AA15CR11
AS (2015) CR 11
2015 ORDINARY SESSION
________________________
(Second part)
REPORT
Eleventh sitting
Monday 20 April 2015 at 3.00 p.m.
In this report:
1. Speeches in English are reported in full.
2. Speeches in other languages are reported using the interpretation and are marked with an asterisk.
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 report.
(Ms Brasseur, President of the Assembly, took the Chair at 3.05 p.m.)
The PRESIDENT – The sitting is open.
1. Changes in the membership of committees
The PRESIDENT* – Our first item of business is to consider changes proposed to the membership of committees. These are set out in document Commissions (2015) 04 Addendum 2.
Are these changes to the membership of the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media agreed to?
They are adopted.
2. Free debate
The PRESIDENT* – I remind the Assembly that Mr Didier Reynders, the Minister for Foreign and European Affairs of Belgium and Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers, is unable to make a statement to members this afternoon. We hope to get in touch with him so that he can make his statement this week, but we have not yet been able to. We therefore move straight on to the free debate.
Given this change to the timetable, I propose that the free debate continue until 5 p.m. Is that agreed?
The proposal is adopted.
I remind members that this debate is for topics not already on the agenda agreed this morning. Speaking time will be limited to three minutes. I will interrupt the list of speakers at 5 p.m. For clarity, I ask each speaker to start by referring to the subject that they will be talking about.
I shall now call speakers on behalf of the political groups. The first speaker is Ms Durrieu, who speaks on behalf of the Socialist Group.
Ms DURRIEU (France)* – I would like to speak about the recent elections in Israel and the victory of Binyamin Netanyahu. The electoral campaign was conducted with hardly any reference to the worsening Palestinian situation. There is great distress in Gaza and the West Bank is on the brink of bankruptcy, particularly because the Israeli authorities have held up €106 million of fiscal revenue.
Israel is relatively isolated on the international stage. The agreements on the Iranian nuclear issue have not yet concluded, but they have not given satisfaction to Israel. Tension is growing in the region, which has direct and indirect consequences. The cost of living is exorbitant and recently, for the first time, Netanyahu spoke out against the establishment of a Palestinian State. In other words, it seems that the status quo suits Binyamin Netanyahu, who would prefer to manage the crisis than resolve it.
What initiatives are possible with a view to relaunching the peace process? Barack Obama has espoused a new doctrine of greater openness without risks, as we have seen in the cases of Cuba and of Iran, where there is the desire to reach agreement by June, but perhaps the risks there are greater than with Cuba. We are talking about $30 billion in the military sector and Iran is not really a danger if that is compared with the United States’ $600 billion budget. If there were to be a risk, that could be handled or managed, but America will always be on Israel’s side.
France is slightly more sceptical and demanding when it comes to the negotiations with Iran. We are wary, which should reassure Israel, but in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict it is important that a resolution is adopted. An attempt was made at Christmas with a view to relaunching the peace process, but that failed. It is important that the international community welcomes these efforts. The United Nations Security Council needs to adopt the necessary parameters, but if we wish for there to be peace and two States, it appears that it is here within Europe and at the United Nations level that we will find the necessary response.
The PRESIDENT* – Thank you. I call Mr Zourabian to speak on behalf of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe.
Mr ZOURABIAN (Armenia) – The Council of Europe is first and foremost about democracy and human rights. It is about fair elections, protection of the opposition’s right to oppose freely the ruling government and having constitutional safeguards against attempts by governments to establish dictatorships. The situation in some Council of Europe member States raises serious concerns about their commitment to core democratic values.
In Armenia, elections are falsified to make change of power through elections impossible. Since October last year, dozens of opposition figures have been attacked by criminal gangs, apparently affiliated to the authorities, and five people were put in prison under made-up charges of organising mass disorders. The president of a leading opposition force resigned from his position and quit politics owing to reprisals against him and his party after Serzh Sargsyan demanded in a televised address that he step down and refrain from any further political activities. The crackdown started after three main opposition political forces formed an alliance to oppose the constitutional amendments initiated by Serzh Sargsyan to make a transition to a parliamentary model of governance effectively to circumvent the constitutional ban on him serving a third presidential term.
In Azerbaijan, the situation is much worse. Elections are falsified to ensure an almost 90% vote win for the ruling party and a constitutional reform was adopted that eliminated the ban on Ilham Aliyev having a third consecutive term, making him a de facto life-long president. Dozens of opposition figures, journalists, bloggers and human rights activists were put in jail and kept in life-threatening conditions. Belarus changed its constitution in the same way.
In Georgia, almost the entire leadership of the opposition has been arrested or is facing prosecution or under investigation, raising concerns about possible abuse of power. In Turkey, journalists are under attack. The assassinations of Boris Nemtsov in Russia and Oleg Kalashnikov and Oles Buzyna in Ukraine raise concerns about security for opposition figures in those countries. The Parliamentary Assembly and the Monitoring Committee should thoroughly access such processes in member States and make every effort to protect the right of opposition. Otherwise, it seems that we sometimes forget why we gather here in Strasbourg.
The PRESIDENT – Thank you. I call Mr Neill, on behalf of the European Conservatives Group.
Mr NEILL (United Kingdom) – Later on this year, we will celebrate the 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta, which is perhaps one of the first manifestations of a commitment to human rights. It was not a perfect document, and the people who drew it up were not perfect either, but nonetheless, it is appropriate that outside the Chamber there is a translation of it in one of the display cabinets. I hope that we can recognise that anniversary in the course of this year.
Some parts of Magna Carta are rather antiquated, so perhaps we need not think of them as being immediately relevant to us now. However, the two golden principles remain and still inform our work today: the thought that, first, the sovereign – now, in more modern parlance, we would say the government – is subject to the rule of law, which implies independent courts and an independent judiciary; and, secondly, people should be free from arbitrary arrest and detention.
We touched on the second of those principles this morning, not least in relation to one of our own number, Nadiia Savchenko, who has been subject to arbitrary arrest and detention. The truth is that, in relation to her and many others, President Putin has behaved in the manner of King John: an arbitrary fashion. The barons were prepared to have a dialogue with King John, but they were not prepared simply to appease him. Perhaps we as the Council of Europe should take forward an important lesson from that. If we are to ensure justice, appeasement will not be enough. We must say that we have certain principles that must be met and adhered to and we must be prepared to back them up, forcefully when necessary.
