| |||
| Inter-Parliamentary Union | ||
| Place du Petit-Saconnex, P.O. Box 438, 1211 Geneva 19, Switzerland |
|
Report noted by the Council at its 170th session (Marrakech, 23 March 2002)
The Committee held a meeting on Monday, 18 March under the chairmanship of Mr. Y. Tavernier, which was attended by all Committee members (with the exception of Mr. R. Ahouandjinou, from Benin). Several delegations participated in the Committee's work:
2. The Committee worked in a spirit of dialogue and openness. All were able to express themselves in a climate of calm and mutual understanding. All the participants noted that the war led to tragedy, leaving many civilians dead or injured, which only deepened hatred and in no way made it possible to reach a solution to the conflict. All agreed on the absolute need to put an end to the "vicious cycle of violence" and to replace the logic of war, violence and terror prevailing in the region with a logic of peace, by establishing a dialogue between the two parties. The delegates unanimously agreed to call for a halt to the violence so that the two peoples could live free and in peace. The participants made a point of stressing the importance of United Nations Security Council resolution 1397, the initiative of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah, the initiatives taken by the United Nations and by European bodies, including the one launched in Paris by the President of the French National Assembly on 23 January last and the Egyptian proposal to meet in Sharm-el-Sheikh to prepare the latter initiative, enabling the Presiding Officers of European parliaments to travel to Jerusalem and Ramallah with the Speaker of the Knesset, if the Israeli Parliament gives its agreement. They also stressed the fact that a solution could come only from the two parties themselves, or to use Mr. A. Burg's words, there was a "will to help Israel and Palestine to help themselves". The participants stressed that the Mitchel Plan and the Tennet Outlines were still considered as providing a framework for the resumption of peace negotiations and the United Nations resolutions as the basis for settlement of the conflict. 3. Statements submitted by the parties After the discussion, two texts were conveyed to the Committee, one from the Knesset and the other from the Palestinian representatives. A comparison of the two texts brought out a number of similarities, namely the need to put an end to the spiral of violence and hatred, to introduce a ceasefire to enable the resumption of political dialogue and ensure the safety of the people. The resolution proposed by the Palestinian delegation emphasized the reference in Security Council resolution 1397 to the creation of a Palestinian State as a condition for a return to peace. The Israeli proposal highlighted the mission carried out by the United States Special Envoy. The one submitted by the Palestinians mentioned the initiative of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah and referred to the diplomatic efforts made by the United States, the European Union, the Russian Federation and the United Nations to help to find a solution to the conflict. The major difference between the two texts was that the Palestinians urged the Israeli authorities to put an end to their occupation of the territories, to lift the siege of the authorities and to lift the restrictions on the free movement of the people. It would appear that the resolution prepared in the drafting committee on the emergency supplementary item entitled: "The role of parliaments in supporting implementation of resolution 1397 adopted by the United Nations Security Council" could serve as a basis for consolidating the two texts. The Committee met for a second time on Thursday, 21 March with Mr. Tavernier in the chair to finalise the consolidated version. It deeply regretted the absence of the Israeli delegation, which prevented the Committee from fulfilling its mission of promoting dialogue between Palestinians and Israelis. The Committee heard the representative of the Palestine National Council, who commended the Committee on its useful work and hoped it would play a more important role in parliamentary diplomacy. He pointed out that, in analysing the Middle East situation, it needed to address all elements liable to lead to peace. He highlighted the danger of certain practices which adversely affect people's living conditions, so playing into the hands of extremists. The Palestinian representative commended the bold initiative of all those who had taken the floor during the discussions at the Conference, particularly the Speaker of the People's Assembly of Egypt. 4. Recommendations of the Committee The Committee supported all parliamentary and inter-parliamentary initiatives, particularly the one by the President of the People's Assembly of Egypt, Mr. F. Sorour, to host in Sharm-el-Sheikh on 12 April 2002 the Presiding Officers of the Israeli and Palestinian Parliaments. The Committee on Middle East Questions of the Inter-Parliamentary Union wished to participate in this meeting. It also supported the plan for a meeting between Israeli and Palestinian parliamentarians in Ramallah in the presence of the Presiding Officers of national parliaments and the Inter-Parliamentary Union. The Committee expressed concern that the democratically elected Palestinian Legislative Council had been unable to meet for 18 months, although its contribution to the peace process and to dialogue with the Knesset was fundamental. The Committee expressed the hope that it would be able to meet at the time of the session of the Inter-Parliamentary Council to be held in Geneva in September 2002 in order to follow up the action undertaken by the Inter-Parliamentary Union.
 IPU COUNCILMAIN AREAS OF ACTIVITYIPU STRUCTURE AND DOCUMENTS
|
