Proposition 54K0722

Proposition de résolution concernant la situation au Burundi.

General information ¶

Authors

CD&V Sarah Claerhout, Nahima Lanjri, Peter Luykx, Els Van Hoof, Stefaan Vercamer
MR Kattrin Jadin
N-VA An Capoen
Open Vld Nele Lijnen, Tim Vandenput

Submission date

Dec. 18, 2014

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

Burundi fundamental rights resolution of parliament election freedom of expression

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR VB

Abstained from voting

PVDA | PTB

Party dissidents ¶

• Stéphane Crusnière (PS | SP) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

March 26, 2015 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

On 10 March, the Committee on Foreign Relations discussed the draft resolution on the situation in Burundi. There were two proposals: a proposal by Mr Crusnière and Blanchart and Mrs Grovonius, and a proposal by Mrs Claerhout, Mrs Van Hoof, Mrs Lanjri, Mr Vercamer, Mrs Jadin, Mr Luykx, Mrs Capoen, Mr Vandenput and Mrs Lijnen. It was decided to continue on the basis of the latter proposal.

The main contributors point out the importance of the resolution, not only for Burundi, but in a broader context, for the political situation in the Great Lakes region. In 2015, there are presidential elections in Burundi, a year later in Congo and another year later, in 2017, in Rwanda. In each of these countries, one wants to interpret the Constitution creatively or even modify it. We are receiving signals that in the run-up to the elections a number of disturbing developments are taking place in the face of the political opposition and the civil society. Media representatives and human rights activists are threatened or arrested. The independence of police and justice leaves much to be desired.

The proposed resolution is intended to send a number of strong signals to the Burundi government: respect for human rights, respect for the peace agreements of Arusha, further democratization of the political process and the importance of stability in the country and the entire region.

During the general discussion, Mr Capoen asked, among other things, the Burundi government to be explicitly urged to respect the Arusha agreements. It declares its satisfaction with the fact that the second scheme of the Belgian election financing is linked to conditions. Collega Crusnière regrets the sometimes paternalist approach, by providing sanctions in various requests. For colleague Van der Maelen, the proposal is called, but he wants the House of Representatives to refrain from any form of paternalism.

I will not bored you with all the amendments and votes. Some further adjustments were made, with references to European Parliament resolutions, Human Rights Watch reports on stand-alone executions by the Burundi army and press releases from the Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister following the visit to the region. In the end, the text was approved by 12 votes in favour with one abstinence.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, Burundi is an essential partner of our cooperation and, more broadly, of our bilateral diplomacy. It is a country so important that my group was the author of a text on it published long before that which is now subject to our vote by the majority, the law of the strongest obliges.

In this context, first of all, I would like to be able to correct my colleague Rita Bellens’ report. Indeed, the report fails to point out why my group has scrapped its vote in the committee, my colleague Ben Hamou having voted in favour of this text and I myself having abstained on the final vote. Of course, the PS Group supports the general lines of this proposal. I abstained so the attitude of this majority towards the opposition on this resolution, and more broadly on international issues, is scandalous.

Indeed, it was a tradition within our commission that on major international issues, beyond opposition-majority divisions, we could find great common guidelines. This majority put an end to this long tradition, while I, however, had taken a constructive step by accepting to work on this text and not on mine, which, however, had the priority.

I have therefore submitted amendments that I thought were constructive, also introducing a whole series of notions absent from this text, which however are crucial to us, such as: to ensure the effective and transparent conduct of the future scrutiny of this country; to emphasize the important work of the Belgian Fund for Food Security in this country, a fund which, I remind you, is managed by the Parliament itself and, more broadly, the issue of fighting hunger; to also support Burundi civil society in the important educational work it carries out with the Burundi population in the context of these elections; finally, if any possible sanctions should be taken, to ensure that these do not harm the aided populations.

Dear colleagues, all these amendments were simply rejected by the majority, without even any debate, marking a total hermeticism to the contributions of the opposition.

With these considerations made, let us now look at the substance of this text, the findings it makes and the demands it formulates. The PS Group has always emphasized the crucial importance of Central Africa, and therefore of Burundi in particular, in the international agenda and in the diplomatic action of Belgium, both at the governmental, European and international level and at the parliamentary level, in particular through the Interparliamentary Union.