The second point is the importance of an independent judiciary. In that respect, the European Court of Justice’s decision is troubling because, in many ways, for many parts of our citizens’ lives, the European Union is a form of government. The suggestion that it should not be subject to the rules we apply to member State governments must be troubling to us. That is why it is important that we continue the pressure for the European Union to adhere to the European Convention. Equally, it is important that we do all that we can and continue our work to support an independent judiciary in our member States. That is why – as we often do here – we should pay attention to the work done by GRECO and similar bodies in strengthening the capacity of judges, prosecutors and independent law enforcement agencies so that they can carry out their tasks. Perhaps we should give mutual support in terms of good practice and monitoring and evaluation work. That is why Magna Carta is still relevant today.
The PRESIDENT – Thank you. I call Ms Kanelli, on behalf of the Group of the Unified European Left.
Ms KANELLI (Greece) – I would like to point out and urge all of you to understand that, 70 years after the huge, historic anti-Nazi victory in Europe, Europe now, in its broader sense, faces a political Mengelism that tries to equate Nazism with communism. There is a phantom of a Europe based on difficult, extreme situations, as in the war periods, paid for by European taxpayers. An anti-communist law was introduced in Ukraine about a week ago, banning communists from everything and accusing them of everything. They cannot even mention or quote anybody connected with communism. I remind colleagues from all countries in the Council of Europe that about 10 years ago we avoided equating Nazism, which is a criminal ideology and a criminal practice, with communism, which can be the dream of a better world and to which we owe a lot of the human rights we are defending and practising here today.
I urge the President of Ukraine not to sign the anti-communist law. In Ukraine, we have already seen communists – and only communists – accused of everything that has happened in that tormented country. I come from Greece, a democracy in the 21st century where the Communist Party has been in existence for about 100 years, and some Nazis have gone on trial today. In difficult economic situations, uprisings and civil wars, fascism and Nazism begin their massively anti-human work by hunting communists. Then they come for the democrats, then the Jews and then it will be the Muslims. We have seen that scene played out before in our history. Let us stop applauding that idea. Anti-communism is the first step by all fascists and Nazis wherever they appear, and I urge the Council of Europe not to permit it to happen in this case.
The PRESIDENT – Thank you.
I call Ms Quintanilla to speak on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party.
Ms QUINTANILLA (Spain)* –I should like to speak about the persecution of Christians, an issue of enormous importance to the international community. The first article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stipulates that all human beings are equal in their dignity and honour, and that pact was hammered out between countries with an enormous philosophical contribution from the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Unfortunately, we now see cases of persecution against Christians every day in the media. In a Kenyan university a few days ago, 147 young students – all of them Christians – were murdered. We also see so many immigrants setting sail, but on one trip 17 Christian migrants were thrown overboard. We also saw 200 young girls at a school in Nigeria kidnapped by Boko Haram, but they have disappeared so completely from the media that we have forgotten about them and the new President of Nigeria has said that it will be impossible to find those girls. They were targeted and kidnapped not simply because they were young and girls, but because they were Christians.
As we know, Christians are being persecuted throughout the world today. In 2010, a study was carried out that showed that out of every 100 people killed for reasons of religious persecution, 75 were Christians. Unfortunately, since then the proportion has gone up. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe should never forget Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 18 also states that everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. That includes the freedom for each and every one of us to practise our own religion. Today, more than ever before, it is our duty to say, “Stop, enough.” This is a constant struggle that we must continue to wage, because persecution of Christians is based on hatred. In the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe we are united against hatred and in favour of tolerance, so we must put a stop to the persecution of Christians.
The PRESIDENT* – Thank you. We now move on to the general list of speakers. I call Mr Le Déaut. He is not here, so I call Mr Rzayev.
Mr RZAYEV (Azerbaijan)* – We see in everything that is happening in the world how often double standards are applied in questions of international politics, territorial integrity, aggressive separatism and nationalism, and lack of respect for human rights. They all show that international law is being undermined at every turn. We also see the rise of new conflicts, and the international community has viewed the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia with new eyes. More than 20% of Azerbaijan’s territory has been seized by Armenia, but that is now considered an old conflict. There are new conflicts that have bought the world to the edge of conflagration.
Armenia is about to recognise the centenary of the Armenian genocide. The Turkish Government has declared several times that it will open up the archives from that era – from the First World War. But the Armenians have not responded to that announcement. The current Government of Armenia is inviting many leaders to visit that country, but who are those people to invite other leaders to come and see the traces of genocide? They themselves have perpetrated genocide in Azerbaijan. Do they think that is the way to solve the problems between Azerbaijan and Armenia?
We have heard much today about dialogue and the need to solve the conflicts we face peacefully. I have so often advocated the need for that in the Assembly, and I appeal to Ms Naghdalyan and the others who have brought up the subject to seek ways to find dialogue on the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. We need to find a new impetus for negotiations in the Minsk Group of the OSCE. If we can achieve dialogue, we can increase the trust between us, and that will create something new for peace and for the world.
(Mr Rouquet, Vice-President of the Assembly, took the Chair in place of Ms Brasseur.)
Mr SOBOLEV (Ukraine) – I want to discuss a very important theme. For the last few years we have had serious resolutions on and discussions of the problem of terrorism and violence in Europe and all over the world. It is not only a problem caused by organisations. The United Nations and other international organisations have concrete definitions of terrorist and other violent organisations, but we also need a definition of State terrorism. Without it, it is impossible to struggle against State-sponsored terrorism. That is important for my country, Ukraine, because during the fascist Nazi period we lost more than 10 million people, and during the period of Stalinism and communism we lost another 10 million people to the concentration camps of the gulag. The holodomor was a very serious crime against all mankind.
It is very important for our Organisation to have not just an historical view of all these important conditions, but a concrete definition of State terrorism. What does State terrorism mean? We still have examples of States, through their rules and their procedures, using all their efforts – military forces, police and secret services – to function as terror States. For Europe and the whole world, it is therefore very important to have a definition. Without a definition, the military aggression and occupations conducted by one State – Russia – will never stop. This is not just a problem for Ukrainians; it is a problem for Georgia and the other countries occupied by Russian troops. Now is the time to have a concrete and open definition of what constitutes State terrorism. Without it, we cannot solve this problem.
