EU Parliament Rejects Asylum For Snowden

cold fjord writes "Euronews reports, 'MEPs have rejected a demand from the European Green Party that urged EU governments to grant asylum to whistleblower Edward Snowden. The move came during the adoption of a European Parliament committee inquiry into the NSA spying scandal. As Claude Moraes, a centre-left British parliamentarian, explains, member states have the final say over who they allow to remain inside their borders. "The European Union does not have the power to grant asylum as the European Union, so this is something for individual member states," he told euronews. "And the issue of asylum within this report therefore does not become a relevant issue for the European Union."'"

Reject?

[mbone]

They didn't reject it (or not). They are unable to grant it, so the issue is moot.

Re:Reject?

[bazmonkey]

Agreed. There's a distinct difference between rejecting a request because one does not agree, versus because one cannot acquiesce in the first place.

Man: Give me $1,000,000.

Me: I don't have $1,000,000.

Would it be fair to say I rejected the man's request for financial help?

Where?

[jklovanc]

If the EU granted asylum where would Snowden live? The EU has no land; It's constituent sovereign nations have the land. For Snowden to live somewhere the country would need to accept him which makes the acceptance by EU a moot point. What if the EU gave him asylum but some of the constituent countries disagreed? Could the EU override the decisions of a sovereign country on a political issue?

Some people have an issue with the EU acting too much like an overriding country. If the EU gave asylum it would be acting like such a country.

Re:Where?

[ledow]

"Could the EU override the decisions of a sovereign country on a political issue?"

You obviously don't live in the EU. The answer, unfortunately, is "yes".