2007 ORDINARY SESSION

________________________

(Second part)

REPORT

Eleventh sitting

Monday 16 April 2007 at 3 p.m.

In this report:

1.       Speeches in English are reported in full.

2.       Speeches in other languages are summarised.

3.       Speeches in German and Italian are reproduced in full in a separate document.

4.       Corrections should be handed in at Room 1059A not later than 24 hours after the report has been circulated.

The contents page for this sitting is given at the end of the verbatim report.

Mr Lindblad, Vice-President of the Assembly, took the Chair at 3.05 p.m.

THE PRESIDENT. – The sitting is open.

1. Minutes of proceedings

THE PRESIDENT. – The minutes of proceedings of the First Sitting have not yet been distributed. They will be adopted at a later sitting.

2. Honouring of obligations and commitments by Azerbaijan

THE PRESIDENT. – This afternoon, we have the debate on the report on honouring of obligations and commitments by Azerbaijan, presented by Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd on behalf of the Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe, Document 11226.

The list of speakers closed at 12 noon. Seventeen names are on the list and 13 amendments have been tabled.

I call Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd, the co-rapporteurs. You have eight minutes to be shared between you.

Mr HERKEL (Estonia). – The rapporteurs wish to thank the Azeri delegation for its co-operation. We have always had understanding and good personal relations with its members even when discussing the most difficult problems concerning Azerbaijan’s fulfilment of its obligations. I also wish to thank the Monitoring Committee and Mrs Chatzivassiliou who assisted much in our work. Unfortunately, she cannot take part today.

Several points need to be emphasised, but some of them are more important than others. At the end of last year, problems regarding the freedom of the media were very serious, but some improvements took place just before we presented our report. The number of political prisoners is not as high as it was some years ago. That is, of course, a positive development, but we should not confuse such small positive steps with the very problem of political prisoners. The existence of political prisoners in a member state of the Council of Europe is not acceptable.

Corruption in the system of justice and the judiciary’s lack of independence is another problem. Certain measures have been initiated by the Council of Europe but there are still structural weaknesses in the political system. Local self-government is weak and not enough power is in the hands of the elected parliament. The problems of freedom of assembly must be resolved before the next elections and – this is probably most important – the electoral code should be amended to guarantee equal opportunities in the electoral committees for both the government and opposition. We have already waited a long time for that. There is a wide range of structural problems within the political system and obligations and commitments have not been fulfilled.

Azerbaijan gained access to the Council of Europe in 2001. Unfortunately, most of the obligations then formulated have not been fulfilled. In January 2006, even the voting right of the delegation was put under question. This Assembly pointed out the problems that needed to be resolved regarding the bad practice occurring in the conduct of elections. Unfortunately, those problems still exist today. Next year, there is the opportunity for the country to hold much better presidential elections.

I also want to mention the lack of representation of the opposition in the Azeri delegation. That reflects a wider problem, because the opposition is not represented well in the parliament. On the one hand that is the consequence of a boycott, but on the other hand it is also a consequence of bad practice in the conduct of elections.

My time is over. Thank you very much.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you Mr Herkel. I now call Mr Lloyd.

Mr LLOYD (United Kingdom). – Thank you Mr President.

I endorse Mr Herkel’s thanks to the Azerbaijani delegation, which was so helpful in preparing our report. I also thank Mrs Chatzivassiliou. Many people will extend their sympathies to her.

As the President of the Assembly said this morning, membership of the Council of Europe does not guarantee that its members have been given a clean bill of health. I must make it clear that we do not give in this report a clean bill of health to everything that has taken place in Azerbaijan. It is work in progress, and we welcome the real progress where it has been made. However, we also recognise that the direction has not always been the right one.

I know that in a complicated society such as Azerbaijan there are those who want to adopt fully the best possible standards of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. They are working hard to make sure that that is implemented. However, there are equally those – I must be frank – who are resisting that at every step. In Azerbaijan, it is often a question of trying to measure who has the upper hand in the battle of the forces of progress and those who would move things backwards.

I want to mention a few particular areas of concern. Mr Herkel has already rightly mentioned the need for strengthened parliamentary accountability. I strongly welcome the fact that the Azerbaijani delegation now includes a member of the opposition, although I urge that proper recognition be given to the need for members of that opposition party to have the whole-hearted support of those who proposed them. This cannot be seen as something that represents the views of the majority in parliament. Parliaments need oppositions. We need oppositions here in our Parliamentary Assembly. The Azerbaijani National Assembly needs its own strong opposition to allow government to function properly and to criticise government on some occasions.

Azerbaijan needs fair elections, and we know that the election code must be written in a way that guarantees that. The 2008 elections will be a very serious matter in deciding whether Azerbaijan really belongs here in the family of the Council of Europe Assembly, committed to democracy, and respect for the democracy of the people.

I also want to mention the important role in Azerbaijan of the whole legal process. The issues raised by Mr Herkel, such as the existence of political prisoners or those who claim to be such, depend intrinsically on the fact that without a fair judicial process the courts will not be fair and cannot be relied on to be objective. That inevitably leads to injustice, as well as to the charge that the courts themselves are being used in an unjust way. Concentration is needed on the recommendations that relate to the need to strengthen and improve the judicial process.

I very much endorse what Mr Herkel had to say about political prisoners. I wish to conclude by paying some small attention to those such as Natiq Efendiyev and Rasim Alekperov. If for no other reasons than those of health, they should now be considered for some form of release. At the very least, the possibility of commuting their sentences should be considered. That would be a very real indicator of the way in which the government intend to proceed on political prisoners.

This is a good report, and I hope that it will be adopted unanimously. It is important that a signal is given to Azerbaijan that it belongs here in our Assembly, but only if it conforms to all our standards.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mr Lloyd. The next speaker is Mr Vareikis, on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party.

Mr VAREIKIS (Lithuania). – Today we are discussing a report that may well be called a complicated and difficult report, because the country that it concerns still needs not only to be monitored closely but to accept a huge dose of criticism.

I want to express my appreciation to the rapporteurs, who did an excellent job. They struck a balance in giving a realistic view and criticism with regard to the position of the Azeri authorities, which are not, perhaps, always happy to hear such views. So the report is critical, but we are saying that we accept it, and do not accept everything that is going on in the country.

It is always good for the Council of Europe, and its rapporteurs, to see the progress that is being made. Where is that progress? There are some improvements in the work of local authorities, the status of political prisoners and the area of freedom of government. However, we have to say that it is not the European standard merely to have fewer political prisoners and a little bit more political freedom in the street. The European standard is to have no political prisoners and completely free political minds. While things are a little bit better, they are not really European. Unfortunately, the list of negatives is much longer than that of improvements. The country did almost nothing to change the structure of power. We still have a very strong president, a very weak parliament and a very weak and probably not independent judiciary. The election code has to be improved as soon as possible, and especially before the next presidential election.

The situation has been even worse in the area of mass media. As the rapporteur mentioned, there is a critical situation with regard to the work of the opposition. The ruling coalition and the opposition should be working together for the sake of the country. Even the little improvements that have been made are not sufficient. It is a pity that this country is still among the most problematic in the Council of Europe. Of course, we must encourage democratic forces and work for democratic change. Authorities that are not democratic must change their mind if they want to be in the Council of Europe; if they want to be European states, they have to take those things into account. Of course Azerbaijan needs to be in the Council of Europe and to be on board. That is very important for regional security and important for Europe. We can never agree that a country has the right not to be democratic and not follow European standards.