Ms TAKTAKISHVILI (Georgia)* – In Georgia, two and a half years on from the change of the governing majority in 2012, the situation is, unfortunately, alarming. All the leaders of my party, the United National Movement, have been arrested, imprisoned, prosecuted or forced to flee and threatened with imprisonment if they return. That is true of our former President, Mikheil Saakashvili. A massive campaign of interrogations has affected thousands of members and supporters of my own party, the United National Movement. Some have been interrogated more than 10 times. The leaders of the opposition, including members of parliament, have been badly attacked by groups associated with the governing majority. No inquiries have been conducted. The attackers are well known and can be identified on video recordings, but they are either not being brought before the courts or they are being acquitted without having to pay any kind of pecuniary punishment for physical assaults on parliamentary members. Members of my party are constantly being attacked, including during the primaries we are organising ahead of the presidential elections. All the attacks have one single aim in mind: to try to outlaw the activities of the main opposition party, so that we do not criticise the billionaire who is the de facto leader of our country.
The Parliamentary Assembly has given these issues an airing, and we have stressed that provisional detention is being used as an instrument. Gigi Ugulava is a case in point. Despite calls from the Parliamentary Assembly, the OSCE and the NATO Parliamentary Assembly for the authorities to refrain from using provisional detention with a view to suspending the activities of the opposition, the gentleman I referred to is still in provisional detention way beyond the deadline stipulated in the convention, which is some nine months. Mr Bacho Akhalaia, a former Defence Minister, is another case in point. He spent more than 20 months in provisional detention in the absence of any kind of judgment passed down by the courts. We cannot allow this situation to continue.
I want to convey the concerns of the opposition in Georgia. I appeal to you to follow the situation more closely and to give it your full attention.
Ms MAGRADZE (Georgia) – It has happened several times that I have prepared one speech but, following my opposition colleague, I have had to change it. I will just say that anyone from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe who has visited Georgia knows that the opposition has the right to speak. They have time on television. With regard to prosecutions, this is the legislation and justice system. If someone commits a crime, he needs to answer for it whether he is a former president, a member of the opposition or a member of the government.
Today, I would like to talk about one specific issue, which goes beyond the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe’s formal scope of activities, but is very close – I would say intertwined and interconnected – to its activities in Georgia. It is a result of those activities that I want to brief you about the upcoming Riga summit.
Since the Vilnius summit, Europe’s security landscape has been dramatically transformed from the Baltic to the Black Sea. Russia’s annexation of the Crimean peninsula, and the conclusion of two so-called treaties with the non-States of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, mean that national sovereignty is no longer the unquestionable pillar of European order. The Helsinki Final Act is being openly and blatantly violated. The European Union and the Council of Europe – specifically, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe – have long been preparing for this emerging reality. For its part, Georgia, besides some security-connected arrangements with NATO, has made progress on democratisation, the rule of law and freedom of speech. We reached a significant milestone with the conclusion of an association agreement and a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement in June 2014. Naturally, we are not perfect yet in this regard, but we are committed to moving ahead and have recently met all visa liberalisation action plan benchmarks. In the words of the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, “Georgia is one of the frontrunners of the Eastern Partnership. This is not a compliment, but a fact". In this regard, the role of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, our rapporteurs, and the activities of the Monitoring Committee and its chairman have been immeasurable.
At this point in time, it is important to consolidate our strengths even as we face up to emerging challenges. In this context, the issue of visa liberalisation is key. Besides the obvious advantages of business and student mobility, the symbolic significance of Georgians traveling “in Europe” as Europeans will constitute a tremendous cultural milestone that will have a profound effect on public opinion, both in the occupied territories and in Tbilisi. What visa liberalisation signals, above all else, is a sense of commitment to the European community, just as Russia is underlining its power over each and every citizen in the region as an imperial power.
Ms HOVHANNISYAN (Armenia)* – During the debate on the progress report, our colleague Mr Seyidov showed a picture of an Armenian soldier with a raised white flag. This was nothing but a well-prepared performance of Azeri propaganda. There have been numerous and real cases concerning Azeri soldiers, but we have never turned the Assembly into a circus. In addition, what we witnessed a few minutes ago from our colleague Mr Rzayev was nothing but a falsification of facts, especially in relation to the closed archives of Armenia.
Exactly 100 years ago on April 24 1915, the crème de la crème of the vast Armenian community of Constantinople was rounded up and murdered. It was the beginning of the first genocide of the 20th century: the Armenian genocide.
It seems that, 100 years on, nothing has changed. We failed to intervene in Nazi Germany until the war came to our doorsteps. In the case of Rwanda we failed a whole nation while using diplomatic language to describe the killing. We did not even notice the genocide in Cambodia. We use the word about Sudan, because those committing it have no friends in the west. In Syria and Iraq we follow the news of an ongoing genocide of absolutely all non-Sunni minorities and keep on issuing empty statements and condemnations that do nothing to stop the campaign of mass extermination. Yet again, we play around with words close to the feared “G” word, because, if we dare to utter it, we will infuriate an ally – a bloody one – and will be obliged to intervene. But intervene we will not. There is no oil or other interests involved for us in saving the vanishing minorities, and so the genocides continue.
One hundred years on, we in Europe believe we are better, more civilized and highly cultured and that the days of the Third Reich are far behind us. We are so very wrong, misguided and hypocritical. One hundred years on Turkey still denies the elephant in the room, and with its allies in Syria – the various rebel factions and, of course, ISIL – it is indirectly carrying out another genocide with the same determination and zeal, and the same goals. We know well what happened back then and what is happening now, yet we still prefer silence to conscience. We are still the same. A more barbaric fourth Reich is rising today in the cradle of civilisation. It turns out that, 100 years on, it takes a living saint, Pope Francis, to utter the “G” word in full. It is a word that many European countries still fear to pronounce, but genocide is the word we should be using.
