Women
in Prison
Quakers
have been involved in issues of criminal justice and conditions in
prisons for 350 years. In part, their concern rose out of their own
experience of religious persecution and imprisonment during the early
days of their existence in England. It also arose out of their conviction
that each person is of value and should be treated with dignity. This
led them specifically to work on the abolition of the death penalty,
on improving conditions for those imprisoned, and on restorative justice
and alternatives to imprisonment. The most famous historical example
of this Quaker work is Elizabeth Fry who was concerned primarily about
the conditions of female prisoners being transported to Australia.
The
Quaker Council on European Affairs (QCEA) has participatory status
with the Council of Europe and also represents Quakers at the European
Union institutions. It has worked on criminal justice issues throughout
the 25 years of its existence, publishing a number of reports in
this area.
The
long-standing and continuing Quaker involvement in criminal justice
and human rights both nationally and internationally has led to
the concern for the rights and conditions of women in prison. There
is now a joint project between QCEA and the Quaker United Nations
Office (QUNO), Geneva, which follows on from the statement made
by the Quakers who attended the UN Commission on Crime and Criminal
Justice in Vienna 2003.
Both
QCEA and QUNO Geneva will build on Quaker expertise of criminal
justice, prison work, and human rights issues. Through research
it will reveal why increasing numbers of women are being imprisoned
and develop a better understanding of how prison affects women and
their children differently from men. The findings will lead to a
series of seminars, publications, and presentations to ensure that
national and international policy relating to women in prison is
based on a better understanding of their actual situation and the
impact of imprisonment on their children.
QCEA
will be contributing to the debate about the proper use of imprisonment,
its purposes and, most importantly, alternative approaches to criminal
justice. Whilst focusing on the issue of women in prison, the project
is sure to indicate applicable lessons to be learnt from both good
and bad practice.
By
undertaking a comparative study across a number of European countries
QCEA hopes to identify good practice across borders and spread knowledge
and expertise in that way. The analysis and conclusions drawn from
the research are intended to be used to undertake advocacy for improvement
in the prison system for women throughout Europe. This will involve
presentations to European Union institutions, to the Council of
Europe and to national governments as appropriate.
This
work will be done in conjunction with criminal justice work of Quaker
Peace and Social Witness Committee of Britain Yearly Meeting.
For
further information contact Martina Weitsch mweitsch@qcea.org
Return
to contents
Peace
and Justice in the Middle East
Last
month we reported on the meetings QCEA hosted in Brussels for a team
of Ecumenical Accompaniers recently returned from Israel/Palestine.
This month we look at some of the policy issues in relation to European
Union engagement in the Middle East. The
European Union has an Association Agreement with Israel and an Interim
Association Agreement with the PLO. Both have been entered into
in the context of the EU-Mediterranean policies of the EU which
aim to establish both a Political and Security Partnership and an
Economic and Financial Partnership with the 10 Mediterranean Countries
not in the EU.
In
the context of the EU – Israel Agreement two key issues arise:
1.
Despite the fact that respect for human rights and democratic principles
constitutes a substantial element of these Agreements, there is
no monitoring mechanism to ensure that the countries concerned maintain
respect for human rights and democratic principles in practice.
This leaves the EU in a weak position to take action under these
Agreements in situations where human rights and democratic principles
are not respected in another country.
2.
Under the terms of the Agreement, favourable customs treatment is
afforded to goods traded between the EU and Israel. The issue here,
however, is what territories are or are not part of Israel and therefore
the territorial scope of the Agreement. Under international law
all territories currently occupied by Israel which fall outside
the 1967 border (the Green Line) do not constitute a part of Israel.
Accordingly, any products originating from occupied territories
and settlements should be outside the scope of the trade elements
of the Agreement. However, this is not implemented by Israel and
not enforced by the EU. The European Commission does not make the
link between Israeli exports of settlement products and violation
of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. (The settlements contravene
this.) According to the Commission, the problem arises from a difference
of interpretation between Israel and the EU on the territorial scope
of the Agreement and it therefore seeks a technical solution of
the problem.
What
can or should the EU and its Member States do about these two issues?
And what are the obstacles which impede action?
The
EU can and should call for international human rights observers
to monitor any peace process in the region. It is well known that
Israel is not willing to agree to such an observer mission. How
can the EU and the international community overcome this resistance?
The
EU should implement the letter of the EU-Israel Agreement with regard
to trade. Trade with the EU is important to Israel, but is it important
enough to make a difference, given the significant support Israel
has from the US?