We would like to support the projects and the report, and to encourage democratic forces in Azerbaijan and in Azeri society to improve their minds and to become very much a European state. We wish that the next report on the country will be more optimistic and more positive.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you Mr Vareikis. I call Mr Goris on behalf of the Liberal Group.

Mr GORIS (Belgium). – On behalf of the Liberal Group, I congratulate both rapporteurs, Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd, on this excellent report, which was, by the way, unanimously approved a few weeks ago in the Monitoring Committee. That point is worth stressing; as I recall, that is the first time that we have had such a vote on this kind of sensitive issue. I congratulate both of them.

We, too, want to stress improvements, although I shall also want to deal with some other points. First, on the revision of the electoral code, improvement is needed, especially looking forward to next year’s elections in Azerbaijan. In this respect, we call not only on the authorities, the Council and the Venice Commission to review the code, but on the opposition parties, which have a responsibility to conduct constructive opposition and preparation for the elections, to ensure a situation in which the whole population of Azerbaijan will be the winners. It is worth noting that in paragraph 8.7 of the draft resolution, the Assembly notes “that two demonstrations were recently staged by the opposition and no incidents were reported”. It is very good that that features in the report, and we can only look forward to continuing in that direction.

Judicial reforms are another important element, as well as the pardoning by the president of 14 prisoners who were on the list of the taskforce. It is important that we remain vigilant with regard to such prisoners, and recent arrests that give rise to concern were mentioned by the rapporteurs. I am happy, however, to hear today from Mr Herkel, that there are fewer prisoners than before.

As I said before, it is very important that we have unanimous support for this report, and we can only hope – this hope was also expressed by the Liberal Group – that the constructive monitoring and dialogue will continue. We call on both rapporteurs and on the Azeri administration to continue in this way.

Last but not least, I turn to an issue that the Monitoring Committee has just discussed. The Liberal Group explicitly call for a solution to the Karabakh conflict, and particularly for a solution to the problem of the 760 000 displaced persons. We believe that it is in the interest of the whole of the South Caucasus area that a correct solution be found. Peace and harmony will positively influence the progress made by all countries concerned regarding their obligations and commitments to the Council of Europe. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe of course supports this project.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Walter on behalf of the European Democratic Group.

Mr WALTER (United Kingdom). – I, too, congratulate the rapporteurs, Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd, on this excellent report. I sense that there is a strong consensus within the Assembly in support of it, including among the Azeri delegation.

I have visited Azerbaijan on a number of occasions in the past couple of years, as an election monitor representing the Council of Europe, and as Chairman of the Sub-Committee on the Media. We held a media, freedom and ethics seminar in Baku last year in the context of the training of journalists.

We must remember that what the report says is that nobody is perfect. Over the years, there have been scandals of various types – party finances in Germany, postal voting in the United Kingdom, and wine cellars in the Hôtel de Ville in Paris. However, Azerbaijan is a young democracy. It joined this Organisation in 2001, and did not do so with a long tradition of free and fair elections. It joined having to qualify in order to meet the standards and conditions laid down by this body.

On reading between the lines of the report, it indicates – I certainly get this impression from my visits to Azerbaijan – that there is a maturity in attitudes among Azeri politicians, the Azeri Government and the Azeri delegation here. That is one reason why, as I understand it, the delegation in general supports the report. However, let us not forget that the report is a critical one. It is critical of elections in Azerbaijan, and I can certainly say from personal experience that those elections were far from perfect. None the less, they were democratic elections and they returned a government. They were far from perfect not least because of a very weak opposition in that country. One of our obligations as the Council of Europe and as a Parliamentary Assembly is to nurture that opposition and to encourage pluralism. One reason for that weak opposition is a weak media – the absence of a critical media in Azerbaijan. There are certainly suspicions that when an independent television station is closed or when an opposition newspaper is evicted from its offices, these are anti-democratic processes. I know that the government had technical reasons for carrying out both those measures; none the less, in mature democracies governments welcome a critical media and a strong democratic opposition.

This report is also right to separate out the question of Nagorno-Karabakh. I know that there are enthusiasts within the Council of Europe who would like us to move on this issue, but I have a feeling that positive and constructive dialogues are taking place between the two parties from Baku and Yerevan. We should leave the process to evolve for the time being, and wish those involved in it the best of luck in finding a solution, so that two states within this Council of Europe Assembly can live side by side and in peace.

The European Democratic Group has no hesitation in supporting the thrust of this report and the attached resolution. Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Platvoet on behalf of the Group of the Unified European Left.

Mr PLATVOET (Netherlands). – On behalf of the Group of the Unified European Left, I congratulate both rapporteurs on this report. It is not a formal document, but it is a good report, especially in terms of dealing with political prisoners and the media in Azerbaijan. It provides detailed and convincing information on what is happening in Azerbaijan, and the rapporteurs deserve to be complimented on it.

As usual, we have a monitoring report that contains good and bad news. In that way, it is a balanced report, but unfortunately, that does not mean that the good and bad things are equally divided. Yes, there seems to be good co-operation with the Venice Commission to improve the election code, to balance the composition of the Central Election Commission and to get a better procedure for election-related complaints and appeals. However, this issue should have been settled almost a year ago, after the resolution was adopted in the debate on challenging the credentials of the Azeri delegations after the bad elections of November 2005. I ask both rapporteurs, what has really changed during this period? Yes, economic growth is running at about 30%, but 25% of the population still live in poverty. The growth of the economy is leading not to a growth of social welfare, but to a growth in corruption.

Yes, there was a presidential pardon decree. Ten political prisoners were released but of course, the bad thing is that Azerbaijan – a member state of the Council of Europe – is a country where people can still be arrested because of their political convictions, and some are still in prison. Yes, the licence to broadcast was given back to the independent television channel, ANS, after numerous protests, but the bad thing was that it was possible for a member state of the Council of Europe to drop this licence for unknown reasons. Also, the opposition newspaper, Azadliq, was kicked out of its premises by police forces. As the well-documented report of Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd points out, there were many violent incidents against journalists, and journalists were imprisoned.

Freedom of assembly is frustrated by the authorities, and the situation in the prisons is very bad. The government refuses to give permission for the publications of the 2004 and 2005 reports of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. That is not acceptable. What is the role of the Parliament of Azerbaijan in this matter? Has it demanded that the government implement the recommendations?

It is often said in this venue that you cannot expect a country that has been on its way to democracy for fifteen years to reach this goal in such a short period, given that other countries, such as mine, took 150 years or even longer. This is an argument for slowly changing structures, but it can never be an argument for state violence against journalists and demonstrators, or for arresting and deporting people because of their religion.

Azerbaijan has a frustrated history, involving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. I understand that very well, and regret that international resolutions such as those of the United Nations have not been implemented.

The almost 5 000 missing persons from Azerbaijan – missing due to the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh – are a deep scar in society. The rapporteurs have given some attention to that issue, and I will ask them to implement the monitoring procedure – because the issue has everything to do with human rights – after my report on missing persons in the Southern Caucasus.