We should fear what comes as a result of silence. The more we ignore it, the more rampant the next genocide will be. The Armenian catastrophe was a genocide. We live in an age of new genocides, and bear the responsibility for silent observation, a form of complacency that is another crime itself. A hundred years on it is time, very belatedly, to stop this shameless silence and criminal ineptitude.
Ms ZOHRABYAN (Armenia)* – Earlier today, during the debate on the progress report, the head of the Azerbaijani delegation was, as usual, cynical in his approach to what we were discussing.
Distinguished colleagues, in three days’ time the victims of the Armenian genocide will be canonised at Etchmiadzin, the spiritual capital of Armenia, just as the holy innocents of Bethlehem murdered by King Herod were canonised in their time. When it happens, the bells of Armenian churches all over the world will ring in unison. On 24 April it will be the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide committed in Ottoman Turkey. One hundred years ago, looters massacred or evicted and stripped of their homeland 1.5 million Armenians. To this day, Turkey continues to deny the genocide, making her the accomplice to the crimes committed by the Ottomans. There is no excuse for spreading international propaganda while waiting for ineffectual commissions of historians to pronounce their verdict. We do not need commissions to prove the Armenian genocide. If you go to any Armenian home, in Armenia or in the diaspora, you will find that hardly any family was left untouched by the horror. That is the most eloquent commission: the commission of those who survived the genocide.
As a people who have survived genocide, we have a special mission to do everything possible so that such crimes are never repeated. Today, 100 years after the Armenian genocide, we call on all States and on the international community to recognise and condemn that unprecedented crime. No political interests can ever be above the interests of justice itself. No economic interests can be placed above the truth. Historical facts cannot be denied for financial gain. We cannot erase the memories of human beings. The crimes perpetrated in Cambodia, Rwanda and Darfur, and what is being done by the terrorist group Islamic State, all bear witness to the fact that a culture of impunity and denial leads to new genocides.
Two years ago in this very Chamber I gave photographs of children who were innocent victims of the Armenian genocide to Recep Erdoğan and Ahmet Davutoğlu, and begged them to look into the eyes of those innocent victims. I saw neither compassion nor remorse in the eyes of those high dignitaries from Turkey.
I finish with the words of the famous pastor, Martin Niemöller, who after his arrest by the Nazis said, “When the Nazis came looking for the communists, I said nothing. When they came looking for the Jews, I said nothing. Then they came looking for me, and there was no one left to protest on my behalf.”
Distinguished colleagues, neither we nor you have the right to remain silent.
Mr HONCHARENKO (Ukraine) – Colleagues, I want to tell you my personal story, which is highly demonstrative. On 1 March this year, I went to Moscow to take part in the memorial events for Boris Nemtsov, whom I knew personally. He was killed 100 m from the Kremlin. I wore this T-shirt, which has a portrait of Boris Nemtsov and the words, in Ukrainian, “Heroes do not die”. For that, I was arrested and beaten by the Russian police, and spent five hours in a cell in a Russian police station. I asked for medical assistance, but it was refused. I asked for lawyers, but that was also refused. I asked for Ukrainian representatives; again, that was refused. I showed my diplomatic passport and told the police that I was a member of the Ukrainian Parliament and a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. That meant nothing to them.
I was released from Russian jail only after a statement by Ms Brasseur, interventions by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and by many colleagues from Ukraine and other countries – thank you for that – the story being covered in the international media and an intervention by our President, Petro Poroshenko. I was under obligation to attend court the next day. While in the police station I asked many times what I was accused of, but received no answer, so I wanted to go to court to hear the accusation. However, the next day, several hours before the court was to sit, the Russian Federation Ministry of Internal Affairs stated that it had no questions for me and that I could leave Moscow. So what was it all about?
I wanted to tell you my story for two reasons. First, I want to thank Ms Brasseur and all of you who helped me be here with you at this part-session and not – for no reason – in a Russian jail. Secondly, I spent only five hours in a cell, but, believe me, it was unforgettable. Our colleague, Nadiia Savchenko, a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and a Ukrainian MP, has been in Russian jail as a hostage for almost a year. She was captured in June 2014 and has been there since. She has held hunger strikes, but nothing has helped her. I want us to show our solidarity with that incredible woman. If possible, I ask all colleagues to stand for a moment to show our solidarity for her – she is a hero.
Mr MIGNON (France)* – I want to pick up what was said by Ms Quintanilla on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party earlier. She quite rightly denounced the genocide we are witnessing – live, as it were – of Christians in the orient. We do not have the excuse of saying that we do not know about that genocide, because of course those responsible are not hiding what they are doing. In fact, we are seeing the cruelty on display before us.
We represent human rights, and so must react forcefully and robustly when those Christians – men, women and children – are suffering. I think we are seeing passiveness, if not cowardice, on the part of the international community. The silence is deafening. We are right in asking human rights defenders to manifest themselves. What about Christians in the orient? Nothing is happening. Only a few days ago, we saw assassinations on our television screens or on the web. We are witnessing the barbarity of criminals who assassinate – they cut people’s throats. They are sending messages to the international community and international leaders, but there is no reaction. We should not accept that.
When the Council of Europe was established, we said, “Never again.” Genocides and awful crimes have been committed in the course of history, and the Council of Europe was established because of them. It is our duty to stand up and ensure that our voice is heard in defence of those who are being persecuted. It is a question of the Council of Europe’s credibility – it is our raison d’être.
Like my excellent colleague Ms Quintanilla, I hope there is some reaction and that the international community wakes up. Of course, the awful incidents of which I have spoken are always going on, and they are trivialised. We cannot accept that. Once again, we must react.
Mr PINTADO (Spain)* – I agree with Mr Mignon and Mrs Quintanilla, who spoke of the huge problem that Europe is looking away from, but there are other issues. I would like to talk about the free exchange treaty – the TTIP – between the European Union and the United States, which is causing so much fear in European societies. People are afraid of losing their rights. The treaty will affect jobs, the environment and even defence.
Much fear is being expressed. Europe has seen growth and social development over the past few decades, but people are afraid that we will lose some of those achievements. That free trade treaty between Europe and the United States needs to provide safeguards and guarantees. European governments must stand as guarantors to uphold our European Union model. We do not currently have those safeguards or guarantees.