Burundi, a partner country of Belgian development cooperation, is one of the five poorest countries in the world in terms of GDP. This country is facing chronic malnutrition: one in two Burundians suffer from malnutrition. A parliamentary mission of the Working Group of the Belgian Fund for Food Security was conducted in the country in 2013 under the presidency of Mr. by Christophe Lacroix.

The resolutions discussed today make sense when it is known that Belgium is one of the largest donors in terms of bilateral aid to this partner country, especially in the context of funding for the crucial checks ahead.

Following the 2010 elections, the presidential party gained a comfortable majority. As a result, the opposition parties decided not to participate in the vote in order to denounce the fraud.

At the moment, the current president has not yet made clear his intentions. The possibility of a third term for the President. Nkurunziza is a source of significant tensions. For the opponents of the president, this third term would be unconstitutional as the Constitution provides for only one re-election, while Mr. Trump would not be elected. Nkurunziza has served as president since 2005. In the presidential party camp, it is estimated that since the current president was not elected democratically for the first time in 2010, he can therefore represent himself in 2015 for a last term.

Last February, a citizen campaign "Stop a Third Term", which currently brings together 304 civil society associations, asked the president to clearly announce whether or not he intends to run for that third term. This call did not receive the desired echo. Faced with the majority party, the opposition parties allied in two formations are experiencing all the struggles of the world to adopt a common strategy. To this adds the impossibility of finding a common candidate behind which all the opposition parties could gather.

To my group, however, on this point, the text lacks on several points. First of all, the issues dealing with elections are marked by very strong paternalism. But I am deeply convinced that the first solution to the political, socio-economic and human rights situation and to a transparent and inclusive electoral process must come from Burundi itself, with the support of the international community.

A civil society that we must therefore fully support in its role of training and information. Next, the goal must remain that Belgium and other donors can contribute constructively to the proper conduct of the electoral process.

While it is normal that the conditions for granting financial assistance are set, it is not, however, a question of using conditions to justify savings within the cooperation budget. And here, point 6 of the arrangement raises many questions for me.

Beyond the political situation, which is therefore very tense, the question of respect for fundamental rights and freedoms arises very clearly in this country. Several laws have in fact restricted the freedoms of association, demonstration and expression.

For several months, journalists and NGO members have been disturbed and imprisoned for opposing the regime. This was in particular the case of Pierre Claver Mbonimpa who was imprisoned after he denounced the sending to DRC of the youth league of the ruling party to attend military training. More recently, the head of the African Public Radio, Mr. Rugurika was arrested and arbitrarily imprisoned after conducting an investigation following the deaths of three nuns in Bujumbura.

The UIP section Belgium-Burundi, under the socialist presidency, of which I am a member, did not fail to summon the Burundi ambassador to make a point on this situation and the European Parliament was also concerned about this situation through the adoption of a resolution.

My dear colleagues, you can see it as I do, the general context remains tense and unfavorable to hold a three-course election in the best conditions. Everyone feels that the current relative calm could very quickly be undermined and result in a dangerous situation at the scale of this partner country, or even the region.

It is therefore indispensable to encourage all goodwill, both at the level of Burundi’s civilian and political forces, as well as the international community and therefore the European Union and also Belgium. We must best support the Burundi authorities and civil society in the preparation, organization and conduct of these three elections. The observation missions of the European Union and the United Nations will make sense.

However, I find that this text, without our amendments, is lacunar, preferring to focus on the question of the conditionality of sanctions. It is probably important to prepare for these elections. Voting is mandatory in Burundi. It is therefore essential that the public be informed of the importance and challenges of this election. A large part of the population is illiterate and therefore very easily manipulable. Important work must be done in this regard by the international community and the European Union to support civil society organisations.

I totally agree with Mr. Mr. Crusniere, but I cannot accept what is not a truth, namely that the majority would not accept to listen to the minority. But the opposite! And you know it well. Not later than this week, in the Committee on Foreign Relations, we took into account one of your amendments; I think that was also the case for the problem of Burundi.

Mr Flahaux, you are absolutely right. I recognize that this week, indeed, on a very specific point, you accepted our amendment. But I repeat, as part of the discussion we had on Burundi, we made a whole series of constructive and not entirely controversial amendments to this resolution. Unfortunately, we have not been able to discuss these issues at any time. We have seen the vote that led to that.

