Committee on Development Ordinary meeting
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Replay
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
DEVE European Parliament
Follow its sittingsTiago Moreira de Sá
Thank you, President. I will speak in Portuguese because I have my remarks in Portuguese, so it's easier for me, if you don't mind. Senhor Presidente, caros colegas, queria começar por dizer que foi mais uma vez um gosto integrar esta delegação do Parlamento Europeu ao Fórum Político de Alto Nível em Nova Iorque, ao lado de colegas eurodeputados de diversos grupos políticos. É precisamente esta diversidade que torna o nosso trabalho parlamentar mais útil. Podemos discordar profundamente sem deixar de reconhecer os objetivos que nos devem unir: combater a pobreza, proteger a dignidade humana, criar condições para que ninguém fique condenado à exclusão.
Há contudo uma questão que atravessa praticamente todos os Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável e que continua a receber atenção insuficiente: a corrupção. Há um ano apresentei a proposta de criação de um novo objetivo, o SDG 18, dedicado especificamente ao combate à corrupção.
Muitos dos restantes SDGs ficam comprometidos. Segundo várias agências das Nações Unidas, milhares de milhões de euros são desviados e perdidos em esquemas obscuros, muitos acabam em bolsos privados e são presa fácil de burocracias corruptas. Isto não é uma falha técnica, é roubo institucionalizado. Também por isso devemos olhar para o Global Gateway com ambição. O investimento europeu em infraestruturas, energia, transportes, saúde, educação e conectividade pode ser uma verdadeira ferramenta de desenvolvimento em certas zonas do mundo, desde que seja transparente, mutuamente benéfico, envolva o setor privado e respeite o Estado de direito.
E não podemos falar de SDGs sem falar das mulheres, um dos assuntos dominantes do fórum político juntamente com os jovens. Combater a violência contra as mulheres e raparigas não é apenas uma questão de igualdade, é uma questão de liberdade, segurança, dignidade e direitos fundamentais. A União Europeia deve continuar a apoiar concretamente esse combate, incluindo através da cooperação internacional. Neste âmbito, não posso deixar de condenar uma vez mais a decisão da Comissão Europeia de reunir com uma delegação dos Talibã. Quando a União Europeia recebe os Talibã, recebe mais do que uma delegação, recebe um símbolo, recebe a chibata que rasga as mulheres, recebe o silêncio que é imposto às raparigas, recebe a ordem política imoral que expulsou da escola, do trabalho e da praça pública metade da criação.
Naquela delegação não havia uma única mulher e essa ausência não é um acaso. A desaparição da mulher é a forma como os Talibã se apresentaram ao mundo e a nós, não é nem pode ser a forma como nós nos apresentamos ao mundo e a eles. Thank you, President, for your tolerance.
Marc Jongen
Yes, thank you, Chair. This was a very interesting mission. It's always a difference seeing all this and meeting the people involved and the institutions in these important decisions rather than just discussing it here. The High-Level Political Forum has shown a clear implementation gap. Only around 36% of accessible SDG targets are on track or making moderate progress.
For DEVE, in our view, the priority should therefore be effectiveness and measurable results rather than adding further targets and commitments. The estimated USD 4 trillion annual SDG financing gap cannot simply become an argument of ever higher European development expenditure. EU taxpayers cannot be expected to compensate for a global financing gap of this magnitude. Development policy mainly must respect national sovereignty and partner country ownership. The HLPF itself emphasized country-led implementation.
Global Europe should therefore avoid overly prescriptive EU conditionalities and one-size-fits-all development models. And very important, private investment and development finance should complement limited public resources. The EU funding should seek leverage and additionality rather than treating increased grant expenditure as the principal measure of European engagement. And I was very impressed how clearly Secretary-General Guterres pointed out exactly this point and said and also admitted that there are significant bureaucratic hurdles that should, that can be removed and should be removed in order to get more private investment in this field. So the political lesson from New York for DEVE, in our view, the remaining years to 2030 should be about delivery rather than expanding the catalogue of commitments, national ownership rather than centralization, investment rather than dependency, and measurable results rather than expenditure targets.
Thank you very much.
Barry Andrews
Excellent. Thank you. Now we go, give the floor to the Commission to react to these remarks from DG ENV, which is Mr. Giovanni Santambrógio, who's the Planetary Common Goods, Universal Values and Environmental Security Unit.