Over five years, many resolutions on Azerbaijan have been adopted to allow Azerbaijan to fulfil commitments to the principles of the Council of Europe. The presidential elections in 2008 will be a new touchstone; we cannot, however, have an endless row of touchstones.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Pangalos. He is not here.

I therefore call Mrs Severinsen.

Mrs SEVERINSEN (Denmark). – Thank you, Mr President. I also thank the rapporteurs. I agree with previous speakers that the report is a very good one. It shows that the monitoring system – which is sometimes criticised by those who say, “Why are we going on and on with those countries?” – has impact. There has been progress in some ways, some of which is due to rapporteurs pointing out, for instance, the issue of political prisoners. The good news is that some have been released, but the bad news is that people are still being imprisoned. It is therefore important that the rapporteurs continue with their work.

Almost every day, I receive e-mails from NGOs about prison conditions and prisoners being ill-treated. Not all such accusations are founded but some are. It is important to keep an eye on the issue, as it has always been an important one in Azerbaijan.

It will be good news if the election law is improved. If the press was completely free and if the opposition was free to express its opinions fully, that would be better news. We must also admit that the issue is not only about those in power, but about the opposition, which is weak and split. We need a genuine choice for the forthcoming election to be real. Therefore, the conclusion that the monitoring should continue is very well founded.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mrs Hajiyeva.

Mrs HAJIYEVA (Azerbaijan). – Thank you, Mr President.

Dear colleagues, I should like to start my speech with the words that I said today in the Group of the European People’s Party meeting. I said that I would like to express my thanks to our distinguished rapporteurs, Andreas Herkel and Tony Lloyd, to the members of the Monitoring Committee, to our distinguished colleague Eduard Lintner and to all those who not only helped to produce the report, but were involved in all the activities to help my nation and my country, Azerbaijan. I also express my special gratitude to dear Despina. We are praying for her, her husband and her son.

If we compare the report with Resolution 1305 adopted in 2002 and the first document on the honouring of obligations and commitments by Azerbaijan, it is impossible not to notice the gradual and substantial progress in democratisation, particularly in the sphere of the protection of human rights. Perhaps since accession, my country has successfully co-operated with the Venice Commission on bringing its legislation into full compliance with European standards. For more than a year, Azerbaijan has been developing a new criminal code, taking on board the recommendation of Council of Europe experts on its compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights and especially the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, which is not usually practised by our judiciary.

There are obvious dynamics in the establishment of, and the forging ahead with, democratic institutions. Witnesses to the discussions on Azerbaijani obligations have clearly observed those dynamics over five years. A huge amount of work has been done and numerous steps taken, but we are not so naïve as to pretend that we are a European democracy in the full sense of the notion. Much more remains to be done to meet the standards of a real democracy.

Democratisation is a complicated and multi-faceted process, usually involving serious contradiction in society. To a great extent, it is connected to the consciousness and mentality of society. It is therefore an evolutionary, not revolutionary, process. It is possible to change the rules in a very short period of time but not to change the mentality and attitude of people in respect of well-established and rooted traditions and experience. We should never forget that democracy is a process that has a beginning but not an end. In relation to levels of democracy, we should stop applying double standards – one set of standards for small countries and one for bigger countries.

We should also take into consideration the geopolitical position of Azerbaijan, which is located on the crossroads not only of east, west, north and south, but at the intersection of different and often contradictory geopolitical and economic interests. There are serious forces that are not interested in a strong independent political leadership in my country – a leadership that could prevent the manipulation of existing political, social and economic problems. We must take into consideration the fact that 20% of Azerbaijani territories are under occupation, which is one of the factors detrimental to democratisation in the country. It is not easy to develop democracy with about 1 million refugees and 20% of territory under the occupation of a neighbouring country, which, unfortunately, is also a member of the Council of Europe.

By adopting the resolution, we will send a strong message to those political forces in my country headed by our former colleague Ilham Aliyev, which have a strong democratic aspiration, to push forward and accelerate reforms in the political, economic, social and judicial spheres. We have European aspirations and consider ourselves a part of Europe, but we need your love, support and understanding. I believe that our friends in the Council of Europe will never refuse us those.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Seyidov.

Mr SEYIDOV (Azerbaijan). – Thank you, Mr President. I thank the rapporteurs, Andreas Herkel and Tony Lloyd for this important report for Azerbaijan.

This is the first time in the history of the relations between rapporteurs and the delegation that we have prepared the report together. We suggested a lot of amendments to the report and exchanged views a great deal in the discussions. We have implemented all the amendments and the report is now balanced and in favour of Azerbaijan. That is despite the fact that there is criticism in the report, but it is objective. Such an approach could be useful to the future of Azerbaijan.

Together with the rapporteurs, I express my gratitude to all my friends who support Azerbaijan in our efforts to create democracy. I express my gratitude to the NGOs that are working together with us. Thanks to the Council of Europe, we have created a unique experience and a taskforce in Azerbaijan, which, together with NGOs and representatives of the authorities and of the parliament is trying to find a solution to the problems that still exist in Azerbaijan. That is the right approach.

Azerbaijan has been an independent country for just the past fifteen years. Despite that, economic progress has been unbelievable. There has been economic growth of 25% or 30%. That is very good. Colleagues have mentioned that 20% of the population live in poverty, but let us bear in mind that just three years ago that figure was 40%. That figure has been reduced because of economic progress and the political will of our president and my government.

Azerbaijan shares all European values, and we are proud of that. We have a Catholic minority of just 330 people, yet in the centre of the city a Catholic church is being built. There are Catholic churches, Orthodox churches and synagogues in Azerbaijan, and we are proud of that. Therefore, Azerbaijan is a good advertisement for tolerance.

We try to honour all our obligations to the Council of Europe. That is not such an easy task; it is very difficult. I am very proud that in the report we can find many positive signs in Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan recently adopted a special action plan for human rights. It is trying to honour its obligations not only to the Council of Europe; we have signed a neighbourhood policy with the European Union, which is very important for us. Azerbaijan has tried to give power to the municipalities, and we see a reflection of those steps in the report with the independent associations working in the country. We are very concerned about the human rights issues and we are trying to do our best by associating with specialist NGOs.

Of course implementing European values is not as easy as it seems; it is a very difficult task. However, it is important to take into account the desire of the Azerbaijani people. We actively want to be together, not because of the Council of Europe and United Nations Organisations or the European Union, but because of the desire in my country to join western civilisation. We have done much in that direction. I hope that, together with my colleagues in the Council of Europe, and given such an approach, we will be able to do a great deal. For the first time in Azerbaijan’s history in the Council of Europe, members of the ruling party, of the opposition and of independents in our delegation are trying to be constructive, and we voted in favour of the report despite its critical elements.

I want to see, in the near future, resolution of conflict in my region, of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue and other problems so that we can co-operate throughout the region with the rest of Europe.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Proroković.

Mr PROROKOVIĆ (Serbia). – I start by commending the efforts of the rapporteurs in compiling this outstanding report. By reading a report as detailed as this, even someone who knows very little about Azerbaijan and the regional problems of the Caucasus can easily understand everything. Of course, the report draws attention to the many problems that Azerbaijan faces today in the field of the rule of law, democratisation and human rights and freedoms. The biggest problems are corruption and the issue of political prisoners, but I shall not talk about bad news because, when speaking about young democracies, the question is whether the glass is half full or half empty.