We understand the problems we face. The economic development of our nations is linked to globalisation, but it is the globalisation of indifference. We must not confuse the issue. That indifference is there in many of the European countries that have been affected by the crisis. It is there in Africa where Christians are being massacred – they are persecuted just for being Christians. We must ensure that European governments and the Parliamentary Assembly condemn what is happening there and do everything possible to stop it.
The PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Mr Pintado. I call Mr Tilson, Observer from Canada.
Mr TILSON (Canada) – My comments today focus on the Canadian legislative response to terrorism. The attack on the Canadian Parliament in October 2014, and the other attacks that led to the deaths of Corporal Nathan Cirillo and Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent, are reminders that Canada is not immune to the threat of terrorism. Such attacks, including the recent attacks in France, are attacks against our values.
In February 2015, the Canadian Government introduced Bill C-51 – the Anti-terrorism Act – to protect Canadians from the evolving threat of terrorism. The Bill includes a comprehensive package of measures that propose, among other things, to criminalise the advocacy and promotion of terrorism offences, to respond better to the threat posed by radicalisation. That is in line with Article 5 of the Council of Europe’s Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, and with measures taken by our allies in France and the United Kingdom. The Bill deals with counter-terrorist recruitment by giving courts the authority to order the removal of terrorist propaganda online, which is important because the Internet is the most effective tool for recruitment and radicalisation.
In addition, the Bill will enhance the no-fly list programme; it will prevent travel by air for the purpose of engaging in terrorism. It is important to recall that the European Union has signed a bilateral passenger name recording agreement with Canada. The Bill will further enable the sharing of national security information across federal departments, so that we can better identify and address threats while at the same time trying to strike a balance with privacy rights. The Bill will increase protection for witnesses and victims of terrorism. That is in line with Resolution 2038, which was adopted by the Assembly in January 2015, and which declared that witness protection is an indispensable tool in the fight against terrorism.
The Government of Canada has also introduced a Bill entitled the Protection of Canada from Terrorists Act. Together with Bill C-51, that will clarify and enhance our national security intelligence service’s powers to fight and disrupt terrorist activities in Canada and abroad.
The Canadian Parliament has recently adopted a number of other anti-terrorism measures, including the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act 2012, which allows victims of terrorism to sue foreign States that have supported terrorist entities. A further piece of legislation – the Nuclear Terrorism Act – was enacted in response to a number of United Nations resolutions and treaties. Finally, the Combating Terrorism Act was passed in 2013. It allows police officers to detain suspects and interrogate individuals in order to prevent terrorist activities. Those special measures are subject to a sunset clause and public reporting requirements.
All of those pieces of legislation include checks and balances to ensure that they respect the rights and freedoms of Canadians. The Government of Canada is also working with local communities and international partners to prevent radicalisation and to fight terrorism better in general. To conclude, I wish to emphasise that co-operation in that regard between Council of Europe member States and Canada should continue to be a priority.
Mr CSENGER-ZALÁN (Hungary) – I wish to speak up for the legal rights of those national and religious communities that have no possibility of presenting their case in the Assembly.
After the political and economic changes in the 1990s, the eastern and central European States one by one became members of the Council of Europe, after the ratification of the Assembly Order No. 488 and the preconditions listed for each applicant country in the so-called opinion of the Assembly. The listed pre-conditions are binding for all following Governments of the member States.
As we all know, every law and agreement has value only in as much as it is honoured. I will quote paragraph 8 of Opinion 176 of 1993: “The Assembly calls upon the Romanian Government to return property to the churches and to permit the establishment and operation of church schools with a particular view to teaching children of minority groups their mother tongue.” More than 20 years have passed, but regardless of the domestic political orientation of the Romanian Government, the contents of paragraph 8 have been only partially honoured. About two thirds of the properties have not been returned to their legal owners, with the exception of the Romanian Orthodox Church, which received more than it had owned before. Paragraph 12 of the same Opinion states: “The Assembly considers that Romania is able and willing to fulfil the provisions of Article 3 of the Statute which stipulates that every member of the Council of Europe must accept the principles of the rule of law and of the enjoyment by all persons within its jurisdiction of human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
I emphasise that the second quotation applies specifically not only to Romania, but to a number of other countries too. Similarly, unfortunately, in a number of cases other Council of Europe member countries are also not honouring their internationally binding obligations.
Ms PASHAYEVA (Azerbaijan) – Dear colleagues, I regret that the members of the Armenian delegation devoted all their speeches in this debate and during the progress report discussions to Turkey and Azerbaijan, with the wrong information and thoughts. Members of the delegation of the country occupying and keeping under occupation 20% of the territories of the neighbouring country have no right to criticise any country in the Assembly. MPs of the country that caused 1 million Azerbaijanis to be IDPs and refugees, and which does not permit 1 million IDPs and refugees to return home, should not talk here about human rights. It would be better if the Armenian delegation talked about the situation in its country rather than focusing on false information about Azerbaijan and Turkey.
We call on the Parliamentary Assembly to put pressure on Armenia. It has undertaken an obligation in front of the Council of Europe but has not taken any steps yet. The Assembly has adopted Resolution 1416, but Armenia has not fulfilled it so far. That is why the Assembly should take a strong stand against Armenia. Azerbaijani IDPs and refugees who cannot return home, whose human rights are still being violated by Armenia, are waiting for this.
Representatives of Armenia, which brought genocide to civilians of Khojaly 23 years ago in front of the eyes of the world, have no moral rights to talk about human rights issues. Why is the Armenian delegation trying to present the events of 100 years ago as genocide, without any historical or official proof, but is not apologising to the people who lost their families in Khojaly as a result of the genocide committed by its State? Why does Armenia hide the executors of this genocide in its country and not allow them to be brought to justice? Why does Armenia not let the people of Khiojaly who have survived after the genocide in their city to come back to their home town?
We are waiting for the Armenian delegation’s answers to these questions. I think that those who keep silence against the genocide committed by their own country and even support that action have no right to talk of human rights issues here.