I thank you again for the opening that took place yesterday in the committee, but on that text, I regret that there are no more. You will be able to review your position today, since I have put the amendments back. We will have the opportunity to discuss them and you will have the opportunity to continue to be open and vote on these amendments today in the plenary session.

It will be very important to ensure the proper conduct of the checks. It is important that all actors put an honor to ensure that the three elections are inclusive, free and transparent. When voters were recruited last December, fraud was detected, which provoked the anger of the opposition parties. The various actors had eventually reopened the recruitment process, to enable citizens who had not had the opportunity to register to do so.

In this electoral context, it is therefore strongly that my Group ⁇ supports point 5 of the conclusions of the Council on Foreign Affairs of the European Union, according to which “the European Union’s support to the electoral process through the presence of this observation mission and its financial support can only be conceived within the framework of an inclusive and transparent electoral competition, open in a fair manner to all political parties and actors”.

This is why I have submitted an amendment to this proposal. I have no doubt, given what Mr. Flahaux, which you will welcome in favour, as these conclusions have been endorsed by the Belgian government.

In September, the European Parliament adopted a joint resolution on the situation in Burundi. In the resolution, the European Parliament called on the Burundi government to open up political space and end the arbitrary arrests of civil society activists and journalists, as well as the abuses committed by the Imbonerakure who threaten the long-term stability of the region.

I am therefore convinced, Mr. Speaker, that our Assembly must also take, in addition to the adoption of this text, concrete and positive initiatives with regard to Central Africa and Burundi. We must continue to fully activate the sections of the European Innovation Partnership (EIP) and the Association of European Parliamentarians for Africa (AWEPA). Our Assembly must also consider what can be done voluntarily in terms of collaborations between our parliaments, for example, between our officials, and ⁇ organize an election observation mission.

I hope that this region will be at the center of your concerns in the coming months. Requests 11 and 25 of the system are addressed both to our Assembly and to the Government. Let us take our responsibilities!

The text that is presented to us today incorporates some of the long-term concerns as it is based in particular on the Senate resolution, a resolution of my colleague Marie Arena. However, as I have already said, while several aspects are lacking in my group’s view – the fight against hunger, possible non-popular sanctions, the law on homosexuality – the majority text helps address important themes by relaying the positions of the European Parliament that my group fully supports. I thus think of the worrying question of the militarization of young people in the region and unacceptable abuses. I also think of our concerns over multiple intimidations, charges against human rights defenders and laws that suppress freedoms and mock the press.

In writing my group’s resolution, I wanted to emphasise how important it is for our Assembly to support and forward the demands made in the European Parliament’s resolution to this central partner country of our bilateral diplomacy. It is of paramount importance that all attention be paid to the internal situation in Burundi, including after the 2015 election period. The international community, the European Union and Belgium in particular, must define a clear, transparent, long-term diplomatic policy towards Burundi and, more broadly, the region.

It is not about leaving Burundi to its own fate before, during but also after the triple vote because it would be the people who would suffer. We must continue to accompany them in the fight against hunger, in the defense of the exercise of their fundamental rights and freedoms, in a rich partnership and not in a strictly conditioned approach that would in fact justify budget cuts that would be decided by this government in terms of development or preventive diplomacy.

For all these reasons, my group will support this text but, for my part, as a committee, I reserve the right to abstain symbolically depending on the support that will be given to our amendments, in particular on the issue of fighting hunger or sanctions not affecting the population.

As a co-signatory on behalf of the N-VA Group, I will give a brief explanation on the present resolution.

The N-VA group supports the resolution for several reasons, which have already been cited in part by the speakers before me and which will be discussed more extensively later during Mrs Claerhout’s presentation.

There are a number of important events in Central Africa. I think of the presidential elections in Burundi, but also in Congo and Rwanda, not by chance the countries where the second term of the president is on.

However, in the last few months there have been a lot of worrying developments in Burundi. Think of the adoption of the new press law in 2013, the violent actions of the Imbonerakure, the arrest of Pierre Claver Mbonimpa, among others, and the numerous other flagrant human rights violations in the run-up to the presidential election.

We therefore fully support the resolution. We call on the Burundi authorities to engage in dialogue, respecting the Arusha Agreements, the electoral law and the Constitution.