None the less, I must observe that Azerbaijani officials have made great efforts to solve problems in the past two years. They obviously took seriously the criticism made in 2005 and as a result have reactivated a taskforce to implement Resolution 1457. That has resulted initially in solving some individual cases. Also, they have begun reform of the prisons system and improvement of prison conditions, which are bad not only in Azerbaijan but throughout the countries of the region.

It should also be mentioned that Azerbaijan has made certain improvements in the field of human rights. A national action plan has been adopted and improvements have been made in the protection of rights and cultures of national minorities. That is especially worth mentioning, given that some of those national minorities are very small communities which were about to be assimilated. I also remind you that three municipal associations were formed: for cities, for rural towns and for settlements. I believe that that is one more step towards democratisation.

There is of course a question of the balance of power and the strengthening of the role of parliament not only as a law-making body but as an institution that has control in a political hierarchy. However, we must admit that that problem is common to all countries of South-Eastern Europe, and not exclusive to Azerbaijan.

Despite those problems, we can say that the country has made progress in a number of areas. Some might say that progress has been limited, and perhaps it has, but it is progress all the same. That is why the Parliamentary Assembly must encourage Azerbaijan to continue on the road. In the end, the fact that the great investment made in Baku over the past year is turning it into one of the biggest construction sites in Europe justifies my assessment. Such improvement is even more important if we bear in mind the problems of Nagorno-Karabakh and instability in the Caspian region, as well as the latest developments in Iran, which also impact on Azerbaijan.

Finally, I want to say something about Nagorno-Karabakh, as during a previous part-session we also discussed Kosovo. Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd call, as rapporteurs, for further negotiation and the creation of a positive climate as a way of finding a solution for Nagorno-Karabakh. In my opinion, that is the only rightful solution, because such a problem can be solved only by dialogue between both parties and not by the imposition of ideas. As we know, some are keen to resolve the problem of Kosovo by imposing solutions. We should say once more that the independence of Kosovo can mean only further separation and instability in the Caucasus. That is why in Kosovo and in Nagorno-Karabakh there is no alternative but negotiation between the parties and the reaching of a mutually accepted agreement. That is why the position taken my Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd should be strongly supported.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Loutfi.

Mr LOUTFI (Bulgaria) commended the rapporteurs and commented that the report which highlighted the progress made by Azerbaijan, omitted nothing. He noted that the highest authority in Azerbaijan, President Aliyev, had taken account of the recommendations made by the Assembly, in particular those relating to human rights and prisoners. At a local level, measures had been taken which attested to the goodwill of the authorities in Azerbaijan to co-operate as closely as possible with the Assembly.

Problems relating to media pluralism and freedom of the press gave rise to concern, although progress had been made. Positive progress had also been made in relation to freedom of association, and he was sure that the existing legislation would be extended.

The separation of powers and electoral reform gave rise to significant concern, although there was hope that the Assembly could assist Azerbaijan in reducing the threshold for the representation of groups in parliament. Effective means needed to be found to support the opposition, and any assistance that could be provided would enable Azerbaijan to match the values found elsewhere in Europe. A great number of national minorities in Azerbaijan needed help in this respect.

In relation to the Nagorno-Karabakh, what was needed was to unite around the idea that the conflict could be resolved through dialogue and in the light of international law. He concluded by saying that Azerbaijan was on the right path in terms of its development.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Tekelioğlu.

Mr TEKELIOĞLU (Turkey). – I would like to thank the rapporteurs, Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd, for the detailed report that they have prepared on the honouring of obligations and commitments by Azerbaijan. As the report suggests, there have been improvements in the protection of human rights and democracy in Azerbaijan, but there are also some concerns that need to be tackled immediately.

Unquestionably, some further work is necessary for Azerbaijan to fulfil its democratic commitments and to realise its potential as a stable and prosperous democracy. I firmly believe that, with its strong political will, Azerbaijan can successfully complete this task and become one of the leading democratic states governed by the rule of law and the principles of human rights in the region. Let me explain why I believe that this is so.

First, Azerbaijan chose of its own free will to become a democracy embracing the core values of the Council of Europe. Azerbaijan made this choice in the belief that democracy would secure its sovereignty, independence and prosperity in the years to come. Secondly, we observe that Azerbaijan has started to fulfil its commitments and has begun to lay the groundwork for a democratic future. The latest improvements in democratic structure in Azerbaijan testify to the fact that Azeri authorities are on the right track in building their future.

Thirdly, Azerbaijan is not alone in its struggle to realise a democratic future. There are many international organisations, such as ours, ready to help the reconstruction of democracy and human rights in Azerbaijan. Fourthly, as a Caspian littoral state, Azerbaijan is capitalising on the sizeable hydrocarbon resources of the region. Azerbaijan’s real gross domestic product grew immensely in 2006. This economic boom, together with a young and skilled population, will help the democratic reconstruction of the state.

Having identified the positive aspects of Azerbaijan’s future, I should also mention some negative aspects. The first and foremost problem that has to be solved immediately for a democratic future in Azerbaijan is the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The problem of Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territory has been awaiting a peaceful solution for more than a decade. The peaceful solution of this conflict will contribute not only to the democratic construction of Azerbaijan, but to the normalisation of Turkish-Armenian relations.

In conclusion, I emphasise my sincere belief in the genuine efforts of the Azerbaijani authorities, which will transform the country into a place where human rights are fully implemented and citizens are governed by democratic principles and live in prosperity. The Council of Europe, through the Parliamentary Assembly, should give its full support to Azerbaijan. The Council of Europe presence in Azerbaijan should be strengthened to provide the necessary support for the reforms made by the Azeri Government. Instead of taking punitive action such as challenging the Azeri parliamentarians’ credentials, we should embrace a constructive dialogue with Azerbaijan to lead the country in a positive direction.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. The next speaker is Mr Ali Huseynov.

Mr A. HUSEYNOV (Azerbaijan) reiterated what had been said by the head of the delegation of Azerbaijan, Mr Seyidov, which was that Azerbaijan supported the report but wanted to draw the attention of the Assembly to a number of points.

One of Azerbaijan’s main aims was to set up a permanent joint committee. Such a proposal had been put forward in 2003, but the draft legislation was not supported by parliament. It was also planned to develop a professional electoral administration. The situation on regard for political opposition was not as good as it could have been. The human rights position in Azerbaijan could be improved. He also said that this was not something that the opposition should deal with but was an area where the public could play an important role. He stated that Azerbaijan had set up penitentiary institutions with regard to accepted human rights standards. Azerbaijan had also established an independent body for the training of judges and had adopted a policy to set up an independent Bar. He concluded that Azerbaijan had also established arrangements for political prisoners with the help of the Council of Europe and a number of non-governmental organisations.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I now call Mr Çavuşoğlu.

Mr ÇAVUŞOĞLU (Turkey). – The report prepared by Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd deserves appreciation. It is factual and comprehensive. It recognises the efforts made by Azerbaijan in a number of areas and draws attention to issues of concern.