So please, Giovanni, you have the floor for three minutes and you're very welcome.
Giovanni Santambrogio
Thank you very much and good morning. Thanks for having me here. I would like actually to provide a bit of the taste of the mission of Commissioner Roswall to the High-Level Political Forum in July. As you know, she attended the Monday and the Tuesday of the high-level segment. And her participation was first and foremost politically important.
Together with the Commissioner, the representation from the Parliament and also from the Economic Social Committee, we ensured a strong EU representation at the Political Forum, which was something very appreciated by developing countries who attach a very good value to this forum and of course showed again our continued commitment to the Agenda 2030 and the SDGs. As head of the EU delegation, the Commissioner delivered our statement on behalf of the EU and 27 Member States, where of course we again reaffirmed our strong commitment to multilateralism, to accelerate implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Even if she had only a day and a half there, she had a very intense program around three main priorities. First of all was water, because first of all it's under her portfolio, but it's one of the SDG 6 under review and in view of the 2026 UN Water Conference. She met with the conference co-hosts, she participated in several side events about the conference and the message was clear: our main flagship contribution will be the Water Resilience Strategy, sorry, Water Resilience Initiative, and we all look for an action-oriented conference.
We also organized together with UNDP a high-level roundtable on mobilizing public and private investment for water resilience. It was very interesting to hear the private sector point of view. The second priority was circular economy and pollution. The EU together with Germany and UNEP organized an event on pollution to kind of place pollution not just as an environmental issue, but as a sustainable development issue, as a health issue, as an economic issue and so on. And of course as circular economy as a big contributor to address such issue.
The third big priority was the forum provided an opportunity for the Commissioner to engage with the highest level of UN hierarchy. We also met the Secretary-General Guterres, the Deputy Secretary-General Mohammed and UNDP Administrator Alexander De Croo. Discussion there covered many things: SDGs, water, UN80, but it was very good especially with the Secretary-General to hear that the UN is also moving from a climate focus, specific focus to a more holistic biodiversity, climate and pollution approach, and that will be part hopefully of UN80. Of course we also met in a EU team meeting the delegation from the Parliament and from the Social Committee, and we had good discussion there. The discussion on post-2030 were limited.
Next year will be an important, one second, will be an important edition paving the way to the SDG Summit in 2027. Thank you.
Barry Andrews
Thank you, Giovanni, and thank you for everybody. I think next year is a crucial year for the Sustainable Development Goals. There will be a summit in September probably. And we didn't have a delegation to the summit in 2023, but I really think as a committee, as coordinators, Lukas and Udo particularly, something we should have a think about for 2027 as we think about what comes next after Agenda 2030. So that's it for that item.
Item 7 is any other business. As there are no indications, item 8 is the date of the next meeting which is next Monday in Strasbourg. So, in 10 minutes we will resume with the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Subcommittee on Human Rights on the Sakharov Prize presentations at midday. So, thank you on my behalf to the interpreters and the secretariat and Hildegard Bentele will take over the chair for item 9. Thank you.
The European Parliament awards the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought.
Hildegard Bentele
Dear colleagues, I was told that you are in a big, big hurry, as everybody on a, on a, on a Thursday, so let's jump to the next item, which is the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, the presentation of nominees. And this meeting will be co-chaired as follows: by me, by of course David, and by our colleague Mr. Satouri. I would like to welcome you to this joint meeting, and we mark today the beginning of the procedure for the selection of the 2024 Sakharov Prize laureate.
Each year this prize affirms the European Parliament's unwavering commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights. By awarding this prize, we are honoring extraordinary women and men who, through their work, champion human rights, democracy, and freedom across the globe. They are all a source of inspiration and should be commended and encouraged. We are seeing an increasing trend of attacks on the universality of human rights, democracy, the rule of law, and international humanitarian law across the world. This Parliament must continue to stand up for those that actively promote the values our Union stands for, often at great danger to their lives and freedom.
Six admissible nominations have been received for this year's Sakharov Prize. You have received short biographies of all nominees. Without further ado, I will now give the floor to my colleague David McAllister to lead the presentation of nominees.
