HUMAN RIGHTS: MEPS SPLIT ON WHETHER NEW AGENCY SHOULD COVER NON-EU STATES.

Mr Cavada said he had discussed the issue with Austrian Presidency representatives in Strasbourg on January 17. The Presidency aims to get agreement on the agency by the mid-June European Council, which will mean Parliament having to give its opinion in May, he said. While Parliament is formally not co-legislator on the proposals to establish the agency, the Council seems keen to gets its full political backing on this sensitive dossier.

Geographical remit.

As the agency will examine human rights breaches in the civil and criminal law domain (the EU's first and third pillars), Parliament is drafting two reports. Hungarian Members Kinga Gal (EPP-ED) and Magda Kovacs (Socialists) are rapporteurs. Addressing the Civil Liberties Committee, both cautiously backed some kind of third-country remit but were keenly aware that this is problematic. Cem Ozdemir (Greens, Germany), who is drafting an opinion for Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, said third countries with which the EU has cooperation agreements should be covered.

However, both Michael Cashman (Socialists, United Kingdom) and Charlotte Cederschiold (EPP-ED, Sweden) felt the agency should focus on EU member states. oIt would be wholly wrong to involve candidate countries as it could be used as a mechanism for keeping countries like Turkey out of the EUo, he said. Mr Cashman felt the agency's role should be to nudge a reluctant EU Council of Ministers to sanction member states that breach human rights, as Articles 6 and 7 of the EU Treaty provide. Claude Moraes (Socialists, UK) doubted the legality of giving it an extra-EU remit, noting EU Court of Justice case-law is not clear on this question.

EP/Council of Europe role.

MEPs will be tabling amendments aimed at reinforcing their...