the Western Front. Remarque has put the people of his century in the center of his novel and the question of humanity, a central theme we are concerned about today as we were then when we think about how people in peace treat each other and live together.

People have always wanted to live in a world that fully respects their Human Rights. They want to live without fear of threats to their personal security and to move freely.

"The dignity of Human Beings is inviolable" says article 1 of the German constitution. Article 3, paragraph 3 states: "Nobody must be discriminated against or privileged because of his gender, his descent, his race, his language, his home country and origin, his faith, his religious and political opinions". The same protection of basic Human Rights are in force.

Tolerance, mutual respect and the principle of equality before the laws are part of our common heritage in Europe.

All citizens are entitled to the same rights, and the right to security is one of them,. i.e. there is no room for discrimination. Every human being must be able to feel secure nonwithstanding their race, religion or gender. Racism is contradictory to this principle.

We are actually living through a time of profound changes. And times of crisis are bad times for good arguments. Unemployment and serious shortage of housing, fear of declining prosperity and new distribution problems, East-West differences and the consequences of the German Unification, Civil wars and the world-wide consequences of migration - a lot of things indicate that in such times of individual and social changes and crisis, which need new political knowledge and acting, individuals and groups of people reject this cognitive process because need and threat promote more the opposite: To take refuge in fundamentalism and irrationalism, in prejudiced thinking and acting, in scape goat - theories and mechanisms, in hatred of the strange and the foreign, in a view of the world where only black and white count and nuances and differentiations are rejected.

Political arguments don’t have a good chance against these structures of prejudice, aquired through life stories and provoked by the present social developments.

Political education has to start from here, which is to a certain extent a constant trial against all reason, it needs a cautious, almost pessimistic utopian dream, like in Theodor W. Adornos much quoted phrase form "Education after Auschwitz":"Even if rational enlightenment - as psychology knows for certain - does not straight away dissolve the subconscious mechanisms, it at least strengthens in the preconsciousness certain counter authorities and helps to prepare a climate which is unfavourable for the worst."

Which answers have been found in politics during the last 50 years to these fundamental questions?

Those who had thought the end of Word War II to be as well the end of the violation of basic Ruman Rights were proved awfully wrong. Just think of the dramatic events in former Yugoslavia, the Greece of the coloneles, the dictatorships in Spain and Portugal.

The protection against the violation of Human Rights has been internationally embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. This declaration states explicitely that the rights and freedoms of humans have to be guaranteed without distinction. There must not be any distinction because of race, colour, language, religion, political or other conviction, national or social origin, belonging to a national minority, means or other status. The same principle is fixed in other documents, i.e. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the International Convenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Taking part in the debate on Human Rights with other peoples and other cultural areas, it would serve us Europeans well to get down off our high horse we like to sit on in respect to this issue. Not long ago we have lived through the same stages of development we are now observing in other parts of the world and are so easily tempted to criticise. The American "Bill of Rights" and the French Declaration of Human and Civil Rights came into being only in 1776 and 1789, just 200 years ago. The relapses which occured afterwords are well known. In Bosnia we could see that there was more to it than just severe restrictions on Human Rights. The pressure of public opinion in the Western and Islamic countries - a product of Human Rights - have eventually, after the fall of Srebrenica, caused an intervention which put an end to genocide and opened the path for the Dayton Agreement. We don’t know yet if all our hopes put into agreement will be fulfilled, but one thing we know for sure: after today’s knowledge the Human Rights are the most convincing means to achieve peace between people as well as between states.

Ladies and gentlemen, with the Amsterdam Summit this year more important steps towards the goal of a Federal State of Europe have been taken. Insofar there is also a new prospect on the protection of Fundamental Rights in the European Union. With every step towards intensifying integration the improvement and intensification of the protection of Fundamental Rights becomes more urgent. So we Europeans get ever closer to the vision of a "Bill of Rights" for the 21st centuries’ European Union. Politics live on visions, without them political action would come to a standstill. But every vision has ist own story. In the founding contracts of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1950, and the European Economic Union and European Atom Union in 1957 no regulations on the protection of Fundamental Rights could be found. Only in the Treaty on the European Union in 1992, the protection of Fundamental Rights was anchored in the general clause of Article F, paragraph 2.

Even without explicit regulations in the treaties the process of European Integration has not taken place in a space void of Fundamental Rights. The European Court early recognised the necessity to judge the common bodies’ action by comparison with the Fundamental Rights. Based on its duty of safeguarding the law, Fundamental Laws as legal priniples have been developed. The European Standard is being established by a rating comparision of the members’ legal systems, especially the national Constitutions. The European Convention on Human Rights which has been ratified by all member states serves as another source of knowledge.

