Côte d'Ivoire: Western parliamentarians speak out (3)
" a European Parliamentary Questions to the European Commission
Posted February 18, 2011
Côte d'Ivoire has experienced in recent months, a period of instability due to an electoral process interrupted before term. Without taking up the cause of one or other of the parties, it is however necessary to examine the causes and consequences of this situation where the EU has intervened directly, to the extent that the sanctions chosen, hit not only economic actors but also innocent people who are in no way responsible for this situation. The sanctions imposed by the EU suddenly now have consequences for the entire sub-region may cause serious tension between sovereign states.
This is not the first time in Africa, a country has an electoral process "unequivocal" and "unnatural" that leads to blockage of the country's political situation.
A presidential election was held in Côte d'Ivoire, the result is challenged by one of two candidates. The Ivorian Constitutional Council declared winner after Mr. Gbagbo invalidated a portion of the votes in some regions. It belongs to his opponent who disputes the decision to initiate an action before the competent legal authorities and provide evidence that there was no massive fraud or violence in the northern regions controlled by the rebel New Forces who in 2002 tried to overthrow Gbagbo. 1 - The violation of agreements Ouagadougou and the responsibility of the EU
On this issue, the requirement of Article 5 of the fourth supplementary agreement to the Ouagadougou agreement has in recent years been quietly put aside by the United Nations and Western powers (France and USA in particular). Regarding the UN, on reading the various reports of the Secretary General of the United Nations on UNOCI and resolutions of the Security Council on Côte d'Ivoire in 2010, the international community continue to legitimize the mission of UNOCI , refer to the Ouagadougou agreements in their entirety.
In a report dated May 20, 2010, the Secretary-General noted that "(...) President Gbagbo and the ruling party felt that the security situation in the north did not allow to organize freely election and to hold free and fair elections. They therefore called for the disarmament and the reunification of the country before elections are completed as required by the 4th Supplementary Agreement to the Ouagadougou agreement. Opposition parties accused the ruling party and the president to use the 4th Agreement as an excuse to postpone elections indefinitely. " And the report went further: "Many stakeholders with the Facilitator [1] believe that issues relating to these two processes (...) must be addressed simultaneously so as not to give either party any excuse for not fulfilling its obligations. "
This report was in fact open the way for implementing "flexible" of the condition to "disarm before holding the elections," or, to put it more directly, a non-enforcement of this condition. The shift observed in reports on UNOCI is also found in successive resolutions of the Security Council. The Security Council acknowledges in passing that when the presidential elections, there was no restoration of State authority throughout the country, or the reunification of the latter!
Under these conditions it is understandable that President Gbagbo, under pressure from the United Nations and Western powers have come to accept the holding of them in 2010, so as not to appear as one who does not want to elections at all, and for that he received assurances that the elections would take place normally.
However, after the first round and five days before the second round, the 26th report on UNOCI's November 23, 2010 considers security "stable but fragile" and recognizes that disarmament was not completed.
The report also recognizes that the authority of the state is still not restored in the areas occupied by the Forces Nouvelles. They continue to levy taxes and customs duties and other "illegal taxes" and to "own way" the police and justice because, as the report says, "in the absence of officers judicial police and security forces deployed, the courts are to judge any criminal case. " In these occupied areas, prisons are not under the control of the state, especially north. Concerning the situation of human rights, the report noted violations on all sides and in all regions, but stresses that the situation remains "extremely precarious in the west" and respect for human rights is " generally low "
Suffice to say that the elections failed to meet the agreements prior to the democratic conduct of these elections and that France and the EU have endorsed a flawed electoral process from the outset.
2 - The first trading
Faced with this situation and in a haste that has nothing to diplomacy, the French President has issued an ultimatum to Mr. Gbagbo, who, given the potential conflicts, undermined the French military contingent, the community of 12,000 French nationals and more generally French economic interests in Côte d'Ivoire.
him following in the footsteps of the European Union announced that December 13, 2010 menaçait le président de la Côte d’Ivoire et ses proches de sanctions. Les mesures prévues allaient d’un retrait de visas au gel des avoirs financiers détenus par certaines personnes présumées proches de Monsieur Gbagbo.
Le Conseil des ministres des affaires étrangères avait donc publié un texte qui décidait« d’adopter sans délai des mesures restrictives ciblées à l’encontre de ceux qui font obstruction aux processus de paix et de réconciliation nationale et en particulier menacent le bon aboutissement du processus électoral » notamment par « une interdiction de visas et un gel des avoirs ».
L’Union européenne a décidé January 15 to strengthen the sanctions in deciding the freezing of assets in Europe of 85 members of the "Gbagbo camp" and eleven economic entities some of which have a direct influence on the lives of Ivorians.
It should be noted that three people on this first list were removed since, including a pair of French entrepreneurs, who had nothing to do with litigation is that the seriousness of the formation of this list. It is now clear that the European courts shall be taken to say whether or not the Union's fundamental principles were not violated in this case.
It is not I think will happen to the French state or the European Union, nor to the international community to interfere in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. To those who blow on the coals, fanning the flames of inter-community tensions, it is worth remembering that the rhetoric going to war jeopardizes the lives of tens of thousands of Ivorians and Europeans.
Only diplomacy, negotiation and consultation are able to resolve the tangle of the Ivorian crisis.
It would also be good to remember the rule " two weights, two measures "which seems to settle in European diplomacy in terms of interest lost on many observers. I recall that France in the coup in Niger, condemning the seizure of power "through non-constitutional" by calling for dialogue! But perhaps the presence of AREVA in the country explained that!
I ask the formation of a commission of inquiry pluralistic European level with the task of determining responsibility and propose solutions to resolving the crisis.
- On what legitimacy and Which text is based on the EU to intervene in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation such as Côte d'Ivoire?
- Similarly, what criteria are used by the EU to intervene or not intervene in situations similar or even more sensitive on the African continent?
- Why did the EU it tolerated the violation of Article 5 of the fourth supplementary agreement to the Ouagadougou agreement for the holding of free elections and democratic?
- The EU has realized it when deciding the economic blockade of Côte d'Ivoire, it takes the risk of starving the country and even the cause of serious consequences for peace, civilians and economic entities not in any way responsible for this mess sustainable diplomatic-legal?
- How to reconcile the inscription on this list with the violation of the principles of Article 6 of the CSDH, which guarantees rights to a fair trial?
- What are the criteria that have prevailed in establishing the list of "banned" and are they consistent with human rights as protected by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms?
- The solution does not lie does not hold another "second round" after that, in agreement with the parties, all conditions (Ouagadougou agreements) are met for the full exercise the sovereignty of the Ivorian people to be guaranteed? "
Ah yes, the last point,
text above is
Marine Le Pen.
must admit that it has a different look in terms of diplomacy and foreign policy that we are making the draft "responsible" not only present on the Cote d'Ivoire, but in general (Alas sir) - and support unfortunately (against Côte d'Ivoire), "responsible" for the PS! See
http://www.sanfinna.com/aucourantdelaplume.htm
and
http://ci.telediaspora.net/fr/visuelvideo.asp?Idmedia=10690&idchaine=1&cat=0&tipe=0
This bodes really, all this added to all this, an election in 2012 in France which could be as folklore than that of 2010 in Côte d'Ivoire. So that one might wonder if this is not what we practice with UNOCI: it could serve in 2012 ... Paris!