Speeches

Mr President! Baby Sara is now four years old, she likes to laugh, romps around and certainly has her own head. She is raised by two people who love her, who love each other. But love can sometimes be complicated, because Sara does not have the same rights as other children of her age, because her rights and those of her parents Kalina and Jane are curtailed in Bulgaria and in ten other EU countries. Because they can be discriminated against in 11 Member States. Because eleven Member States are more interested in how Sara was conceived than how much she is loved or what her future looks like. We therefore support the Commission's proposal to give same-sex couples a right to their child and their children a right to parental love. We are appalled that this proposal is already a red line for so many Member States, whether out of false concern for their so-called traditional values – here nice greetings to the Kremlin and Mr Putin – or out of false consideration for alleged formalities. It's not our job to complicate love. It is our job to support all children in the EU, no matter where they live, no matter what gender their parents are. Rainbow families must be recognised in each Member State, otherwise the fundamental rights of parents and children will be undermined.

Madam President, Madam Vice-Presidents, Madam Commissioner, yes, we have issues with foreign interference, with hybrid interventions from abroad, and with corrupt politicians at home. But frankly, those issues are not quite new. There has always been money that spoke louder than words if paid to the right people. There was always corruption and always politicians for sale to foreign powers. So what is new? I will tell you what is new. A political trend where authoritarians and anti-democrats set their NGOs under pressure by accusing them of being foreign agents, by blaming them for representing interests of their grantors, by imposing on the NGOs the burden of bureaucracy, distracting them from their original burden: the burden of saving democracy. This should not happen with this law, for one simple reason: we are not authoritarians. We do not want to assist authoritarians in the EU to label, prosecute, pressure their civil society, and this is our goal with this legislation. We must strike a delicate balance between accountability and freedom. This is how history will judge us, will judge you, and will judge this legislation. Let’s do everything possible to defend our free space for our civil society.

Dear Mr President, Vice-President, Rapporteur, Colleagues! The digitalisation of cooperation is urgently needed and it is good that we are pushing it forward. Europe and its justice systems: Yes, we are growing closer together, and digital means are part of it. And yes, it also gives us opportunities. For example, access to justice will be improved in such a way that case-law can become faster and more efficient. And what is particularly important to me: Victims of crime do not have to arrive in person when they are in other Member States, or – which is also very important – violence and traumatising experiences do not have to be relived when you are in a room with the perpetrator, the perpetrator, or the accused at this time, as a witness or as a victim. That's on the good side. But let us not forget that it is about fundamental rights. This is not only about trust in this system, but also about fundamental rights, about the integrity of our legal system and, ultimately, about the rule of law. We all know from our normal lives: remote meetings have something different than meetings in the room, and the more important it is in court hearings that digital hearings are not the same as on-site exchanges; This should not and should not become the norm. Also important for us: Confidentiality of communication with lawyers must be maintained. We must not go in the direction of Russia and other authoritarian states. But, I'm very optimistic about that. We've put in enough protections.

Madam President, the amendment addresses the horrific situation around the hospital in Gaza and the tragedy that took place there. It was formulated in consensus with the leading groups in the first hours after the incident news arrived. And now, as more and more news is upcoming and more and more differentiation is there about what happened, we would like to propose an amendment that would focus on those who innocently perished there, and the potential perpetrators who are responsible for it, with consideration of the new information that we have in the media, so that we do not spread fake information or do not somehow push it, even unwillingly. Our proposal is the following: ‘Deeply regrets and mourns the loss of hundreds of innocent lives and those injured at the Al-Ahli Hospital blast; calls for an independent investigation under international law to establish whether this was a deliberate attack and thus a war crime; calls for perpetrators to be held accountable.’

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, So far, we have not considered geostrategy. Now we're trying to spell out geostrategy in analogy. What we're still not doing is developing a geostrategy for the digital space. After all, a true geostrategic Europe does not see digital policy merely as a technical thing. Our future decides on it. There has to be a technology foreign policy. To this end, we must formulate three objectives, three areas and three necessities. Three objectives: It must be about the ability to act, also in the digital field. It must be about our capacities and a balance between capacities and values. The values are a green Europe and a people-centred, digital Europe. And it must be a strategic approach, embedded in our foreign policy. Three areas are necessary: Competition between global powers must be addressed, especially in the technological field. We need to talk about war and peace-making through digital means. And we need to talk about freedom and oppression with the means of digital technology. These are the goals that we have to embed and work on in a normal geostrategic and foreign policy way.