However, the N-VA group also wants to point out the responsibility of the Burundi authorities to bring the elections to a successful end. We would also like to point out the responsibility of the federal government to support the electoral process, without therefore renouncing our duty to remain critical.

Therefore, it is good that, among other things, the second scheme of electoral financing is linked to the implementation of the conditions, based on, among other things, the Feuille route. Therefore, we would also like to see that in new cooperation programmes attention is paid to human rights and good governance, as well as to the timely preparation of the promised policy note Grote Seen, as already promised by the government.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, dear colleagues, we are going to vote this afternoon on a resolution on Burundi at a significant moment in the history of this country. We must, indeed, remain realistic: Burundi policy is made by the Burundians and we must protect ourselves from any tutorial or moralizing tendency.

However, for historical reasons, for reasons of sentimental and human attachment to the Burundi people, we must adopt a clear language of our values and our principles, values and principles that we share with the Burundi people. These are the importance of the rule of law, freedom of expression, the defense of human rights, the fight against corruption, socio-economic development, the sharing of wealth for all.

On the eve of elections, we can only lament the reduction of political space: restrictions on freedom of assembly, freedom of expression and restrictions imposed on the media. We must also denounce the issues related to the independence of the judiciary. Who cares about this country, this people, if not a few countries including ours?

We have, through the policy of Minister De Croo, ambitious projects in this country. We must carry them out for the well-being of the entire population that needs them.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, Burundi has made significant progress in overcoming the barriers and challenges laid down by the civil war, but peace still remains very fragile. The issue of the elections that will be held in a few weeks is at the heart of our resolution. Our Minister of Foreign Affairs, Didier Reynders, will obviously be very attentive to the proper development of these.

The holding of credible, free and democratic elections in 2015 is crucial for the future of Burundi. It is imperative that the electoral process be calm, inclusive, fair and transparent. We must not use violence but fully engage in a peaceful process.

What has been seen in the last few weeks? The arrest of a journalist; the dismissal of the head of the intelligence services; the exclusion of the fronts of his party; the mobilization on February 19 for the release of the journalist Bob Rugurika; the will of Pierre NKurunziza to apply for a third term against the stipulations of the Constitution; the successive postponements of the CNDD-FDD Congress, which must designate the candidate of the majority; demonstrations of the opposition, then of the majority, in February, in the approaching of the elections of June 26; the release of Bob Rugurika; rumors of intervention of the secret services against the fronts of the presidential party.

Should the street force Nkurunziza to refuse to appear, with the follow-up of violence, victims, looting and repression?

Should the army, with its providential leader, intervene, while the transition years are behind Burundi, a country that now experiences a normal civil regime after decades of violence?

Dear colleagues, Burundi has given itself the tags on which it should base its policy:

- the Arusha agreements, which are at the heart of the stabilization of the country;

- the Constitution, the roadmap for elections;

- the very recent declaration of political parties aiming to conduct these elections peacefully.

These political and legal foundations are the conditions for a good organization of the country. The Burundi government, whatever it is, must respect them.

Finally, Mr. Minister, we must remain vigilant in the face of the absolute need to preserve the cohesion and unity of Burundi society. All the debates that divide it are dangerous, even more in this sensitive period. It is about reminding local political actors that they must make the supreme interest of the country prevail, the consolidation of peace, the search for consensus and tranquilization and place them at the heart of their actions.

Mr. Speaker, the Reform Movement, co-signatory of this text, will obviously vote for this resolution and will remain attentive, ⁇ through the upcoming hearings on Central Africa that will begin next week, to Burundi’s political life and the future of its people.

Mr. Speaker, we have drafted a resolution on the upcoming elections in Burundi. However, we need to put this resolution in a broader context. Presidential elections are held across the Great Lakes region: this year in Burundi, next year in the Democratic Republic of Congo and in 2017 in Rwanda.

In each of these countries, the sitting president is appointed at the end of his second term. According to the respective constitutions and the signed Arusha Agreements, the presidency is limited to two terms. However, we see initiatives to interpret the Constitution creatively or to adjust to this point.

Tensions increase due to this unclear situation. We see therefore that the pressure on the free press, on the civil society and on the political opposition is increasing.