David McAllister
Thank you very much, dear Hildegard, and I can only echo the words you have found. I would also like to welcome you all, and without any further ado, we can now proceed with the presentations of this year's Sakharov Prize nominees. These, dear colleagues, will be as per standard practice done in alphabetical order. Since we have to close this meeting at one o'clock, I will be very strict together with my co-chairs that we all keep and follow the agreed speaking time of six minutes each for the presentation. The first nominee is Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya from Palestine, nominated by the Greens/EFA group and by the Left, and I give the floor to our colleagues Catarina Vieira and Rima Hassan to present the candidate.
Six minutes, please.
Catarina Vieira
Thank you very much, Chair. Dear colleagues, on behalf of the Greens/EFA group, it is my profound honor to nominate Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya for the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought. Dr. Abu Safiya is a leading Palestinian pediatrician and director of the Kamal Adwan Hospital in Northern Gaza. In December 2024, the hospital was brutally stormed by Israeli forces and Mr. Abu Safiya was forcibly disappeared. Today, nearly 21 months later, like many others, he remains in arbitrary Israeli detention, without formal charges nor incriminating evidence, and has reportedly been subjected to abuse and ill-treatment.
UN experts have urgently called for his release. Before his arrest, the doctor, like many others, treated the wounded, especially children, while courageously documenting the reality on the ground and pleading with the world to protect medical workers and facilities. He stayed with that important work through the worst conditions, through severe shortages and relentless attacks, through repeated evacuation orders and danger to his own life, through the total collapse of Gaza's healthcare system. He continued to run one of the two last operating hospitals in Gaza, saving children of others, even after the unimaginable pain of the killing of his own son in October 2024. His is not an isolated tragedy.
Mr. Abu Safiya is a symbol of the broader reality facing many Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, including thousands of those who remain in detention without due process. Beyond, he also represents not only the brave medical professionals, aid workers, and journalists who have been killed in Gaza, but also around the world, where first aid responders increasingly become targets of warring parties and in the blatant disregard for international humanitarian law. His case must compel us all to demand answers and accountability.
The doctors, the nurses, the aid workers, the journalists. And this on its own is also a declaration of our commitment to uphold international law. This is a candidacy that today is being brought forward by two political groups, the Greens and the Left. But importantly, this is a candidacy that represents deep values that I know I share with many other colleagues in this European Parliament. Values that run much deeper than political lines.
So I urge you, dear colleagues, to stand with us. For Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya. For the protection of healthcare workers. For the freedom to those who are in arbitrary detention and for the respect of international law. I thank you very much and I pass the floor to my colleague Rima Hassan.
Rima Hassan
Bonjour à toutes et à tous. Merci Katarina pour cette pour ce début de présentation. Donc je vais poursuivre pour défendre effectivement cette candidature. Le docteur Abu Safiya est l'un des visages du système de santé que l'armée israélienne a méthodiquement détruit à Gaza. Cette destruction systématique n'est pas étrangère au génocide en cours, elle elle en est l'un des instruments.
Détruire les hôpitaux, cibler les soignants, empêcher l'entrée des médicaments, rendre impossible les évacuations médicales, c'est priver toute une population des moyens de survie. Aujourd'hui, selon l'Organisation mondiale de la santé, 36 hôpitaux que comptait Gaza, seuls 19 fonctionnent très partiellement. Pas un pas un seul hôpital de Gaza n'est aujourd'hui pleinement opérationnel. Depuis octobre 2023, l'OMS a recensé au moins 920 attaques ciblant spécifiquement le système de santé de Gaza. Plus de 1700 soignants ont été tués.
Et aujourd'hui encore des dizaines de milliers de patients ont besoin de soins spécialisés et qui ne sont tout simplement plus disponibles à Gaza. C'est aussi cela détruire un peuple, détruire les conditions qui lui permettent de vivre. La commission d'enquête internationale indépendante des Nations Unies a conclu qu'Israël avait commis à Gaza quatre des cinq actes constitutifs du crime de génocide. Parmi eux, tuer les membres d'un d'un groupe, leur infliger des atteintes graves et leur imposer des conditions d'existence susceptibles d'entraîner leur destruction physique. Alors quand nous parlons du docteur Hussam Abu Safiya, nous ne parlons pas seulement d'un individu, d'un médecin.
Nous parlons de centaines de médecins, d'infirmiers, d'ambulanciers et de personnels de santé qui ont continué à maintenir des Palestiniens en en vie au milieu de ce génocide. Certains ont été tués ou arrêtés, d'autres continuent encore aujourd'hui à travailler dans les ruines de leurs propres hôpitaux. En distinguant le docteur Abu Safiya, le Parlement européen distinguerait aussi celles et ceux qui continuent de lutter pour préserver la vie là où tout concourt à la destruction. C'est pour eux aussi que nous portons aujourd'hui sa candidature au prix Sakharov. Je vous remercie.