Mr President, my wholehearted condolences to the victims and all those affected by the destruction of the Al-Alhi al-Arabi Hospital in Gaza, no matter how many victims there were, because even one person’s life is a human life. It is tragic that missiles of Islamic Jihad and Hamas are flying over the heads of those whom Hamas has made their hostages, and by that I don’t mean Israelis – I mean Palestinians. It is tragic that instead of investing in water and sewage systems, water pipes are used to produce missiles, machinery to kill – to kill others and sometimes to kill one’s own. It is unimaginable pain to look at photos of the Israeli victims. It is tragic that Israel has no choice but to defend itself and, yes, defend itself by military, because Hamas leaves Israel no other options. This war started with Hamas inhumanity. This war will end through Israel’s humanity. Because yes, it is human, deeply human, to try to provide security to your civilians, but it is also human to do the utmost possible to limit the humanitarian losses in Gaza, to look for peaceful solutions beyond the current operation and, yes, look for a peaceful solution with Palestinians ultimately. This time is now time for our commonness in Europe without hatred, without hatred on the streets and without us trying to get political benefits from supporting the masses, chanting for terrorists. We need to stand together, even if it is very, very hard to be able to stand.

Mr President, the effectiveness of sanctions is determined by clarity about our sanctions’ goals, and effectiveness of sanctions is determined by the professionalism of sanction policies. This Council and this Commission have lost sight of the main priorities: our priority is to prevent Russian government and Russian machinery from continuing to be able to finance this genocidal war. The goal of sanctions is not collective punishment of Putin’s opponents in the EU. Just recently, the interpretation of sanctions by the Commission – according to which Russian dissidents cannot bring personal items such as shampoo or soap from Russia to the EU – is frankly an embarrassment and is self-ridiculing the sanction instrument, one of the most important instruments of our foreign policy. Cars with Russian plates should not be allowed in the streets of the EU? Come on, listen to that. Are those our priorities? At the same time, while EU customs officers were hunting down Russian dissidents and their personal cars, we have heard about lifting sanctions from key actors of the media landscape in Russia, based apparently on two articles in the media. Is that the professionalism that we want in our sanction policies? We hear reports about sanction lists that are created based on Wikipedia articles. Is that the professionalism that we have? We still do not have a clear understanding of how sanctions are imposed, lifted and implemented. Dear Commissioner, dear Council, we must increase pressure, we must enact more sanctions, and our colleagues were right about that. We must close the loopholes. But please do it with a clear view of helping Ukraine through restricting the Russian state, and do this by driving a clear, transparent and professional strategy.

Mr President! Anyone who has seen pictures of Sarema Musayeva knows what this is all about. It is about inhumane crimes against an innocent woman whose family members have dared to contradict Kadyrov. But it is also about much more: It is a symptom of the disintegration of the Putin system – systemic disintegration, moral disintegration. It's also about a deal, a deal with human lives between Moscow and Grozny, a deal to maintain power. And it is also about Chechnya becoming a laboratory for decades – a laboratory to normalise inhumanity. Only through a war of extermination against the Chechen people, now to normalize the most brutal cruelty against dissidents, against the families of these dissidents, against oppressed women and also against minorities, especially against the LGBTQI community. With this resolution we say: We look very closely at these crimes, and these crimes are not only in Moscow, they are everywhere in Russia and especially in Grozny. We are watching and we are drawing our conclusions. We won't let it go on like this.

Madam President, We do not believe when Azerbaijan says that Nagorno-Karabakh will be integrated into a multinational Azerbaijan. We cannot believe this when cultural development and civil rights protection are verbally promised. No, what we are seeing is cultural annihilation and ethnic cleansing, if not by proven violence – some doubt – then certainly by proven threats of violence and physical annihilation. If the cause of Nagorno-Karabakh is presented as terrorism, the entire population, at least the male population, will be degraded to criminals and thus also threatened with death. Our demands must be that we also offer the Armenian minority from Nagorno-Karabakh a perspective, up to an opportunity to return under an international guarantee. In any event, the payment of compensation must be clearly and unambiguously demanded. And we must support small democracy in Armenia and offer the poor a Western, democratic perspective.

Madam President, I am one of many who have consciously decided for a future in Germany, in the EU. For years I was asked how it could be that I lived in the country of the perpetrators. For years I have answered proudly that, precisely because of Germany's past, I look confidently into Germany's future, that, like so many of us, I feel confidence in German democracy precisely because this society has never forgotten what it carries in the backpack of its history. We have repeated these answers so many times that now no one abroad asks these questions that we ourselves became proud German Democrats. But now let's look at the latest poll results, at the poll-drinking regulars' tables. And we ask ourselves the question: Was self-confidence in vain? There must be a jolt through Germany, through Europe and through this Parliament. Where is the responsibility of the parties? I do not ask Mr Krah about his TikTok revisionism. But I turn to Mr Weber, whose Prime Minister sacrifices the German tradition of remembrance on the altar of maintaining power. We must fight for our common democracy together. And that means that we as Democrats do not make a pact with populists, fascists or anti-Semites, even if it hurts. This is democracy.