With this resolution, we want to express our deep concern about this situation. We also urge our government to act proactively. Burundi is the first country to hold elections. What happens there may have implications for the elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo and in Rwanda.

Between May and August 2015, Burundi’s residents went to the polling stations. The current president, Nkurunziza, a member of the CNDD-FDD, comes at the end of his second term.

We have drawn up a resolution on this issue because we consider it appropriate that Belgium follow this situation in particular and assume its responsibility. Belgium must have the ambition to play a leading role on the international level in the region of the Great Lakes in Central Africa. After all, this is a region with which our country has historical ties, where we have many contacts and on which we have built up a lot of expertise.

My party has always put its shoulders under an ambitious policy on Central Africa and will continue to do so. Let us also not forget that Belgium is the largest bilateral donor of Burundi. In the past, we have already drafted several resolutions that have effectively impacted the political situation in Burundi, such as the release of human rights activists Mbonimpa and Rugurika.

A clear signal from Belgium can be a strong pressure agent. Therefore, we must emphasize that fair elections in a safe context and in line with the Constitution are primary.

In parallel with our discussion in the committee, the European Union also addressed the situation in Burundi. Last week, the EU Foreign Affairs Council expressed its concern about the election situation in that country. The Council addressed the possible third term of office of the President and decided to send an EU observation mission next month.

It should be clear, dear colleagues, right now fair and safe elections in Burundi do not seem to be evidence.

I would like to give a brief summary of the situation, but my colleagues have already discussed it extensively in previous presentations. I will keep it short.

I just want to give a few more examples. Human rights are under pressure, intimidation is on the rise and the government plays a role in it. They interfere with the opposition parties in order to weaken them, and they attempt to discourage political opponents from the electoral process in various ways. The youth wing of the ruling party, the Imbonerakure, also appears to be actively involved. There is a culture of structural impunity. The government and the security sector are involved in this and that is very disturbing.

It is for all these reasons, dear colleagues, that we ask the federal government to take steps. The strengths of the resolution that we have drawn up are as follows.

First, we would like to insist that our government pursue a strong political dialogue with the Burundi authorities. The focus should be on – I will give some points from the resolution – respect for the smooth running of the elections, respect for the Constitution and the Arusha Agreements, monitoring the inclusion of the electoral process and the independence of the electoral bodies and the security services.

It should also be pointed out the importance that Belgium attaches to inclusive and transparent elections respecting the freedom of expression. We also want that, in consultation with the Burundi authorities, civil society and other donors, the second section of the Belgian election financing is linked to the smooth running of those elections.

This resolution also calls on the Belgian government to work thoroughly on a strategic note on our socio-economic, cultural and political relations with the countries in the Great Lakes region. Belgium must also play a leading role in the European context and help to get a European voice about this region.

It also calls for a European Union election observation mission, to develop a sanction policy and to support Burundi civil society, including by closely monitoring the restrictive legislation on civil society.

With regard to the specific situations of harassment of human rights defenders, such as Pierre Claver Mbonimpa, Pacifique Nininahazwe and Bob Rugurika, we call on the government to take initiatives to end it. As members of Parliament, we also wish to be further informed about the initiatives being taken.

We discussed the resolution in the committee and adopted a number of amendments that add value to the whole. Amendments that are repetitive and cause redundancy or have a different focus than the electoral process, such as the very legitimate struggle against hunger, we have rejected because we want to keep the focus clearly on the electoral process.

This resolution should be part of a much broader vision of the policy for Africa and the Great Lakes region. It is very important for our group to work on such a clear policy vision. This is necessary in order to pursue an efficient and coherent foreign policy and to avoid having to act ad hoc whenever problems arise.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, Ladies and Gentlemen, I will be quite brief because many colleagues have already discussed the most important points of this proposal for a resolution.

Mr. Minister of Pensions, I regret that we have this debate in the absence of the Minister of Cooperation and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. However, they are coming back from the region and this is a serious, important issue. It is about the future of a country with which we have close relations. I would have very much liked that the considerable work done in Parliament was heard directly and that we had the reactions of the government regarding this proposal for a resolution. Unfortunately, it is known that in many cases, parliamentary resolutions benefit from a vertical ranking by the government. I hope, Mr. Minister, that you will be our spokesman to the ministers concerned so that they really take the content of this proposed resolution seriously.