Staying indifferent regarding Armenian aggression is staying indifferent to the violation of human rights. We call on the Assembly to be more sensible on this issue and put pressure on Armenia to fulfil Resolution 1416 on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. For the past several sessions we have been discussing the credentials of the Russian delegation. Why does our Assembly not want to do the same regarding Armenia, which has kept 20% of Azerbaijani territories under occupation for 23 years, disrespecting the Assembly’s resolution in this regard? Hundreds of thousands of IDPs who cannot go back to their homes and whose human rights have been violated by Armenia for 23 years are waiting for this.
Mr KANDELAKI (Georgia) – I was first amused but then alarmed by our Greek colleague’s pro-Communist tirade. It is of course legitimate to debate whether the Communist Party should be banned in Ukraine, but the civilised world has long put an equation sign between Nazism and Communism. Communism killed more people than Nazism, including in my country, so I think that that debate is over.
It has been more than two years since the Georgian Dream billionaire coalition initially came to power. By now, most observers say that Georgian democracy is backsliding. Almost the entire leadership of UNM, the main opposition party, is either in jail or facing prosecution; the economy is going down, poverty is rising and – this is what is very alarming – public trust in institutions is significantly down, as exemplified in recent polls. We adopted a resolution last October which put specific demands to the Georgian Government, including stopping jailing political figures, stopping abusing pre-trial detention, and investigating instances of violence against the opposition and minorities. What did we get instead? We got the very opposite. We have seen more violence against political opponents, our offices have been stormed – this time not just by mobs but by identified civil servants and local official. More political figures have been placed in detention, including pre-trial detention; one of our leaders, Mr Ugulava, our campaign manager, has been sentenced to an illegal second term of pre-trial detention because they were not able to throw anything on him in the first one.
We have heard of the unleashing of a barrage of rhetoric against NGOs, the kind that no one would expect of a country such as Georgia. Even in Russia, you do not hear rhetoric like that. For example, Mr Ivanishvili, the billionaire and informal ruler of Georgia – it is also a problem having somebody outside the constitutional framework ruling the country – recently accused NGOs of, as he put it, spreading lies. He threatened to investigate prominent Georgian NGOs, including Transparency International Georgia.
For Georgia to fail and repeat the path of some other countries is not in the interests of this body; everybody is worse off with a failed Georgia. With Georgia succeeding as a consolidated democracy, everybody is better off and the implication of a successful Georgia goes far beyond its borders. So, dear colleagues, please help Georgia to avoid this backsliding and return to the normal path of development by keeping it on your radar.
Ms JOHNSEN (Norway) – The humanitarian situation in Syria is causing large problems and tragedies. It is a huge tragedy at the front door of Europe. A vast number of refugees are fleeing the country and neighbouring refugee camps; they hope to get a better life in Europe but their route is, unfortunately, by sea. We are shocked by the incidents in the Mediterranean where thousands of immigrants try their luck in small boats and drown. The situation is getting worse, and a warm summer will encourage more refugees to try to cross the sea to Europe. Women and children are especially at risk. Even if they make the trip, they risk being exploited by traffickers, through either prostitution or child labour.
For Norway, it is important to get this situation under control. That can be done only by political means, and the European Union has a key role to play. Norway recently gave 50 million kroner to humanitarian organisations, including United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, to try to prevent people from crossing the Mediterranean. Norway will also participate in Operation Triton, a search and rescue operation supported by Frontex in the Italian sea, and we will contribute further if needed. Help must be given to Syria and the neighbouring countries. Syria is in danger of losing a generation of children. They are traumatised by war, and they lack schooling and basic needs. Norway has decided that 20% of the support we will be giving will go towards educational purposes.
Who benefits from luring people into these vessels? It is the ruthless traffickers. Refugees must be informed about the dangers of crossing the sea. The people who take payment and benefit must be brought to trial, because one day they traffic humans, but the next day it will be weapons and the day after it will be drugs.
Mr DİŞLİ (Turkey) – The tragic consequences of the First World War are still relevant today as a matter of historical controversy between Turks and Armenians, despite centuries of peaceful co-existence. The background to this prolonged controversy differs in the national narratives, as well as in the personal memories of Turks and Armenians. However, by any measure it is not fair to say, “Turks would gladly forget what happened 100 years ago.” On the contrary, I believe that what happened in 1915 needs to be understood fully, so that the memory of the lives lost can be properly respected.
Turkey is ready to welcome co-operation with third countries and believes that a scientific, objective study of the archives of Turkey, Armenia and other relevant countries and institutions will be instrumental in revealing the historical truth. We have already declared our commitment to accepting the outcomes of the work of such a commission. A peaceful common future between Turks and Armenians can be built on a solid basis only through dialogue, and we are determined to take further steps towards the normalisation of relations between the two nations. In that respect, we are ready to host the Catholicos of All Armenians, Karekin II, in the liturgy to be held at the historical Armenian church in Akhtamar Island, in Turkey, in September. That is set to be another milestone.
Unfortunately, on the eve of April 2015, the Armenian authorities intensified their anti-Turkish activities, and they stand ready to seize any opportunity against Turkey in the context of 1915 events. Turkey will continue its efforts to save the future generations from the domination of this bitter rhetoric and hostility, without forgetting the difficult periods in our common past. We sincerely hope that Armenia will adopt a constructive approach towards normalising relations with Turkey, instead of holding on to political slogans demonising Turks. I thank you all for listening.
Ms NAGHDALYAN (Armenia) – Dear colleagues, on 24 April the world, along with us, the Armenians, will pay tribute to the memory of 1.5 million victims of the genocide. The word “genocide” has acquired sacral meaning for the descendants not only of those Christians who were massacred at the beginning of the 20th century on the territory of the Ottoman Empire, as the realisation of the planned policy of the Young Turk Government, but also of those who committed the genocide. Today, the Turks, against the recognition of the Armenian genocide, bring forward the slogan “Unite and do not separate us”, and that is a correct slogan. We also agree with mutual understanding and are against deepening the separation lines. However, we would like adequate estimation and historical truth to be at the basis of that unity and not the different commissions’ distortion and falsification of the history. That is not the subjective wish of the Armenian people; it is the objective estimate of the civilised world.
