Traduction de «Prouver au moyen d'une prépondérance de probabilités » (Français → Anglais) :

9. Regrets the unwillingness of the EU Member States to define a common position on the Libya crisis, on UN Security Council Resolution 1973 and on the ways to implement it; expresses deep concern about the risk of considering ad hoc coalitions of the willing or bilateral cooperation as viable substitutes for CSDP, as no European State has the capacity to be a significant security and defence actor in the 21st century world; recalls that the Lisbon Treaty provides for the possibility to entrust the implementation of a crisis management operation to a group of Member States, but only within the framework of a Council decision defining t ...[+++]he objectives, scope and conditions of their implementation, and with the association of the HR/VP; insists that a common response to the developments in Libya is essential to formulate a credible new approach for our southern neighbourhood policy; reiterates that the mandate given in UN Security Council Resolution 1973(2011) to protect Libyan civilians should not be exceeded through the disproportionate use of force; calls on the VP/HR to take concrete measures to secure an early ceasefire in order to stop the bloodshed and suffering of the Libyan people; urges the VP/HR to play a strong and direct role in fostering political initiatives in this direction; considers it crucial to work closely with the Interim Transitional National Council, the African Union and the Arab League in order to channel the current military conflict towards political and diplomatic solutions, including the objective of securing the resignation of the Gaddafi regime; underlines that the elaboration of a strategy for the Sahel region and the Horn of Africa is yet another concrete opportunity to demonstrate the ability of the EU to act both on security and development challenges;

9. Regrets the unwillingness of the EU Member States to define a common position on the Libya crisis, on UN Security Council Resolution 1973 and on the ways to implement it; expresses deep concern about the risk of considering ad hoc coalitions of the willing or bilateral cooperation as viable substitutes for CSDP, as no European State has the capacity to be a significant security and defence actor in the 21st century world; recalls that the Lisbon Treaty provides for the possibility to entrust the implementation of a crisis management operation to a group of Member States, but only within the framework of a Council decision defining t ...[+++]he objectives, scope and conditions of their implementation, and with the association of the HR/VP; insists that a common response to the developments in Libya is essential to formulate a credible new approach for our southern neighbourhood policy; reiterates that the mandate given in UN Security Council Resolution 1973(2011) to protect Libyan civilians should not be exceeded through the disproportionate use of force; calls on the VP/HR to take concrete measures to secure an early ceasefire in order to stop the bloodshed and suffering of the Libyan people; urges the VP/HR to play a strong and direct role in fostering political initiatives in this direction; considers it crucial to work closely with the Interim Transitional National Council, the African Union and the Arab League in order to channel the current military conflict towards political and diplomatic solutions, including the objective of securing the resignation of the Gaddafi regime; underlines that the elaboration of a strategy for the Sahel region and the Horn of Africa is yet another concrete opportunity to demonstrate the ability of the EU to act both on security and development challenges;

Agrees with the principle set out in amendment numbered 4, namely, the desire to reassure Canadians that no defences are lost, but, because the wording of the amendment would codify a reverse onus by requiring an accused person to prove his or her innocence on a balance of probabilities, would propose the following amendment:

The Commissioner is required to make out a case, on a balance of probabilities, that the relief requested is warranted by the circumstances.

Agrees with the principle set out in amendment numbered 4, namely, the desire to reassure Canadians that no defences are lost, but, because the wording of the amendment would codify a reverse onus by requiring an accused person to prove his or her innocence on a balance of probabilities, would propose the following amendment:

Where he proves" requires the accused to prove on a balance of probabilities that a defence applies.