Mr President, here we go again: another year, another report on Türkiye, another time to congratulate the rapporteur for his great job. Thanks for holding us together and finding solutions for everything. Once again, we assessed if our Turkish partners came closer to us and we to them. We rely on Turkey and now we rely on Turkey even more, as a neighbour, as a NATO partner, and Türkiye relies on us. But year after year, we don’t come closer. We are still waiting for Türkiye to ratify Sweden’s NATO accession, for political prisoners to be released, for the implementation of several judgements of the European Court of Human Rights. Yet we can help our societies to continue to cooperate. And yes, we should discuss how to advance visa liberalisation. We should discuss how to advance customs union and talk about high-level representatives meeting together again. But it does not mean that we stop thinking and believing in the accession process. I talked to civil society. I talked to the young generation. They all asked us to reiterate this chance – chance for their European future. And yes, the criticism remains, and it will always remain, and we will keep fighting for people to be released from prisons and for democracy in Turkey. But we will do it with a mind focused on Turkey being Europe at some point. We owe it to the young generation.

Madam President, Vladimir Putin doesn’t use the internet. But if he did, he would be able to visit the site of the World Food Programme and read the very first sentence: ‘Today, 828 million people around the world will go to bed hungry.’ 828 million people: the equivalent of six Russias are starving in the world. And Putin’s ultimatum will add yet another Russia to it. Over 100 million more would starve. And what is it all about? It’s about lies, it’s about blackmail and it’s about greed. It’s about lies because there are no sanctions against food exports from Russia, but Russia always says. It’s about greed because by bombing port storages and infrastructure in Ukraine and offering Russian grain on Russian terms, it is about greed and what should we do? We should simplify, not complicate imports through the EU on Ukrainian grain. Customs and sanitary controls should not become an unnecessary burden. And yes, we need EU subsidies to make the transfer of crops with new routes economically viable. It is not about the Polish election here. It is our responsibility to ensure Ukrainian crops do not rot and people do not starve.

Mr President! The AI Regulation was not even adopted yet, as the European Commission has already launched initiatives that are overtaking it. In any case, this could misunderstand the Commission's overzealous public relations work on the AI Pact. We must agree on a common cause, dear friends and colleagues. I hope this is undisputed here. The AI law we just passed is the foundation of our AI strategy. As co-legislators, we owe citizens, we owe companies what we were elected for: To give politics and society certainty through innovation, but also orientation through regulation. That's our job. That must be clear. We must not give away momentum, we must not confuse it with egomaniac initiatives that outdo each other. We need to implement effective and equitable regulation for AI worldwide, based on our law. We agreed on this in response to demands for moratoria and bans. We're not Elon Musk, we're not the Italian government, but we're not China or Russia, where everything that serves despots seems to go. The use of common rules in AI can help – can help, but must take place on the basis of European rules and must not undermine them. That is the common message that emanates from today's discussion, and that is a good thing!

Mr President! One can disagree on the wisdom of NATO's decisions these days, including how realistic the Ukrainians' expectations were. But there are two things that are clear: It is now also our responsibility, the EU's responsibility, to give the Ukrainians what has been lost for many of them these days. We need to start a process, an accession process that is seriously and clearly planned. In this Parliament, we have already started a parliamentary process in this direction, and the Council must now follow suit. Secondly: We must clearly signal to Putin: Vilnius is not Bucharest. The Vilnius pledges are not consolations and shifts, as happened in Bucharest, and are not an encouragement for Putin to strike. The security of Ukraine is everything and remains everything to us. We will do everything, with or without a clear plan, to support Ukraine’s membership here. A word to the left: Stop playing social and human rights against each other. The ... (The President withdrew the floor from the speaker.)

Madam President, names matter. Just today, we had the ceremony of reading names of many victims of those who were persecuted, who were tortured, who were expelled by the Soviet regime from the Baltic states, from Eastern Europe. Names matter, and that’s why when I’m asked why we’re mentioning these two names, I know why. Because by mentioning them, we do not just remember that they exist. We give them a sign of hope. We give them a sign of solidarity. And that’s why I’m mentioning these two names: Tihran Ohannisian and Mykyta Khanhanov. Two kids, who are treated not just like kids, not even like humans, they are mistreated by a regime that occupied their motherland and who does not give them even a right of being treated like humans. And this is just one more crime in this endless chain of crimes committed by the Russian and pro-Russian forces on the Ukrainian territory. And we promise you, Tihran, and we promise you, Mykyta, we will do everything to stand on the side of your country, and to try our best to help you and many millions like you to win this war.