On 12 April, during the liturgy in St Peter’s basilica, the Patriarch of Rome, Francis, said that in the past century our human family had lived three tragedies, the first of which was the genocide of the Armenian people. The first joint liturgy of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches proved that not everything can always be bought or sold. Many international organisations and States recognised the Armenian genocide and condemned the denial of it. We consider the genocide to be a crime against everyone – against the human family and against the natural right of the human being to life. Armenians were the first and the Jewish were the second nationality to be massacred in genocide. Which nation is next in the list? Unfortunately, that question has found a number of responses since the first genocide, because of the lack of adequate estimation of it.
The terrorism of Islamic State today applies exactly the same methods for massacring alive the Christians, and for exploding and devastating world-famous cultural monuments, as the Young Turks did. The existence of the Islamic State is the response to the question as to why not only the genocide, but the denial of it should be condemned. A few days ago, the European Parliament adopted the resolution that was jointly tabled by all political groups of the House. The European Parliament stressed that prevention and punishment of genocides should be among the main priorities of the European Union. We welcome that important and righteous resolution.
The same thing has happened in our Assembly, too, as more than 190 members of this Parliamentary Assembly from 40 member States have added their names to a document with similar appeals – a written declaration of the centennial of the Armenian genocide. We welcome our colleagues who joined the declaration and we will be grateful to all those who will sign the document. Who, if not us, the ones elected by the people, are obliged to preserve civilisation and values by defending human rights and the right to life for humanity?
The PRESIDENT – Thank you, Ms Naghdalyan. I cannot see Mr Nikoloski in the Chamber, so I now give the floor to Mr Chisu, from Canada.
Mr CHISU (Observer from Canada) – Mr President, thank you for the opportunity to speak briefly on a happier note, about the creation of a new type of park in Canada – a national urban park. The Rouge national urban park will be unlike other national parks in Canada; it will be located within and adjacent to a highly urbanised area, the Greater Toronto area. It will possess an unparalleled combination of natural and cultural features, including more than 10 000 years of rich human history, countless species of flora and fauna, and a vibrant farming community.
It is envisaged that the Rouge national urban park will comprise more than 50 sq. km. It will house important cultural and natural heritage, including: a national historic site of first nation significance; a public beach; a camping ground; various woodlands, including the rare Carolinian forest ecosystem; walking trails; internationally significant geological features; and beautiful panoramic views. All of that will be found within a short distance of the millions of Canadians living in the Greater Toronto area. The park will offer an extraordinary opportunity to expose a huge number of Canadians to their heritage, as 20% of the country’s population resides within 100 km of it.
There has been a park named Rouge park in the area since 1995, but it has lacked a defined land base, money and purpose. In its 2011 Speech from the Throne, the Government of Canada announced that it planned to change that by creating Canada’s first national urban park.
Given the unique challenges of creating this urban park, the government introduced a unique piece of legislation, Bill C-40, or the Rouge National Urban Park Act, in parliament on 13 June 2014. It will become legislation before the end of the parliamentary session in June 2015. With the tabling of that historic legislation, the Government of Canada continues to build on its record as a world leader in conservation. The Act will create the Rouge national urban park and place it in the care of the world-recognised Parks Canada, the government agency that is the guardian of Canada’s cultural and natural heritage. Parks Canada is well positioned to protect the many cultural and natural resources located in the park and envisions the building of a “people’s park”, connecting Canadians with the elements of our country that make us truly Canadian.
This unique park will protect a good deal of rare, highly productive agricultural land from the pressures of urbanisation, and will allow visitors to better understand the use and importance of that fertile farmland. Parks Canada is also committed to restoring the Rouge’s native ecosystems, including the Carolinian forest, marshes and meadows.
I emphasise the significance of the creation of this new type of park – the national urban park – in Canada’s landscape. I hope that it will encourage the development of other such parks in urban areas within Canada, as well as in Europe and elsewhere abroad. Enjoying nature is a human right.
The PRESIDENT* – Thank you. Mr Korodi is not here, so I call Ms Gafarova.
Ms GAFAROVA (Azerbaijan) – The first European Games will start on 12 June 2015 in Baku. Holding a European Olympic Games in Baku is a significant achievement for our country. In fact, it is bringing trust and confidence to a State that has been independent for 24 years. There were weighty grounds for the decision to make Azerbaijan the venue of such a grandiose sports event. First, today’s Azerbaijan – a young, independent country – has achieved great successes within a short time and turned into the leading country in the southern Caucasus. That success is based on the policy that has been implemented, which is reflected in Azerbaijan’s domestic and foreign interests, the expansion of the rights and freedoms of citizens, and the development of relations with foreign organisations and partnership with foreign countries. Along with the political and economic development of Azerbaijan, our country is recognised in the international arena as a close partner and reliable ally.
Today, Azerbaijan is also known worldwide as a sports country, and sport has been developed distinctively. Naturally, particular care and attention is attached to sport at State level, which pays dividends in bringing up healthy young generations of our society and in increasing Azerbaijan’s authority through its recognition as a sports nation.
I would like to note that Azerbaijan is ready to host these games. All the essential and necessary activities in our capital have already been accomplished, and a powerful infrastructure has been created. Within a short time of about three years, the professional team of the Baku European Games Operation Committee, headed by the first lady of Azerbaijan, Mrs Mehriban Aliyeva, has got to a position where we can say it is about to finalise its work. In some countries it takes seven or eight years to organise such a sports competition, but Azerbaijan managed to accomplish the job within about three years. It is no accident that the leadership of the European Olympic Committees and other international federations have highly appreciated the job done in our capital and stressed that the standards of the European Olympic movement will be determined in Baku.
It is regrettable that, on the very eve of the European Games, some in political circles have tried to politicise them through accusations, fear and untruths about our country. Now, Baku is looking forward to welcoming guests and athletes coming to our city and living up to the Olympic spirit. I would like to take this opportunity to invite you to Baku to watch this significant event in the history of our country and in the sports history of Europe. As well as showing our dedication to the principle of the Olympic spirit, based on peace and friendship, the games will be a chance for people to get acquainted with the reality of our country today, the rich culture of our people and the successful development of Azerbaijan.
Ms FATALIYEVA (Azerbaijan) – Today, all parts of the world are suffering from the escalation of tensions. There is war going on in the Middle East and in Ukraine, and at each session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe our agenda includes more and more countries. The question is, what is this fight for? What is this blood shed for?