The European Court’s merits in this field are profound and undeniable. That the there developed general formula on the protection of Human Rights has been embodied almost literal in the Maastricht treaty is an expression of this. In addition to that, they are expressed in its extensive and differentiated dispensation.

The development of the European Union is not a mere technical process, this becomes evident by looking at the treaty amendments which have been decided at the Amsterdam Summit.

The Amsterdam treaty acknowledges all Fundamental Principles the Union is based on: Freedom, Democracy, Human Rights and the Rule of Law. For the first time a procedure is introduced according to which severe and continuing violations of Fundamental Rights can lead to suspension of voting and other rights of a member state. Even more emphasis the Union gives to the non-discrimination and equality of women and men and guarantees an appropriate protection of individuals’ personal data insofar as the Union’s bodies are concerned.

With completion of the internal European Market the citizens are guaranteed the freedom of travel. To make sure they are able to make complete use of this right the protection against threats to their personal security must be guaranteed as well.

For this purpose, a new title will be incorporated in the EU treaty which will enforce the Union’s regulations and procedures concerning asylum, visa, immigration and checks at the foreign borders. Ireland and the United Kingdom are permitted to maintain their currant legal and administrative regulations on border checks.

The Schengen Agreement has already lead to free travel between 13 member states. The treaty of Amsterdam embodies the Schengen achievements into the Union’s legal framework. This is done especially in order to secure better judicial and parliamentary control.

In addition to that the most important result is the operative strengthening of the European Police, Europol. It is now possible in investigations of the members’ respective authorities, to create joint workgroups for the preparation and co-ordination of operative procedures. These treaty amendments enable the Union to prevent and combat crime more effectively.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have now explained the achievements of the goverments’ conference on the Maastricht treaties. Should not now everything be all right? Don’t these numerous Declarations and Conventions show that one has learned one’s lesson?

It is important to have a widespread consensus on the respect for Human Rights as fixed in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948 and the Human Rights’ pacts of the United Nations. This goal we must keep.

But in realising this goal we everywhere discover gaps between constitution and reality. Only too often the economical interests of a country have priority over Human Rights, like in China as well as in Iran, and for years Irak has been paid court to and armed. There is still a lot to do and there is a shortage of honesty. Think only about the unbearable silence on the horrible Human Rights violations in Algeria.

It must also include action against racism, xenophobia or antisemitism.

Establishing an European look out (watch-dog) against racism in Vienna surely is one good step in this direction.

Unfortunately we had to realize recently that discriminations against persons of other colour or culture are increasing in ferocity. This is a good reason for the Commission to start an initiative to be realized this year. Especially now, as barriers between the European peoples are being removed we have to take care of not replacing them by new ones; I am talking about differences between groups in society.

The purpose of the European Year against Racism which we are celebrating in 1997 is to show clearly the threat racism radiates and what constitutes its breeding ground. And we do not only have to deal with racial attitudes bust as well with outbreaks of racial motivated violence. Therefore we cannot combat racism simply with prosecution, eventuelly we must win people’s heads and hearts for more tolerance and mutual respect. So it is very important that all social groups get involved in this combat of racism, xenophobia or antisemitism, because the state alone would be overcharged with this task. Schools and other institutions for education, churches and denominations, employers and employees are called for to contribute to the combat of racism.

Ladies and gentlemen, Europe is not only an economical system. The maintenance of Freedom and legality, the respect for Human Rights we deal with so intensively today, the realisation of social justice, the maintenance and recreation of a healthy environment and safeguarding of natural resources are all goals the Project Europe stands for. To build the European house is the crucial precondition for peace, freedom and democracy in the 21st century. Europe is not a luxury but the guarantee for a secure livelyhood in the future. We still have to work hard in order to overcome not only the economical and social problems but the internal walls.

The dignity and the rights of the individual and peaceful coexistence are fundamental values for the European Union’s democratic and legally correct development. Therefore it opposes racist expressions and xenophobic conduct without hesitation. We don’t want to be merely the Europe of economy and employment but an ethical Europe, where the citizens live in peace and mutual respect and shape their future together. This means: there is no place for discrimination. Everybody must feel safe unregarding race, belief or gender. The violation of Human Rights is opposed to this principle.

There must be no pardoning of those who deny people those rights, insult, deride, harm or even kill them. Here our penal laws must fully come into operation. Any other language is bound to be misunderstood.

I want to thank you for devoting yourself to this important issue and I wish you a lot of public attention, especially because the public must support these issues positively and get involved.