Mr Colleague, one question: Do you think it's okay to fall in the back of your own rapporteur - both rapporteurs? And secondly: Do you know the cases where in Russia, with the help of facial recognition in the middle of the streets, people were practically dragged out of the metros, out of the streets and arrested just because they were traveling in public space with their faces, were recognized and subsequently held accountable for political reasons in a repressive state? And isn't that a lopsided level we're headed to here? Because these were also laws – criminal laws, criminal law – which were applied there, as you would like to do here.

Mr President! Many thanks to the rapporteurs. Thank you for your honesty, reliability and trust in the cooperation. We have created a good compromise, and we must respect it and - I say this to the EPP colleagues - respect it and not counter it. Honesty, reliability and trust are also the three cornerstones of this Regulation. AI in Europe needs consumer confidence. Entrepreneurs need reliability. They need reliable guidelines to ensure sustainability and innovative growth. But as Europe's legislators, we must show courage and honesty and say: Where fundamental rights are at risk, where discrimination begins, where environmental damage threatens, we draw the line. That's why we put a stop to techniques that claim they can tell whether Manfred Weber is happy or angry, that pretend to determine the sexual orientation of everyone sitting here by their facial expressions or behavior. And yes, we don't want mass surveillance with AI. We are not the Chinese People's Congress, we are not the Russian Duma - we are the European Parliament, and we operate in an area of freedom and democracy. Most applications, which is important to say, are not affected by this scheme. That's a good thing too! Between technology pessimism and technology optimism, we choose the right balance: technology realism. The balance in this package is correct. We have walked this path together, and we continue along this path into the future together.

Madam President, I thank the President for the visit. This union is a union of equals, but yours – yours is a special case. For decades, your country has been in the epicenter of so many challenges; some imposed from outside, others self-inflicted: fossil explorations, golden visas, implementation of sanctions against Russia and holding against foreign threats. This made you the epicenter of history, and this history made you what you are: an island of geopolitical pitfalls and geopolitical aspirations. As Chair of the Delegation of the European Union to EU—Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee, I salute your humanitarian efforts in the wake of the terrible earthquake in Turkey. I strongly believe that the Cyprus conflict can be overcome and I commend your personal dedication to breaking the deadlock with the help of your allies. Our solidarity to the Republic of Cyprus is – and will remain – unbroken, and this must be made clear to all the regional powers. Dear President, let us work together for a sustainable, peaceful and progressive Cyprus.

Mr President! While in Russia yesterday the national holiday, Russia Day, was celebrated extensively, Russia in Ukraine continued the shelling of volunteer rescuers in small boats who wanted to rescue people from the flooded area, people who wanted nothing more than to help others. In a small village alone, there were three dead and ten injured rescuers. The Russian propaganda machine is trying to trap us in the vicious circle of mutual accusations. Some things are very, very clear: Without Russian control, this catastrophe would not exist. Without the Russian invasion, there would not have been this criminal control. Without the criminal intentions, these dead in the water and the dead among the rescuers would not exist. Russia bears responsibility under international law - for everything that happens in the occupied territories, for everything that does not happen in the occupied territories. Russia bears responsibility for all crimes against man and nature. We need to support the Ukrainian government. We need to double and triple military aid. And we must give hope to these people in the occupation - hope that they will soon become Europeans.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I wonder, frankly, whether we are talking about the same law or the same text here, because I cannot agree with Mr Körner at all. A review: When the Commission adopted the e-evidence package in 2018, this package, it had just launched the rule of law procedure against Poland. And now, just as we see countries, governments, one by one, demolish and domesticate their justice systems, just as we see that in some countries the behaviour that is self-evident in other democracies is being criminalised, just as we see journalists, politicians and priests coming under pressure – at this time we give these governments and their investigators the right to access data from these people unfiltered, unrestricted. No, ladies and gentlemen, this is not progress, this is a step backwards. And that's what you have to call it. Because the result that I am seeing right now is even worse than what this Parliament has adopted. We were critical when we read this. This data access is a freedom attack. The timing is wrong, the procedure is wrong, the balancing is wrong. The Greens will not agree with this decision.