A UK
House of Commons Select Committee conducted a six month inquiry
last year into Israel’s behaviour in the Palestinian occupied
territories and as a result of its findings is calling for the EU-Israel
Agreement to be suspended until Israel lifts the movement restrictions
it has placed on Palestinian trade which are strangling the Palestinian
economy (see press report: The Guardian International, 5 February
2004, p.2).
Three
good reasons for the EU to suspend its Association Agreement with
Israel What might be the impact of this?
Israel
could make it very difficult for the EU to work with the Palestinian
Authority if it chose to do so. Suspension of the Agreement might
precipitate such action.
The
EU would suffer financially from a suspension of its Association
Agreement with Israel as EU exports to Israel are worth around 50%
more than exports from Israel to the EU.
A suspension
of the Agreement would certainly put an end to any political dialogue
between the EU and Israel.
The
impact of any EU action would be dwarfed by the support given to
Israel by the US.
Thus
the publicly well rehearsed arguments for allowing the status quo
to continue. Is that a reasonable position to take?
But
of course, there is also some justification in seeking to continue
political dialogue and in maintaining a situation where the EU can
work effectively with the Palestinian Authority without undue interference.
A priority
is to try to influence US policy towards Israel. That requires concerted
action on the part of all the Member States and a willingness to
confront the US. Some Member States are less willing to do this
than others and that could be said to be the single most important
obstacle to progress in the EU position on these issues.
As
individuals we need to make our voices heard with our governments.
We also need to vote with our money, not buying any products of
which we cannot be sure that they have not been imported in contravention
of international law.
There
is no question but that these issues need to be addressed in small
and larger steps to achieve progress. Despite the complexities,
we renew our call to the EU to call for international humanitarian
rights observers and to implement the EU-Israel Agreement in line
with international law.
Martina
Weitsch and Liz Scurfield
Return
to contents
MEPs
call for EU seat on Security Council
On
29 January 2004 the European Parliament debated and voted on a report
presented to it by the Committee on Foreign Affairs regarding EU representation
on the UN Security Council. The
report and its recommendations were adopted by a significant majority
(367 in favour, 62 against, 14 abstentions). The full text of the
resolution adopted can be found on the European Parliament website:
http://www.europarl.eu.int/home/default_en.htm where you will need
to follow the link to plenary sessions and then to the session of
29 January 2004.
Interestingly,
the report and resolution make no comment at all about the question
of whether this would have an impact on the position of the UK and
France as permanent members of the Security Council. It does, however,
propose that Africa, Asia and Latin America should each have an
extra seat.
The
resolution also proposes reform of the Security Council including
the proposal that a veto could only be actioned jointly by two Security
Council members.
The
EU will only be able to progress this after the Draft Constitutional
Treaty (DCT) has been agreed, as the EU will not have a legal personality
until then. It would then fall on the EU Foreign Minister proposed
in the DCT to represent the EU at the Security Council.
Clearly,
such a resolution by the Parliament only opens or furthers the debate.
The move can only be taken forward in agreement by all the Member
State governments.
We
would like to hear your views on this matter. Any responses please
to: mweitsch@qcea.org or to Martina Weitsch by post at Quaker House,
Square Ambiorix, 50, B-1000 Brussels.
Return
to contents
Seeking
your recollections of QCEA over the last 25 years
QCEA
is 25 years old in 2004. A great achievement for a small independent
Quaker organisation which was founded by a group of individuals who
were and are convinced that Friends have things to say to the people
who make decisions at a European level. QCEA
continues this work in the changing environment of an ever expanding
European Union which has more and more impact on the lives of those
of us who live in Europe and on people the world over.
QCEA
wants to celebrate the achievements of the last 25 years.
We
need your help with this.
We
are planning to put together a small publication which collects
some of the recollections of life and work here in Brussels.
We
want your stories, your thoughts, your poetry, your photos…
Anything
at all that you think would be of interest to all those who have
supported QCEA over the years and continue to do so.
Anything
at all, too, which you think it would be good to remember so we
can all learn from it.
Please
send us your contributions as soon as possible to:
Martina
Weitsch, Joint Representative at:
By
e-mail : mweitsch@qcea.org
or by fax : 00 322 230 63 70
By
post : QCEA, Quaker House, Square Ambiorix 50, B-1000 Brussels,
Belgium This
collection to celebrate 25 years of Speaking Truth to Power in Europe
will be launched at the QCEA/QPSW conference on Economic Justice
in November 2004 in Brussels. For more information on the conference,
please watch this space.
Return
to contents
Back
to the main Around Europe page |