Last year, we discussed challenges to the credentials of members of the Azeri parliamentary delegation due to the failure to meet democratic standards in the November 2005 elections. We observed the partial re-run parliamentary elections and have examined developments since then. We all know that co-operation between the Council of Europe and Azerbaijan is essential for the development of every area in the country. The next presidential elections, which are due in 2008, will be a critical test for Azerbaijan with regard to its commitments and obligations towards this Assembly. It is high time that the countries of the Caucasus displayed their maturity by holding fully free and fair elections.

Economic development in Azerbaijan is impressive. It holds the world record for economic growth and has become a notable supplier of oil to western markets and carried out new infrastructure projects within the country as well as in the region. Azerbaijan gives a strong impression that it has a bright future, but economic progress is never sufficient. Prosperity is an asset when it is generated and spread in a pluralistic democracy. I am confident that Azerbaijan will achieve this target by realising political and social transformation simultaneously.

As the co-rapporteurs rightly highlight, the separation of powers is the key to pluralistic democracy. The Parliament of Azerbaijan should be provided with the necessary means to strengthen its control over the executive and the system of checks and balances should be improved. Dialogue is needed between the majority and the opposition to start with. We welcome the improvements regarding the revision of the election code and the efforts to create an independent and well-trained judiciary. Of course, we expect concrete steps to resolve the issue of political prisoners, and in the fight against corruption.

The freedom of the media remains the most important issue to follow in Azerbaijan. We also look forward to the conclusion of the ongoing programme of prison reform as that would be considered a positive step in the field of human rights. Allegations of torture of ill treatment can be dealt with by implementing the recommendations made by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Adoption of the national action plan on the protection of human rights is an encouraging development.

I certainly believe that Azerbaijan has the potential to realise political, economic and social transformation. I am also aware that it is struggling to overcome obstacles and shortcomings, not only in the country but in international forums. We cannot turn our backs on the frozen conflicts in that region. The absence of a definitive settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict obstructs the way towards real progress. Without lasting peace between the two neighbouring countries and the return of the hundreds of thousands of displaced persons, it is not possible to achieve peace, stability and democratic governance in the region as a whole.

The Committee on Migration, Refugees and Population has written many reports and the one on refugees, internally displaced persons and missing people was mentioned by Mr Platvoet. In Paris, the Standing Committee has just adopted a report on the situation of women in the Caucasus. When we look at the roots of the problems, we see that the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh is the main reason for them. I therefore appreciate the interest displayed by this Assembly in the resolution of the conflict and I extend my full support to the efforts led by the Bureau’s ad hoc committee in this respect.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Rafael Huseynov.

Mr R. HUSEYNOV (Azerbaijan). – Let me express my gratitude to the distinguished rapporteurs. This is not the first time that the issue of Azerbaijan has been discussed in the Parliamentary Assembly and I want to go back seven years and recall the first debates on our country that were conducted here. The genuine truth arises more clearly from comparisons and if we compare the Azerbaijan of seven years ago with the present Azerbaijan, we see that there are many serious differences and that progress has been made.

Like the other newly independent countries that joined the family of the Council of Europe, Azerbaijan faced many problems. However, when we compare the Azerbaijan of seven years ago with the present Azerbaijan, we see different countries. The serious promotion and development of democratic reforms, legal state building, the freedom of the media and of speech and the prevalence of laws and conventions that are common in Europe and superior European values are now quite visible in Azerbaijan.

However some countries remained outside the Council of Europe after they gained independence even though they were also former Soviet countries like Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan has now left behind the countries that it resembled seven years ago and that is undoubtedly due to the useful lessons and experience of the Council of Europe, which is regarded as a school of democracy.

With the passage of years, Azerbaijan has not limited itself to being a exemplary learner in the family and school of the Council of Europe. In comparison with seven years ago, the Council of Europe has also changed and Azerbaijan has shared in that development. The members of the Azerbaijani delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly have always been active here. They prepared reports related to important common European problems, gained promotion to upper positions in different committees and sub-committees, issued thousands of documents, and took a distinctive part in various debates, discussions and colloquiums.

If people at least look at the number of reports we have prepared, or at our recommendations, they will witness the sequence of activities carried out by Azerbaijan in order to enrich the Council of Europe and to help this respected Organisation. The authors of such important reports as “The cultural situation in South Caucasus”, “The education of European refugees and IDPs” and “Professional education and training of journalists in Europe” have been members of the Azerbaijani delegation; these problems do not belong entirely to Azerbaijan, but have a regional and common European character.

However, it is a pity that our respected rapporteurs have forgotten to assess these activities in the report. At the same time, it is also a pity that the dynamics of development in various fields in the country have not been properly reflected in the report. Had these issues been properly analysed, an idea of the effectiveness of the co-operation between Azerbaijan and the Council of Europe would have been much better specified. We are satisfied with the firm position of the Council of Europe regarding Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Council of Europe Resolution 1416, regarding Armenian occupation of the Azerbaijani territories, ethic cleansing carried out by Armenia against Azerbaijanis, the existence of an unlawful and separatist regime in Nagorno-Karabakh, the region of the Azerbaijan republic, as well as the setting up an ad hoc committee on implementation of this resolution, is approvable.

None the less, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe could have contributed much more to solving this problem by using the prestige and influence of the Committee of Ministers. Unfortunately, the presentation of this issue in the report is not at the desirable level. I guess that my colleagues should be able to take a critical approach not only towards the honouring of obligations and commitments by the countries that are under the monitoring procedure of the Council of Europe, but also towards an activity conducted by the Council of Europe with regard to these countries.

The Council of Europe has a commitment with regard to Azerbaijan, which possesses more than 1 million refugees, and this Organisation should make more efforts in order to honour its commitment. However, the monitoring with regard to honouring this commitment is really conducted by the Azerbaijani people, who cherish hopes for the Council of Europe.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you Mr Huseynov. I call Ms Pashayeva.

Ms PASHAYEVA (Azerbaijan). – Azerbaijan is a country whose independence was restored only fifteen years ago, after the collapse of the USSR. In several years, the Azerbaijani economy has advanced speedily, and today Azerbaijan enjoys a leading position in the world with regard to the tempo of its economic development. Azerbaijan has made the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan oil and Baku-Tblisi-Erzurum gas pipelines a reality; they are considered the future of the South Caucasus region and an important grounding for the power safety of Europe. The Baku-Tblisi-Gars railroad project to link Europe with Asia will also become a reality in forthcoming years. Freedom of expression and of the media are ensured in the country. Azerbaijan ranks among the leading countries of the world for the higher level of national and religious tolerance both historically and today. This has been particularly stressed by the rapporteurs in their reports.

In the report, the rapporteurs point out the problems of Azerbaijan along with its successes. We do not deny the problems. Put simply, the objectivity of evaluations is important. Every country has problems, including Azerbaijan. However, the imperative thing is that the country’s president has constantly displayed and keeps on displaying a political will to solve these problems.