David McAllister
Right, thank you very much to the two colleagues for your presentation. We move on to the second nominee, Nayib Bukele from El Salvador and he has been nominated by the ESN group. I give the floor to Mr. Aust and before you speak we see a video first. Yes.
René Aust
European Parliament awards the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought. This year the Europe of Sovereign Nations has chosen a candidate Brussels did not expect. Mr. Bukele, President of El Salvador. Why? Because true dissidence is not always where you expect it.
For years El Salvador was one of the most dangerous countries in the world. Gangs controlled entire neighborhoods and violence and fear were part of everyday life. In 2015 El Salvador recorded more than 100 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Mr. Bukele rejected that this would be the path of his country. The transformation in his president has been extraordinary.
Sometimes true dissidence is simply having the courage to do what others said could not be done. The Sakharov Prize stands for freedom.
Mr. Aust. Today, in nominating the President of El Salvador, Mr. Bukele, I would like to speak about human rights. About the right of a child to go to school without being abducted by a criminal gang on the way. About the right of a mother to let her son go outside in the evening without having the fear that he might never come home. About the right of a small shopkeeper to keep the fruits of his labor instead of having to pay protection money to criminals.
And the most fundamental right of all, the right to live. That is precisely why we are speaking today about the President of El Salvador, Mr. Bukele. Because in order to understand what has happened in El Salvador, we must understand where this country came from. In 2015, more than 100 people per 100,000 inhabitants were murdered in El Salvador. The International Monetary Fund puts the rate at the time at 106.
It was one of the highest murder rates in the world. Behind these numbers were human beings: fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters. And behind their suffering stood powerful criminal structures that had operated for years. The drug gangs were not simply ordinary street criminals. They terrorized an entire society.
And then something happened that many observers had previously considered almost impossible. The state regained its ability to act. The murder rate fell, and it did not fall by 10% or 20%, and not even by half. According to the statistic, it fell from more than 100 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants in 2015 to less than two in 2024. The International Monetary Fund speaks of a dramatic turnaround in the security situation and confirms the magnitude of this change.
That is a reduction in murders of more than 98%. The security situation has fundamentally improved. People can once again enter neighborhoods, open businesses, and let their children go outside in places where fear once prevailed. From this newly created order and security, the country is flourishing. Economic growth, educational achievement as demonstrated by PISA, investment in modern hospitals, and a first step into energy technology of the future: nuclear power.
The Sakharov Prize, according to the rules of this Parliament, is intended to honor outstanding achievement. So, we should ask ourselves a question. What do we actually mean by human rights and the rule of law? When a state arbitrarily imprisons an innocent person, it violates that person's freedom. But when a state, through inaction and by actively turning a blind eye, allows criminals organizations to terrorize entire neighborhoods, extort protection money, abduct children, force girls into prostitution, and torture and rape people in basements and dungeons, is the citizen any less unfree?
The highest duty of the state is to protect its citizens as a prerequisite for the freedom of its citizens. Freedom requires security, peace, and order. A young person who has to choose between joining a gang, submission, or death is not free. We must not define human rights so theoretically, as is often done in Europe, that we ultimately forget for whom they actually exist. They exist for real people in real life, for their physical integrity, for their freedom, and for their dignity.
And that is precisely why this achievement deserves to be seriously discussed here in the European Parliament, and that's why our candidate for the Sakharov Prize is the President of El Salvador, Mr. Bukele.
David McAllister
Thank you, Mr. Aust. That was exactly six minutes. The third nominee is the International Criminal Court and its officials, nominated by the S&D Group, and this will be presented by our colleagues Hanna Yalloul Muro and Chloe Ridel. Please.
Chloé Ridel
Merci, Monsieur le Président. Pour le prix Sakharov 2024, nous portons la candidature des juges et procureurs de la Cour pénale internationale frappés par des sanctions américaines depuis près d'un an et demi. Il s'agit pour nous d'une évidence autant que d'une urgence. La CPI fait aujourd'hui face à des menaces sans précédent. L'administration de Donald Trump a clairement affiché la volonté de la démanteler, et en plus de ses juges, de ses procureurs, de sa présidence, c'est la Cour pénale internationale tout entière qui pourrait bientôt être sanctionnée.
