Ladies and gentlemen, excuse me, but I am just taking the opportunity – and perhaps I won’t address you later on – to talk about the legal issues now, but that isn’t why I’m addressing you. First of all, a change in the legislation was submitted at the end of the previous session following presidential decree 107 of 2020, adding words such as “as applicable in each case,” so I ask that this be entered into the minutes. And following the observations of our colleagues, and particularly of the main and lesser opposition, those of Mr. Katrougalos and Mr. Loverdos, in article 4 following the words “provisional basis” we are adding the words “and until the adoption of an amendment of annex 1 of Regulation (EU) No 1380 of 2013 that concerns the above ...” And at the same time, we have to delete, because then there is no point in keeping them, the words “for as long as determined in these decisions.” So, please be kind enough to take a stance on that by Tuesday's Plenary debate. Allow me to also to make another statement, because the discussion has been veering towards this and understandably so, about the broader issue of the exploratory talks and how the government is approaching them. Colleagues, I say this in here in the hall, I say it for the minutes that are kept, and I say it to clarify our country’s international position; I say it to our international interlocutors as well. I had the opportunity to say this in Rome and in Lisbon, to the Portuguese presidency, the day before yesterday. The international Convention on the Law of the Sea is part of Greek national law. Our country has ratified it. But it is also part of the European acquis, because the European Union has ratified it as such. In any discussion, with any country, Greece is bound by the European acquis and the European Union is bound by the European acquis. This is self-evident. What I’m saying is self-evident. But perhaps – and I am not referring to this hall or perhaps even to this country, but perhaps outside the country – this has not been fully understood. UNCLOS is binding for the European Union and its member states when they negotiate with other countries. What I’m saying is self-evident, but I want it to be in the minutes. Allow me also to give you an example that, despite being different, makes this clear. The Convention on Human Rights is part of the European acquis. Can you imagine a European country discussing with a third country about matters relativising the Convention on Human Rights? In other words, could France, for example, in a negotiation with a country outside the European Union to agree that the Convention on Human Rights does not apply in the relations between them? That’s absurd. As a result, our country – which aspires, as is the choice of the vast majority of the Greek people and the political system, to be at the hard core of the historic European endeavour – is bound by the European acquis, which is also national legislation. This is just so there may be no discussion within or outside the country as to the framework in which this country can discuss, negotiate and agree. Thank you very much for this opportunity. [Responding to what was mentioned by Syriza MP Giorgos Katroungalos regarding the incidents of harassment by the Turkish coast guard of Greek vessels at Imia:] You referred to two instances. A demarche has been made regarding the first. Regarding the second, we have not yet been informed, as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, by the competent authorities. It goes without saying that a demarche is made once the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been informed by the competent authorities. But regarding the first incident, a demarche has already been made in Ankara.
 |
| READ THE ORIGINAL POST AT www.mfa.gr |