ABSTRACT: The resolutions passed by the E.P. which continues to request that the principles of democracy and respect for human rights form the basis for international relations are continually disregarded. The voice of the European Parliament has no weight, and is not even heard, in a European Community which is not democratic, in that power, cynicism and a consumerist subculture continue to lay down the law

(WORLDWIDE PARLIAMENTARY CAMPAIGN FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY BY THE YEAR 200 - Radical party/International League for the abolition of the death penalty by the year 2000)

The events in which we were most involved at the Vienna Conference - the presentation of the signatures collected on a petition to abolish the death penalty and the banning of the Dalai Lama from the podium upon China's request - have provoked certain thoughts which, although they may not be new are extremely valid, in that they indicate the kind of difficulties we are up against.

The most important progress made in relation to the death penalty, was its being excluded from the statute of the International Court set up for violations of human rights in the former Yugoslavia. The absence of any reference to the abolition of the death penalty in the final document produced by the U.N. Conference is, however, proof of the internatioanl organization's incapacity to resolve the differences between countries who are in favour of capital punishment and those who are against it. The United States, which is a democratic country and a member of the CSCE, represents the most serious contradiction in terms, not only because of the growing number of executions that have been carried out in the last two years but, above all, because it shows no desire whatsoever to abolish the death penalty. A small step was taken towards abolition in November '92, when the electorate voted against a referendum to reintroduce the death penalty in Washington D.C. On that occasion, the President of the European Parli

ament Egon Klepsh, upon our request and also as a result of his own convictions, asked the Governor of New York not to reintroduce the death penalty, nor hold a referendum on this particular issue.

Unfortunately, the E.P. only has moral authority regarding human rights, which is not binding for either member countries or non-E.E.C countries. It is also for this reason that a year after the Aglietta resolution was passed, not one of the member countries has responded to the request to abolish the death penalty where it is provided for in the penal code or the Constitution for "ordinary" crimes (Belgium and Greece), or in the Military Code or for "special" crimes (Italy, Spain and England). There is no abolitionist initiative underway in Greece, but the Green Group in Belgium has already previusly presented an abolitionist bill. It had been presented to the Legislation Committee. A similar situation exists in Italy, where a parliamentary bill has been referred to the Justice Committee fot its decision. There are no new deveopments in Spain or England.

Out of the countries belonging to the European Council, Switzerland has taken positive action recently by abolishing the death penalty for all crimes.

The outlook is bleak in Bulgaria, on the other hand, where some parliamentarians are supporting the bill proposed by deputies Gerov and Markoc, which requests that the moratorium of executions introduced in 1990 be abrogated.

In the Baltic States (Estonia and Lithuania only are members of the European Council) nothing new has been achieved on the legal front. Amnesty International has launched a campaign denouncing the practices there, and the E.P. has repeatedly requested that death sentences and executions be ssuspended..

Executions have begun again in Albania. Deputy Gago Apostoli is responsible for an initiative aimed at abrogating them. His request is that this "Vendetta of the State" be brought to an end.

Even though the death penalty was abolished for economic crimes and espionage in Moldavia in 1992, it is provided for in the new Constitution. They will most likely follow Russia's example and only impose the death penalty for homicide.

The second event - the banning of the Dalai Lama from the podium - demonstrates exactly to what degree the fundamental rights recognized in the Universal Declaration are actually appliced in international organizations. The truth is that a country like China can exercise its power of veto and stop a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate from speaking at a Human Rights Conference; moreover, this same country is allowed to continue its violation of human rights, its annhilation of the Tibetan people. And even if it is true that public opinion, the press, the NGOs and the Radical Party made China suffer for its arrogance, the fact remains that the politics which govern international relations are still a long way from respecting the fondamental rights and principles of democracy. It is the economic powers that make the rules.

The resolutions passed by the E.P. - which continues to request that the principles of democracy and respect for human rights form the basis for international relations - are continually disregarded. The voice of the European Parliament has no weight, and is not even heard, in a European Community which is not democratic, in that power, cynicism and a consumerist subculture continue to lay down the law.

The campaign to abolish the death penalty could be particularly effective in pointing up the vital connection between a human rights policy and rule of law. The campaign is based on the need for democratic political reform in Europe and for a complete revision of the principles and the structure on which the U.N. is founded.