Il a fallu près de 50 ans de négociations pour que la Cour pénale internationale soit créée. Il suffirait aujourd'hui de quelques mois à Donald Trump pour la détruire. Nous ne pouvons pas laisser faire. Nous, Européens, qui nous sommes unis après tant d'années de guerres et de crimes innommables commis sur notre sol, avons la responsabilité historique de protéger la Cour pénale internationale dont le siège est ici en Europe, à La Haye. Cette cour est l'héritière du tribunal de Nuremberg.
Elle rend justice aux victimes des pires crimes : crimes de guerre, d'agression contre l'humanité, crimes de génocide. Des crimes si graves qu'ils concernent l'humanité tout entière et menacent sa sécurité. La cour poursuit aujourd'hui Vladimir Poutine. Elle poursuit les talibans en Afghanistan. Elle poursuit aussi Benjamin Netanyahu, Premier ministre d'Israël, et c'est bien la raison pour laquelle les États-Unis veulent la détruire.
Les juges et procureurs de la Cour pénale internationale sous sanctions viennent du monde entier : du Japon dans le cas de sa présidence, d'Afrique, d'Amérique latine, du Canada, mais aussi de la France et de la Slovénie. Nous pensons que ces juges méritent le prix Sakharov pour le courage dont ils font preuve face aux sanctions. Ils ne se laissent pas intimider et continuent d'accomplir leur mission. Pourtant, leur vie quotidienne est devenue un cauchemar. Ils n'ont plus accès à leurs comptes bancaires, n'ont plus de cartes de crédit, plus de réseaux sociaux, sont coupés de nombreux services numériques.
Nous ne pouvons pas accepter que des juges soient sanctionnés au même titre que des groupes terroristes comme Al-Qaïda pour le simple fait d'avoir défendu un ordre international fondé sur les règles. Nous ne pouvons pas accepter que la justice internationale soit détruite. Si nous ne faisons rien, c'est l'impunité qui s'installera pour de bon et jusqu'à présent, nous n'avons rien fait. La Commission européenne n'a toujours pas activé le règlement de blocage qui serait pourtant l'instrument le plus efficace pour contrer l'effet des sanctions américaines. Chers collègues, aujourd'hui par les attaques auxquelles elle fait face, la CPI symbolise une résistance nouvelle, un espoir pour un monde plus juste et en paix.
Ils sont les cobayes de la perte de souveraineté européenne, un incroyable révélateur de notre dépendance aux services numériques et aux services de paiement américains.
À travers ce prix Sakharov, nous avons l'occasion d'envoyer un signal fort et attendu. Là où Donald Trump choisit de sanctionner les juges de la CPI, nous pouvons choisir de les récompenser. Là où l'autoritarisme avance et la guerre se répand, nous pouvons choisir de défendre le droit international et la liberté. Dans ce Parlement, les divergences sont nombreuses, mais je crois, j'espère que nous pouvons encore nous accorder sur la protection du droit international et sur la défense de la souveraineté européenne. Pour la défense de la Cour pénale internationale, c'est maintenant qu'il faut agir, nous avons rendez-vous avec l'histoire.
Merci.
Hana Jalloul Muro
Thank you very much, thank you for your proposal, Chloé. The International Criminal Court was a success for the international community committed to accountability. It emerged from the lessons of one of the greatest errors and bloodiest periods in our history, the Second World War. Until a few years ago, it was our support, unanimous. We applauded each and every conviction of some of the most notorious African criminals and terrorists.
We celebrated the court's work when it convicted Thomas Lubanga, Ntaganda, Germain Katanga in the DRC for crimes including recruitment of child soldiers and sexual slavery. We did the same when convicted Ahmad al-Faqi al-Mahdi, Dominic Ongwen in Uganda for crimes against humanity. It was mentioned before. Honorable members, the defense of international law and accountability cannot be geographically confined. It is a global cause because crimes are also committed by Westerners and on other continents other than Africa.
And yet, when it carries out its work on these cases, the court is not only questioned but also obstructed and sanctioned. It is the court, its staff and organization that seek to cooperate with it. All of this is happening while we continue to take no real action. Voting to award the Sakharov Prize to the International Criminal Court will be a real and cross-party action supported by a majority of the political groups of this chamber. We would like to remind you of several public positions that each political group as well as the highest representatives of the EU have already taken support in the ICC.