You obviously know why the Minister of Foreign Affairs is not present today. He is on a mission abroad. I am surprised that you ignored it!

I do not have access to his agenda, on which he is not very discreet in general.

The press actually echoes it every day. In this context, I understand your comment. I would like to point out that a debate on this issue will take place on Tuesday 31 March in the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Mr. Minister, the debate has already taken place since we come here with its conclusions!

You know like me that this resolution proposal will not solve the problem of Central Africa and Burundi. A debate is scheduled for this Tuesday 31 March at 10:00 in the committee, in the presence of the Minister of Foreign Affairs who will be available to the members of our parliament to answer all their questions.

I take a good note of this, but I also regret that the Minister of Cooperation is not there either and that we do not have a plenary exchange of views on this important issue.

With this in mind, I would like to congratulate the authors of this resolution, once it is not customary, even if elegance would have wanted, and some other colleagues have recalled it, that we are trying to make this initiative a resolution of all the groups in Parliament. This is generally the approach adopted. I therefore regret that the majority wished to have a step on its side, without associating the opposition and without taking into account amendments, some of which were merely factual and others were extremely constructive.

Nevertheless, I think this is an important signal. This is somehow a scream of alarm that our parliament makes today, through this resolution, because in fact, it is midnight less a quarter, it is time to try to reverse what is taking place at the political level in Burundi.

We know the cruel and bloody history of this country. Between 1993 and 2006, there were 300,000 deaths in Burundi due to violence, ethnic tensions, civil war. It is important that we do not go back there. If I say this, it is because Burundi has also been considered for years as a country that had found solutions and arrangements to solve its problems, ⁇ with the Arusha agreements of 2005. Burundi was even considered an exemplary country from this point of view.

Burundi, with the agreements of Arusha, had found a device, some modalities rather inspired by the Belgian model, to ensure that all political factions, ethnic groups, are represented at the political level, within the government.

Parliament must respect itself if it wants the respect of the government.

As many others have said, I think it is fair and normal that the Belgian Parliament is concerned about this situation. We know what the political calendar of Central Africa is. What is happening today in Burundi could inspire electoral processes and political processes next year in Congo, the following year in Rwanda. It is known that all of Central Africa will go through, in the coming months, a period of turbulence and extreme political fragility. Now, we know how much this region of the world has already suffered from political turbulence.

We are also legitimately brought to this issue because we are an important partner of Burundi, being Burundi’s first bilateral donor. In this regard, we also have our word to say about the evolution of the situation. In addition, others have reminded, we are a long-standing friend of Burundi. Many Burundis are present in Belgium and many Belgians there are concerned about the situation in Burundi. We are indeed one of the few countries in the world to be concerned and interested in the situation that prevails in Burundi. For all these reasons, we are right now to ring the alarm bell.

I will not go back on the other elements or on the rather long and detailed arrangement of the resolution. It is so much better!

Mr. Minister, since you say that this debate will continue in the committee, could you tell us clearly and in detail how you intend to implement this resolution in your diplomatic initiatives, in your actions with the Burundi government and at the level of the European Union? You can make sure that we are regularly informed of this situation. Today, the Parliament has done a serious, detailed work. He proposes a roadmap. The government can obviously have its own initiatives complementary or supplementary to those of the parliament, but I think that we must take this resolution proposed today seriously and this call that is launched by the parliament to our government so that the irreparable is not committed tomorrow in Burundi, after tomorrow in Congo or Rwanda.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, we are discussing an important matter. Burundi is an important partner country of Belgium. We spend a reasonable amount of tax money each year. Later this year there are elections in Burundi. The outcome thereafter is not so positive. The president wants to cling to power. It is a classic pattern in many countries. He also begins to restrict civil and liberal freedoms, as well as the freedom to demonstrate. Therefore, it is wise that Parliament gives a signal. This was the intention of the presenters of the resolution. The candidates belong to the majority parties. With the resolution, we express our concerns on a number of issues. We are also committed to continuing to closely monitor the human rights situation in Burundi in the Foreign Relations Committee of the Parliament. We will also organize a parliamentary mission before, during and after the elections, in addition to a number of other matters. It is good that Parliament takes such a commitment.