Mr President, colleagues, I would like to make sure that we are all on the same page regarding what the past one and a half years were all about. It was about defending Ukraine, but it was also about defending the aspirations of citizens, of Europeans, aspirations for freedom, pluralism and democracy. Polish society has made an enormous contribution to this fight to our defending Ukraine and democracies. I thank all the Polish citizens and all the colleagues here from Poland, from all the parties with whom we have been tirelessly working on this. We have defended and we are defending Ukrainian freedom. Now it’s time to defend democracy in Poland. Yes, we owe it to all the Polish forces, to all the Polish citizens, because this year’s election will be a landmark in our European history. That’s why the Commission is urged to do everything possible to remain decisive on the line regarding rule of law abuses in Poland, to think about an urgent procedure right now against the commission. We should stop legalisation of electoral fraud, abusing the current security situation. Our continent deserves it. Poland deserves it.

Mr President! 16-year-old Ihor from Kherson wanted to go on holiday for the first time in his life, and that is why his mother accepted the offer of the Russian occupiers and sent him to Anapa. But when Kherson was freed, the boy was stuck, as were thousands of other children in the camp. After weeks, the mother could only see him after he was told he would be adopted. When I hear what a matter of course the Commissioner for the Rights of the Child of the Russian Federation talks about the adoption and russification, de facto or real, of Ukrainian children, it shows how important the arrest warrant of the International Criminal Court is. It's not just a sign, it's an instrument. This is an instrument against impunity, but also against the absolute lack of awareness of injustice in the Russian Federation – awareness of injustice regarding the abduction and forced adoption of Ukrainian children, which remains a crime. And according to Article 2 of the Genocide Convention, this may also be part of a genocide against the Ukrainian people. You have to say that. The Russian authorities and Russian citizens must also hear this. Because this attack, the perverse attack on Ukraine, continues. First of all, these actions have given us the language. But the longer it lasts, the more we blunt as well. And that mustn't happen. This arrest warrant is a reminder of all of us. Crimes remain crimes, criminals remain criminals, no one can go unpunished. That is why this Parliament will always support the investigation of criminal offences and the prosecution of the guilty. Inhumanity and crime should not be normalized.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, we all agree that more transparency and international cooperation is needed from legal and also practical perspective. Let’s not lose sight of a different view. International adoptions are complicated and expensive. They take a long time and the outcome is uncertain. So, for parents-to-be this is a nerve-wracking exercise and this is also not in the children’s best interest. There is, of course, the Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption from 1993, but many countries in and outside the EU have paused or banned international adoptions due to scandals, abuses and corruptions. This is the point that we want to make. We call on the EU, together with the Hague Conference on Private International Law, to take the lead and reinforce and modernise the legal framework on international adoptions and do it not just on paper. Build a strong global network with expertise and capacity to facilitate international adoptions, always keeping the rights of the children and the best interest of the child as the binding guideline. This is our wish.

Madam President, when it comes to criminal organisations, criminals have one goal in mind: profit. The same is true for corrupt oligarchs from Russia or elsewhere hiding their wealth in the EU. So the most effective response is, to put it simply, to take away their stuff. And this is precisely what we will do. The Commission introduced the directive on assets confiscations and we are working together now to make this proposal fit for reality, fit for times when a war at our doorsteps is being supported and financed by money that was never clean. We will enable Member States to confiscate property linked to serious organised crimes and we cannot show any mercy in this. Handing over the criminal assets to a family member is the oldest trick in the book and I am determined to close this loophole and it must be possible to confiscate unexplained wealth – also unexplained wealth connected to corrupt state structures, also outside of the EU and yes, to use it to compensate victims, also states that were damaged by this money and its wars. Crime is not just about injustice, it is also about profits. Let us work together to take away this motivation from criminals.

Madam President, The focus of the Council meeting was, as it has been for months, the crisis, the war, Russia's inhuman attack on Ukraine. We witnessed demonstrations in Germany a few weeks ago, we also witnessed this here in this hall: People who demonstrate, partly negligently, partly intentionally, empathy towards Ukraine and willingness to show sympathy for Putin. Many of these people, including here in the hall, accuse us of wanting to boycott peace efforts. I recommend that they read the Council's conclusions. It explicitly states that we as the EU support peace efforts, that we support Zelenskyy's peace plan. It even says that we are ready for a peace summit. What they don't like is something else. It is clear to all of us that we want to achieve peace not at the expense of the victim of the attack, but for the victims of the attack. That's what's important to us. The will to support Ukraine in this House remains unbroken. In addition to peace efforts, there is no question of supporting efforts and willingness to support us. That is the most important thing at this summit.