As is noted in the report, located at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, Azerbaijan, with its rapidly advancing economy, becomes a major strategic actor of the region. The rapporteurs remark that, despite that factor, 25% of the Azerbaijani population still live at the poverty level. Yet the rapporteurs are well aware of the fact that the number of poor people in Azerbaijan has fallen from about 45% to 20% due to the socio-economic policy implemented in the country, and this year the same figure will be less than 15%. Also, the state is enforcing a national programme aimed at achieving a further fall of the number of the poor in coming years. However, the report does not provide inclusive information regarding the factors affecting the raise of the poverty headcount in Azerbaijan. Some 1 million of the Azerbaijani population of 8 million have been living the life of refugees and internally displaced persons for more than fifteen years. Some 20% of the country’s territory is under the Armenian occupation. Ignoring Resolution 1416 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Armenia does not retreat from the occupied Azerbaijani land. As noted by the rapporteurs, the problem of more than 4 000 missing Azerbaijanis and about 1 million Azerbaijani refugees and IDPs is still pending.

The Azerbaijani Government was bound to try to improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of IDPs who had lost their houses and jobs, and has achieved important accomplishments in this field. It is already the case that no single tent camp will remain in Azerbaijan this year. Houses are being built for the people living in refugee camps and their living conditions are also being improved.

Today, serious work is ongoing in Azerbaijan to ensure that the presidential elections to be held in 2008 fully meet the international standards. Discussions are being conducted between the Azerbaijani Government and the Venice Commission regarding the electoral code and the organisation of election commissions. At the same time, the discussions with the Venice Commission concerning the law on freedom of gathering are still under way.

As was marked out in the report, sufficient positive steps have been made for the development of municipal institutions. Serious measures are being taken in the fight against corruption. Court reforms in the country are rapidly advancing. The exams for the employment of new judges have been arranged on the basis of fair and transparent selection in co-operation with the Council of Europe. This has also been underlined in the report.

Representatives of international organisations constantly point out in their documents the improvement of prison conditions in Azerbaijan over the years and the serious steps made in this direction. There are no obstacles to the entry of human rights advocates, local and international non-governmental organisations and human rights defenders to the prisons. This was also noted in the report.

In general, Azerbaijan has fulfilled the majority of the obligations it undertook on entry to the Council of Europe. Yet, as is also noted by the rapporteurs, no essential progress has been achieved in the peaceful regulation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, one of the major obligations undertaken by Azerbaijan and Armenia at their entry to the Council of Europe in 2001. Unfortunately, the rapporteurs mentioned only briefly the reasons why this conflict, which is a source of danger for the South Caucasus region, has not yet been solved. Azerbaijan wants a peaceful settlement of the conflict, and its adherence to the negotiations process for more than fifteen years is proof of this. However, let us see whether Armenia, which has undertaken an obligation before the Council of Europe on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict’s peaceful settlement, wants this outcome.

The separatist Armenian regime of Nagorno-Karabakh is preparing for the presidential elections to take place in July with the support of Armenia, and we are expecting a very harsh to this issue from the Council of Europe.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you Ms Pashayeva. That concludes the list of speakers. I call Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd; together, you have four minutes to respond.

Mr HERKEL (Estonia). – I should like to start with the most difficult question, which was probably put by Mr Platvoet: what has happened since January 2006? My honest answer would be: not so much. Unfortunately, the small positive steps were always overshadowed by bad news that we got from the country. The report is critical not because rapporteurs like to be critical, but because the situation is such as we have described. However, there are forthcoming elections, which will be a new opportunity for the country.

Mr Seyidov, in his brilliant speech, said some sentences even including the name of the opposition. I would once again like to emphasise that the Azerbaijani opposition was not present in the Monitoring Committee and was not here today in this discussion. Mr Namazov is on the balcony. Another leader of the opposition, Mr Kerimli, was invited to be here but he does not have an appropriate passport, for reasons that we cannot understand.

I want to say a little more about the proposal that Mr Ali Huseynov outlined, concerning professional members of electoral committees. My feeling is that the opposition in Azerbaijan would strongly oppose this idea. Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. I call Mr Lloyd.

Mr LLOYD (United Kingdom). – I welcome the contributions that have been made. When reports such as this are produced, those who want to regard them as very friendly will described them as such, and those who see them as totally critical will describe them as such. However, this report certainly does recognise that progress has been made in Azerbaijan. It has to be said that sometimes such progress has been pulled like teeth, in the face of a lot of resistance, before we got the right result. In that context, although we very much welcome the decision to allow ANS to continue to broadcast, and for the Azadliq newspaper to continue, it was a struggle to ensure that that happened. We must recognise that if Azerbaijan is to make progress, there must be the joint working that we see in this Assembly and in the task force. Not simply opposition politicians but people in civil society must join together with members of the governing parties, hopefully to move forward the issue of political prisoners. This must become the norm – the culture of democracy, human rights and the rule of law has to be established.

I ask those in this Assembly from Azerbaijan to take this report back with them and to say to those in their country who are resisting change at every point that they are out of step, and that their views are not in keeping with the needs of the people of Azerbaijan or with Azerbaijan’s future. Azerbaijan now has only one direction of travel: towards a European culture of democracy and the rule of law. We will judge Azerbaijan’s progress when the presidential election takes place next year, and on each occasion that the Monitoring Committee or others review what is taking place. Progress has been made but frankly it is not enough, as everybody knows; there must be more progress and more consistency. Those in Azerbaijan who want to see that country properly join the ranks of European nations should regard this report as their benchmark. They should use it not to argue that everything has been achieved, but to argue the case for how far Azerbaijan has to travel. In that spirit, we can all work together to see Azerbaijan make the necessary changes.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. Mr Lintner, chairperson of the committee, wishes to speak. He has two minutes.

Mr LINTNER (Germany) congratulated the rapporteurs who had successfully used the Assembly’s procedures to provide positive support to Azerbaijan, and said that it was important not to lose sight of the main goal: the introduction of a democratic parliamentary system which was accepted by all. Good progress had been made but needed to be maintained.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. That concludes the debate.

The Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee) has presented a draft resolution, to which 13 amendments have been tabled. I have also been informed of two oral sub-amendments.

The amendments will taken in the order in which they appear on the notice paper. I remind you that speeches on amendments are limited to one minute.

I also excuse myself for changing glasses. I do not have the regular “progressives”, so it will be interesting to see whether I can change glasses quickly enough to see who is asking to have the floor.

We come to Amendment No. 11, tabled by Mr Andres Herkel, Mr Marko Mihkelson, Mr Christos Pourgourides, Mr Göran Lindblad, Ms Marietta de Pourbaix-Lundin, Mr György Frunda and Mr Tony Lloyd, which is, in the draft resolution, at the end of paragraph 6.4, add the following sentence: “and the Assembly expects the public broadcasting service to ensure equal and unbiased coverage of the campaign for all presidential candidates;”.

I call Mr Herkel to support Amendment No. 11.

Mr HERKEL (Estonia). – Thank you. Through this amendment, we want to make clear the duty of public service broadcasting in a pre-election period.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – The committee is in favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

We come to Amendment No. 12, tabled by Mr Andres Herkel, Mr Marko Mihkelson, Mr Christos Pourgourides, Mr Göran Lindblad, Ms Marietta de Pourbaix-Lundin, Mr György Frunda and Mr Tony Lloyd, which is, in the draft resolution, paragraph 6.5, after the words “the Election Code be amended”, insert the following words: “at the latest by the beginning of 2008”.

I call Mr Herkel to support Amendment No. 12.