Last year, 11th of September, more than 300 MEPs from EPP, Renew, S&D, Left and the Greens backed a resolution recognizing political and financial support for the ICC. In the 19th of August, Ursula von der Leyen, Kaja Kallas, António Costa publicly condemned the external pressure of the court and reaffirmed their support. Many of you and your prime ministers have also taken public stands on it. So awarding the ICC will mean granting it a cross-party award that implicitly supports several of the proposals that we're very pleased we have been talking here, colleagues, of Abu Safiya. Of course we support this and many others when we talk about human rights and personalities that all of you political groups have presented.
And we think that even all these personalities are under the umbrella of ICC because ICC represents the international law and international humanitarian law.
Michael Gahler
Thank you very much. With huge concern for his fate in court, I present Tundu Lissu. He has spent decades peacefully fighting for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental freedoms in Tanzania. At enormous personal cost, he has remained committed to that cause despite repeated intimidation, violence and imprisonment. In 2017, he narrowly survived an assassination attempt after being shot multiple times outside his home.
He was subsequently treated abroad, including in Belgium. Despite the danger he faced, he returned to Tanzania and continued his political work. In 2020, he returned to contest the presidential election as the main opposition candidate in an electoral environment widely criticized for serious restrictions on political freedoms and opposition activity. In the run-up to the 2025 elections, Lissu became one of the leading voices demanding meaningful electoral reform under the slogan "no reforms, no election". On the 9th of April 2025, shortly after addressing a public meeting in Mbinga, Lissu was arrested by police who used tear gas to disperse the crowd.
He was subsequently charged with treason, a non-bailable offense carrying the death penalty, and has remained in detention ever since. Just days after his arrest, Chadema was disqualified from participating in the 2025 elections after refusing to sign the electoral code of conduct. The African Union later concluded that the arrest and prosecution of Lissu, together with other measures against Chadema, had incapacitated the main opposition and significantly reduced the competitiveness of the election. The elections on the 29th October were followed by devastating violence. A commission of inquiry appointed by the Tanzanian government itself later documented at least 518 deaths, while acknowledging that the figure might not be conclusive.
President Samia Suluhu Hassan was subsequently declared re-elected with 97.66% of the vote. Yet the African Union observation mission concluded that the elections did not comply with AU principles and international standards for democratic elections. Today, more than 17 months after his arrest, Tundu Lissu remains behind bars. Our Parliament has repeatedly called for his immediate and unconditional release, most recently following the 2025 elections. His case reflects a much broader deterioration of democratic space in Tanzania.
Opposition figures and government critics have faced arbitrary arrests, abductions and enforced disappearances, while journalists, activists and civil society have come under increasing pressure. Tanzania's story is not unique in Africa, for instance. His case brings that broader trend into focus. At its core is a simple democratic principle: elections only have a meaning when citizens are offered a genuine political choice. That is why we think to honor him with this Sakharov Prize.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Rihards.
Rihards Kols
Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you Michael Gahler already outlining why Tundu Lissu is worthy this Sakharov Prize. And from the ECR, I just have to also elaborate the urgency. The Tundu Lissu treason trial concluded this Tuesday. The court has scheduled its judgment for 6th November. He remains in detention and faces a possible death sentence.
That gives our decision an immediate significance. We should make it, knowing that authorities in Tanzania will also be watching. The essential facts are familiar: a lawyer, an opposition leader, a survivor of assassination attempt in 2017, detained since April 2025 after campaigning for electoral reform. I want to explain why the ECR believes his nomination deserves this Parliament's support. One detail from his trial says a great deal.
Lissu asked to deliver his final arguments orally, and he explained that he wished to do so so that citizens can understand and know.
Consider that choice. Facing a charge that could cost him his life, he still wanted his fellow citizens to understand the proceedings. That is a powerful expression of conviction we are here to recognize. Citizens have a right to scrutinize power, including the power exercised in the courtroom. The political issue reaches beyond one man.
Amnesty International says Lissu is detained solely for peacefully exercising his human rights. This Parliament has already called for his immediate and unconditional release. When authorities treat peaceful opposition as treason, they claim ownership of the country itself. They tell every citizen that challenging those in office means betraying the nation. For me, that distinction matters deeply.