Following colleague Crusnière of the PS, I would also like to say something about the way the resolution was made. It must be from my heart. The discussion of the resolution took quite a long time. Moreover, it was not the only resolution on Burundi that was submitted. The PS group had submitted a resolution, ahead of the majority resolution to be adopted today. During a first debate in the committee, the question was already raised which resolution we should take as the basis for the discussion. Normally, one could expect the first submitted resolution to be taken as the basis for the discussion.

The majority, however, refused to do so and insisted on discussing the majority resolution first. The opposition, constructively as we are, agreed, but we asked for some openness and appreciation for the opposition factions that have put their time in the process. However, this openness did not occur. That is regrettable. This is not the first time I say this, but it is the first time in this legislature. I find that some majority parties in the Foreign Relations Committee take a little constructive stance.

I have been in Parliament since 2007 and this is the first time I have experienced this to such an extent. I do not draw any conclusions yet, but in this speech, I would like to point out this behavior. It is a rather closed way of working, where, for example, amendments from the opposition were not judged on their content and merits, but purely on the fact that they came from the opposition.

And so, Mrs. Claerhout of the CD&V, there are missed opportunities to make that resolution stronger. I see Mr Flahaux shaking no, but this is clearly stated in the report. This resolution, this signal to Burundi, could have been stronger if the openness had been displayed to include some comments from the opposition. It was not about questionable, diplomatically problematic comments or amendments, but about a number of intellectual arguments and elements that could have been added to the text.

The majority also submitted amendments, but they were not thoroughly motivated. Mrs Claerhout has, to justify her amendment, said six times: “Mr. President, this is an update.”

The severity with which the opposition has dealt with this process was countless times greater than the severity with which the majority has dealt here. I believe that parliamentary initiatives should be rewarded and that there should be openness from the majority parties.

Moreover, we have been so galant from the opposition to present our amendments not during the meeting itself, but a few days before. You were given a week of time to look at everything substantially and therefore the excuse is not that you would not have had the time to evaluate everything.

37 amendments were submitted, namely 12 from the majority and 25 from the opposition, of which 16 from the Ecolo-Green group. Two problems arose, in the sense that the opposition was the first to submit a number of amendments, but that the majority that rejected the amendments to come later with almost exactly the same amendments.

Mrs. Capoen, you will confirm that it was a rather ridiculous show. It was the parliament at its smallest.

In the first amendment. 1 of Ecolo-Greens, we refer to a recent European Parliament resolution on a case of repression against journalist Bob Rugurika. That issue is not covered in the resolution, but it is important to understand the situation in Burundi. Our amendment was rejected in order to see the exact same amendment submitted by the majority approved later.

The amendment went idem dito. We refer to the statement of Foreign Minister Didier Reynders, in which he calls on the Burundi government to conduct a thorough investigation into the events in Cibitoke. He asked that potential perpetrators of human rights violations be brought to Burundi court. As a message, that is useful, but our amendment was rejected. Subsequently, exactly the same amendment was approved, with the difference that the signatories were not the opposition groups, but the majority.

I know that this happens sometimes in this house. Nevertheless, I have rarely experienced this in such a systematic, small way in the committee. I could give a few more examples, but I will not.

I also have examples of useful amendments from the opposition that were briefly rejected, although they could have reinforced the text. I am referring to Amendment No. 2 of me and colleague Benoit Hellings, with which we wanted to enter a passage, referring to the visit of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of Development Cooperation. In the press release then sent by both ministers, Belgium focused on greater inclusion, participation in public life, the importance of election observation and the separation between the judiciary and the executive power. I thought it was important that this be included in the text, but that did not happen.

In the amendment No. We refer to a number of international agreements, existing partnerships between Burundi, our country and the European Union, such as the Cotonou Agreement, its own Constitution, the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance and on Human and Peoples’ Rights. These agreements are important because they contain a number of human rights clauses and have sought to enforce a number of safeguards regarding respect for human rights.

I close my comment, but I had to take it from my heart. We could have done that in a much more constructive and intellectually correct way. I hope from the bottom of my heart that this will not happen again when we discuss next resolutions or files. I would say: appreciate an opposition that wants to do its job and submits amendments. The MP was the first to submit this resolution. We agreed that the later majority resolution would be taken as the basic text, but at that point we asked for some openness. We have not achieved that openness. Unfortunately, we have to learn enough from this.