Mr HERKEL (Estonia). – Thank you. Having been the rapporteur for Azerbaijan for some time, I know that amending the election code involves a long story. We hope that the situation will be resolved before the next presidential elections. However, it is better to provide an exact date, because the amendments must be made a certain time before the elections.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – The committee is in favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

We come to Amendment No. 1, tabled by Mr Samad Seyidov, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Ms Ganira Pashayeva and Mr Sabir Hajiyev, which is, in the draft resolution, paragraph 7.8, replace the words “three meetings have been held in the last five months” with the following words: “four meetings have been held since then”.

I call Mrs Hajiyeva to support Amendment No. 1.

Mrs HAJIYEVA (Azerbaijan). – Thank you. This is a technical amendment that relates to the phrase “three meetings that have been held in the last five months” and the work of the taskforce group. Another meeting was held was held on 11 April, so the amendment makes a technical change to reflect the fact that four meetings have been held.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? That is not the case.

The vote is open.

We come to Amendment No. 2, tabled by Mr Samad Seyidov, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Ms Ganira Pashayeva and Mr Sabir Hajiyev, which is, in the draft resolution, paragraph 7.9, replace the figure “11” with the following figure: “14”, and replace the word “ten” with the following word: “eleven”.

I call Mr Seyidov to support Amendment No. 2.

Mr SEYIDOV (Azerbaijan). – This is also a technical amendment. The last presidential decree covered the number of prisoners who were released, which was 14. The draft resolution refers to figure of 11, which is why we are suggesting changing it to 14.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? I call Mrs Vermot-Mangold.

Mrs VERMOT-MANGOLD (Switzerland) said she did not understand what she was being asked to vote on; she requested that the rapporteurs clarify precisely how many political prisoners had been released.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you. There is one speaker in favour and one against.

The vote is open.

We now come to Amendment No. 3, tabled by Mr Samad Seyidov, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Ms Ganira Pashayeva and Mr Sabir Hajiyev, which is, in the draft resolution, paragraph 7.9.4, replace the words “and to include representatives of the judiciary among its members” with the following words:

“The Assembly welcomes the fact that a representative of the judiciary was included among the members of the Task Force.”

I call Mrs Hajiyeva to support Amendment No. 3.

Mrs HAJIYEVA (Azerbaijan). – This is a technical amendment. The draft resolution contained advice to include representatives of the judiciary among the members of the taskforce. At our last meeting on 11 April, however, a representative of the judiciary and the high court was already participating.

THE PRESIDENT. – I understand that Mr Lloyd, on behalf of the Monitoring Committee, wishes to propose an oral sub-amendment as follows:

To keep the words “and to include representatives of the judiciary among its members” in paragraph 7.9.4 and at the end to add the paragraph proposed in Amendment No. 3 “The Assembly welcomes the fact that a representative of the judiciary was included among the members of the Task Force.”

Do 10 or more members object to the oral sub-amendment being debated? That is not the case.

I therefore call Mr Lloyd to move the oral sub-amendment.

Mr LLOYD (United Kingdom). – Thank you Mr President. The matter is straightforward. While we want to acknowledge the progress in the appointment of a member of the judiciary to the taskforce, it is important that that continues into the future. Therefore, it is important that the original words are retained and that, rather than deleting and replacing them with the amendment, the amendment moved by Mrs Hajiyeva be added. I think that that will be acceptable to her and that everybody will be happy with the oral sub-amendment.

THE PRESIDENT. – What is the opinion of the mover of the amendment?

Mrs HAJIYEVA (Azerbaijan). – I agree.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the oral sub-amendment? That is not the case.

I will now put the oral sub-amendment to the vote.

The vote is open.

The oral sub-amendment is adopted.

Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment, as amended? That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

The amendment, as amended, is adopted.

We come to Amendment No. 4, tabled by Mr Samad Seyidov, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Ms Ganira Pashayeva and Mr Sabir Hajiyev, which is, in the draft resolution, paragraph 7.12, delete the words “Mr Farhad Aliyev should also be allowed to receive treatment by doctors of his choice with respect to his heart problems;”.

I call Mrs Hajiyeva to support the amendment.

Mrs HAJIYEVA (Azerbaijan). – We are not against Mr Aliyev receiving such treatment. In principle, we are in favour of granting him his choice of doctors. He has already received treatment from the doctors of his choice, however, and that is why we wish to delete the words.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? I call Mr Platvoet.

Mr PLATVOET (Netherlands). – It is important that we retain the relevant sentence because it is not sufficient to know how Mr Aliyev has already been dealt with; we must also consider the future. For his future health care, it is important that the amendment be rejected.

THE PRESIDENT. – What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – Against.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

Amendment No. 4 is rejected.

We come to Amendment No. 13, tabled by Mr Andres Herkel, Mr Marko Mihkelson, Mr Christos Pourgourides, Mr Göran Lindblad, Ms Marietta de Pourbaix-Lundin, Mr György Frunda and Mr Tony Lloyd, which is, in the draft resolution, after paragraph 7.12, insert the following sub-paragraph:

“the Assembly also draws attention to the cases of potential political prisoners, particularly Mr Ali Insanov, former minister of Health, and Mr Huseyn Abdullayev, an MP who was recently arrested after having strongly criticised the government;”.

I call Mr Herkel to support Amendment No. 13

Mr HERKEL (Estonia). – The amendment is an attempt to follow the most recent events in Azerbaijan concerning the former Minister of Health and a member of parliament who was arrested.

THE PRESIDENT. – I understand that Mr Lloyd, on behalf of the Monitoring Committee, wishes to propose an oral sub-amendment as follows:

In the draft resolution, after paragraph 7.12, replace the words proposed in the second paragraph of Amendment No. 13 with the following words:

“The Assembly also draws attention to concerns over the fairness of the arrest of Mr Huseyn Abdullayev, an MP who was recently arrested, and the trial of Mr Ali Insanov, former Minister of Health.”

Do 10 or more members object to the oral sub-amendment being debated? That is not the case.

I therefore call Mr Lloyd to move the oral sub-amendment.

Mr LLOYD (United Kingdom). – Obviously, it is rather unusual for one rapporteur to amend the amendments of the other rapporteur. Nevertheless, we feel that the text would be more balanced if we removed the words “potential political prisoners”, thereby recognising that there are potentially legitimate charges while drawing attention to the concerns in Azerbaijan about the trial process for Mr Insanov and the arrest of Mr Abdullayev. I hope that the Assembly will agree to amend the original amendment.

THE PRESIDENT. – Apparently, you have discussed the matter between you, but I must ask Mr Herkel, the mover of the amendment, what is his opinion of the oral sub-amendment?

Mr HERKEL (Estonia). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – I will now put the oral sub-amendment to the vote.

The vote is open.

I call for the result to be displayed.

The oral sub-amendment is adopted.

Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment, as amended? I call Mr Seyidov.

Mr SEYIDOV (Azerbaijan). – Because of the oral sub-amendment, the amendment presented has changed. In any case, I want to provide the information that Mr Ali Insanov is a very corrupt person. We are in favour of an objective court process but we should take into account that he is one of the corrupt guys in Azerbaijan and is under investigation.

THE PRESIDENT. – I shall now put the amendment, as amended, to the vote.

The vote is open.

I call for the result to be displayed.

The amendment, as amended, is adopted.