Loyalty to your country can require challenging its government. No ruling party has an exclusive claim to patriotism. Tanzanians must be free to choose their own leaders. Defending that freedom respects their sovereignty. Accepting the imprisonment of peaceful opponents would leave those choice in the hands of people who control the police and the courts.
Europe also has a responsibility. Our partnerships must leave room for frank criticism and consequences when authorities persecute democratic opponents. Otherwise, our language about accountable government becomes very difficult to take seriously. The Sakharov Prize cannot guarantee Lissu's safety or free him from prison. It can give his case sustained visibility and make it harder for those responsible for his persecution to count on international indifference.
The ECR asks you to support Tundu Lissu, recognize his courage, insist on his freedom, make clear that peaceful opposition belongs in public life and that those who criminalize it must answer for their actions. Thank you.
David McAllister
Thank you to both colleagues. The fifth nominee is Taraneh and Romina Rahimi on behalf of all those persecuted by the Iranian Islamic regime, nominated by the Patriots group. I give the floor to Tiago Moreira de Sá.
Tiago Moreira de Sá
Thank you, President, I will speak in Portuguese. Senhor Presidente, caros colegas, em persa o nome Taraneh significa canção. Taraneh Rahimi tem 20 anos. É estudante e instrutora de equitação natural de Isfahan. No inverno passado, homens mascarados entraram em sua casa à meia-noite, arrancaram-na a ela e à irmã gémea, Romina, das suas camas.
Puseram-lhes sacos na cabeça e levaram-nas. Pouco antes, as duas irmãs tinham-se juntado a milhares de outros cidadãos iranianos nas ruas. Hoje Taraneh está condenada à morte. Romina foi condenada a uma pena de 25 a 36 anos de prisão. São duas dos 16 arguidos de um único julgamento em que 10 pessoas foram condenadas à morte.
As organizações de direitos humanos que analisaram o processo afirmam que nenhum dos 16 arguidos foi sequer acusado das mortes que supostamente estavam na origem do julgamento. E nesse mesmo processo há um vídeo, retirado dos telemóveis dos próprios arguidos, em que se vê Taraneh a implorar a uma multidão que não espancasse um sem-abrigo. É essa a prova. É essa a jovem que a República Islâmica do Irão decidiu enforcar. A família afirma que as confissões foram obtidas sob tortura.
É este o universo moral com que estamos a lidar. Todavia, não vim aqui para contar-vos uma história triste. Vim pedir-vos uma coisa importante. O grupo Patriotas pela Europa, por proposta minha, nomeia Taraneh e Romina Rahimi para o Prémio Sakharov, em nome de todos os perseguidos pelo regime islâmico iraniano. Nomeamos duas irmãs porque um nome tem um poder que nenhuma estatística pode alguma vez ter.
Diz que ameaçaram Taraneh de que a irmã seria violada à sua frente se não assinasse. Pensem no que isto significa. Um regime olha para duas irmãs que se amam e vê nesse amor um instrumento.
Mas elas falam por muitos. Falam pelos comerciantes do Grande Bazar de Teerão, que fecharam as portas a 28 de dezembro, quando a moeda colapsou e deu início ao que nenhum deles poderia ter previsto. Falam pelos estudantes, pelos trabalhadores, pelas minorias das províncias ocidentais, onde alguns dos primeiros manifestantes foram abatidos a tiro. Falam pelas centenas de mulheres cegas pelo crime de protestar pelos seus direitos. Falam por todos os que estavam nas ruas naquele janeiro sangrento, quando dezenas de milhares de manifestantes que exigiam melhores condições de vida, liberdade, democracia, dignidade e mudança política foram brutalmente assassinados pelo regime iraniano.
Falam por todos aqueles que sobreviveram aos tiros para enfrentar a forca. Alguns de vós dirão que o Parlamento Europeu já homenageou o Irão. Em 2023, atribuímos esse mesmo Prémio Sakharov a Jina Amini e ao movimento Mulher, Vida, Liberdade. E fizemos bem. Mas Jina não pôde vir a Bruxelas ou Estrasburgo.
Homenageamo-la a título póstumo. Taraneh e Romina ainda estão vivas. A sentença de Taraneh é uma decisão de primeira instância e ainda pode ser revertida. Desta vez, o Prémio Sakharov pode chegar antes do carrasco.