We come to Amendment No. 5, tabled by Mr Samad Seyidov, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Ms Ganira Pashayeva and Mr Sabir Hajiyev, which is, in the draft resolution, at the end of paragraph 7.13, add the following sentence:

“the Assembly welcomes the fact that a meeting on the Criminal Code was held between Azerbaijani and the Council of Europe experts in Baku on 3-4 April 2007 and that draft amendments in line with the European standards were prepared as a result of their co-operation;”.

I call Mr Seyidov to support Amendment No. 5.

Mr SEYIDOV (Azerbaijan). – Good news came from negotiations between the experts on the Venice Commission and the authorities in Azerbaijan. We wanted to include that recent development in the report.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

THE PRESIDENT. – We come to Amendment No. 6, tabled by Mr Samad Seyidov, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Ms Ganira Pashayeva and Mr Sabir Hajiyev, which is, in the draft resolution, at the end of paragraph 7.14, add the following sentence:

“The Assembly welcomes the fact that Azerbaijani authorities are preparing the National Strategy for Increasing Transparency and Combating Corruption in co-operation with their international partners.”

I call Mrs Hajiyeva to support Amendment No. 6.

Mrs HAJIYEVA (Azerbaijan). – The amendment welcomes the steps taken and encourages the Azerbaijani authorities to forge ahead in that direction.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – The committee is in favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

We come to Amendment No. 7, tabled by Mr Samad Seyidov, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Ms Ganira Pashayeva and Mr Sabir Hajiyev, which is, in the draft resolution, replace paragraph 8.9 with the following sub-paragraph:

“the Assembly urges the authorities to consider, on humanitarian grounds, the possibility of commuting by pardon the life sentences which were the result of the abolition of the death penalty;”.

I call Mr Seyidov to support Amendment No. 7.

Mr SEYIDOV (Azerbaijan). – This very important amendment concerns persons who have been sentenced to the death penalty. We suggest that, owing to new national legislation, the wording should be changed. Our proposed wording would be much easier to implement.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? I call Mr Lloyd.

Mr LLOYD (United Kingdom). – I hope that the Assembly will reject the amendment, not because it is of itself wrong – it certainly would be worth while for the authorities of Azerbaijan to consider the question of commuting sentences on humanitarian grounds – but because it proposes to do something very different. The text calls on the authorities to implement the provisions of the criminal law that were adopted in 2000. We feel that it is better to insist that the original text remains, and if people want to commute sentences on humanitarian grounds, that would be a bonus.

THE PRESIDENT. – What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – The committee is against.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

Amendment No. 7 is rejected.

We come to Amendment No. 8, tabled by Mr Samad Seyidov, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Ms Ganira Pashayeva and Mr Sabir Hajiyev, which is, in the draft resolution, at the end of paragraph 8.17.2, add the following sentence:

“The Assembly welcomes measures taken by the Azerbaijani authorities to combat human trafficking.”

I call Mrs Hajiyeva to support Amendment No. 8.

Mrs HAJIYEVA (Azerbaijan). – Many steps have been taken and much work has been done in this regard. Through the amendment, we want to welcome that and to encourage the Azerbaijani authorities to continue in that direction.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – The committee is in favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

We come to Amendment No. 9, tabled by Mr Tigran Torosyan, Mrs Hermine Naghdalyan, Mr Armen Rustamyan, Mr Stepan Demirchyan, Mr Victor Kolesnikov, Mr Miloš Aligrudić, Mr Miloljub Albijanić, Mr Željko Ivanji, Mr François Rochebloine and Mr Georges Colombier, which is, in the draft resolution, paragraph 9.2, replace the second sentence with the following sentence:

“It therefore urges the parties to enhance their efforts to build peace and harmony between the two communities of the Nagorno-Karabakh region, which will contribute to the efforts of the OSCE Minsk Group to resolve the conflict in the framework of the principles of the Helsinki Final Act (1975);”.

If Amendment No. 9 is agreed to, Amendment No. 10 will fall.

I call Mr Torosyan to support Amendment No. 9.

Mr TOROSYAN (Armenia) said that the problems relating to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict were sensitive, and that care should be exercised. The proposed amendment would change the wording to bring it in line with that used both in Assembly and United Nations documents.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? I call Mr Goris.

Mr GORIS (Belgium). – With all due respect to my Armenian colleagues – I agree that this is a sensitive issue – the subject of the report, the ongoing project and the debate is the honouring of commitments by Azerbaijan and not the semantics of the Karabakh conflict. The text that we adopted unanimously a few weeks ago was copied from previous Council of Europe and United Nations texts. I therefore ask colleagues not to inflame debate with semantics and not to let this overshadow the discussion but to stick to the text that was adopted a few weeks ago.

THE PRESIDENT. – What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – The committee is against.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

Amendment No. 9 is rejected.

We come to Amendment No. 10, tabled by Mr Tigran Torosyan, Mr Stepan Demirchyan, Mr Armen Rustamyan, Mrs Hermine Naghdalyan, Mr Bernard Marquet, Mr Jean-Charles Gardetto, Mr Victor Kolesnikov, Mr François Rochebloine and Mr Georges Colombier, which is, in the draft resolution, paragraph 9.2, delete the words “of the Republic of Azerbaijan”.

I call Mr Torosyan to support Amendment No. 10.

Mr TOROSYAN (Armenia) said that he supported Amendment No. 10 for the same reasons that he supported Amendment No. 9.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? I call Mr Goris.

Mr GORIS (Belgium). – The same reasons and arguments go for this amendment, and that is why I propose that we reject it.

THE PRESIDENT. – What is the opinion of the committee?

Mr LINTNER (Germany). – The committee is against.

THE PRESIDENT. – The vote is open.

Amendment No. 10 is rejected.

We will now proceed to vote on the whole of the draft resolution, as contained in Document 11226, as amended.

3. Date, time and orders of the day of the next sitting

THE PRESIDENT. – I propose that the Assembly hold its next public sitting tomorrow at 10 a.m. with the orders of the day which were approved earlier.

Are there any objections? That is not the case.

The sitting is adjourned.

(The sitting was closed at 4.45 p.m.)

CONTENTS

1. Minutes of proceedings

2. Honouring of obligations and commitments by Azerbaijan

Presentation by Mr Herkel and Mr Lloyd of report of the Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe, Doc. 11226

Speakers:

Mr Vareikis (Lithuania)

Mr Goris (Belgium)

Mr Walter (United Kingdom)

Mr Platvoet (Netherlands)

Mrs Severinsen (Denmark)

Mrs Hajiyeva (Azerbaijan)

Mr Seyidov (Azerbaijan)

Mr Proroković (Serbia)

Mr Loutfi (Bulgaria)

Mr Tekelioğlu (Turkey)

Mr Ali Huseynov (Azerbaijan)

Mr Çavaşoğlu (Turkey)

Mr Rafael Huseynov (Azerbaijan)

Ms Pashayeva (Azerbaijan)

Replies:

Mr Hekel (Estonia)

Mr Lloyd (United Kingdom)

Mr Lintner (Germany)

Amendments Nos.11, 12, 1, 2, 3 and 13 as amended, 6 and 8 adopted.

Draft resolution, as amended, adopted.

3. Date, time and orders of the day of the next sitting