All the current events will go down in the history of each country and of the world as a whole, but under what name? Experience shows that the same events are interpreted in absolutely different ways depending on when they happen. Centuries later, some events are given an unrealistic political assessment that does not reflect reality. Why, in some cases, are victims of cruelty, ethnic and religious intolerance, territorial claims and fights for world power not recognised, whereas in other cases victims of war are ranked as martyrs? Historical events cannot be subject to change based on certain political interests.
My country, Azerbaijan, has for many years asked international organisations for a political assessment of the deaths of the people who have been cruelly killed by Armenian military forces in Nagorno-Karabakh. The conflict has lasted more than 20 years, despite resolutions of the United Nations and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe recognising the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, and remains the source of the instability in the region. Almost every day civilians are shot and children are killed, and the fate of 1 million refugees remains undetermined. A new generation of people who have never seen their homeland live with the desire to return to their ancestors’ land. We often discuss human rights issues here in the Assembly, and a number of people express their concerns about the arrest of certain people accused of crimes, calling them political prisoners. However, the rights of those refugees have rarely become part of our agenda. Where, in this case, are those who call themselves human rights defenders? Until our refugees return to their motherland and have their rights restored, the number of refugees in the world will increase. Until a solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is found within the framework of international law, occupations and terror in the world will continue.
I strongly believe that telling colleagues the truth can never make the Council of Europe a circus, or cast a shadow on the Parliamentary Assembly’s activity. I call on colleagues to be more attentive in developing their political preferences and more sensible to the terrible events going on in the world. We must always remember how valuable human life is.
The PRESIDENT* – Thank you. I now give the floor to Mr Imanaliev from Kyrgyzstan, Partner for Democracy. This is your maiden speech, and in fact it is the first time that a representative from Kyrgyzstan has addressed the Assembly. I welcome you, sir, and your delegation.
Mr IMANALIEV (Kyrgyzstan) – Let me first thank Ms Brasseur and the Secretariat of the Parliamentary Assembly for their assistance in organising the consideration of an important question for us.
As the Assembly knows, in 2010 Kyrgyzstan underwent several traumatic events, which affected our further development. On 7 April this year, we marked exactly five years since the People’s Revolution, and in June it will be the fifth anniversary of the June 2010 events. In 2010, we suffered a terrible tragedy. April 2010 was an important stage in Kyrgyzstan’s fight for freedom. Eighty-four people were killed and 1,500 injured in one city, and before that there had been many killings of members of parliament, businessmen and journalists. The leader of the president’s administration was particularly cruelly killed – he was beaten and tortured for hours. The authorities tried to terrify people by holding up animal teeth. Power was riddled with corruption and crime. People who demonstrated peacefully were shot, and more than 120 civilians taking part in peaceful demonstrations were killed. President Bakiyev, his brother Janish, who headed the country’s State guard, and his eldest son Marat fled the country, and they have now been charged in absentia with mass murder and abuse of power and put on the international wanted list.
As a result of the June 2010 events, more than 470 people were killed, thousands were injured, thousands of houses were destroyed and burned, and thousands of ethnic Uzbeks were forced to flee their homes. The catalyst for the sudden outbreak of ethnic violence was the overthrow of the ex-president, Kurmanbek Bakiyev, in April 2010. He had a great influence in the south.
It is important to ensure that we can extradite these people back to Kyrgyzstan, so that they have to face justice. For many years, the Bakiyev family were in cahoots with criminals and they stole money from the people. Hundreds of millions of dollars, which could have been spent on health, education and infrastructure, have been lost. The money was stolen from the people and it has been spirited out of the country by the Bakiyev family to a series of European countries; indeed, some of it has gone to Great Britain and Belarus.
In recent years, we have seen how the money that was embezzled by these leaders has gone to other countries, but with the assistance of the international community and the European Union it can be returned. That has been the experience of African and Asian countries, so we ask you to help. Bakiyev and his henchmen, who are responsible for the deaths of civilians in Kyrgyzstan, should be punished and prosecuted. We cannot bring back the victims, but with your personal active assistance we can at least see justice.
Mr DENEMEÇ (Turkey)* – The term “genocide” was first legally defined in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in 1948. As the International Court of Justice has recently underlined, the genocide convention is not retroactive. For the ICJ, the threshold for applying the legal concept of “genocide” is extremely high. In order for genocide to be established, a specific intent must be present and convincingly demonstrated. According to the case law of the ICJ, deportation or displacement of the members of a group is not necessarily equivalent to destruction of that group and nor is such destruction an automatic consequence of the displacement.
In the case of Perinçek v. Switzerland, the European Court of Human Rights expressed doubts about the alleged existence of a general consensus concerning the legal characterisation of the events of 1915 as genocide. On the other hand, the various human rights protection mechanisms put an emphasis on the incompatibility of laws with the respect for freedom of expression that is a pillar of democratic societies based on pluralism and freedom of thought. The Perinçek case is an example of how such laws, through their vague and sweeping wording, violate freedom of expression. The essential ground for Mr Perinçek’s conviction by the Swiss courts was the apparent existence of a “general consensus” concerning the legal characterisation of the events of 1915. The ECHR expressed doubts about the existence of such a general consensus and is not satisfied that the general consensus can be relied on in relation to the notion of genocide, which is a precisely defined legal concept.
The best way of avoiding uncertainties and abuses seems to be to limit criminal liability and punishment to cases of denial of genocides that have been established by a final decision of a competent international court on a clear legal basis, such as the 1948 genocide convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The use of such a very narrow legal term is best assessed by a competent international court.
The PRESIDENT* – Thank you. I call Mr Sabella from Palestine, Partner for Democracy.
Mr SABELLA (Palestine) – Thank you. I speak on my behalf and that of Ms Najat Al-Astal.
The results of the recent elections in Israel point to a stalemate, with fear on one side and a feeling of no exit on the other. Given this situation, it is imperative that any new Israeli Government, irrespective of its composition, works towards peace by ending occupation and lifting the siege of the Gaza Strip, as efforts at reconstruction and rebuilding remain stalled, and the economic and social conditions of our Palestinian people remain very difficult, with unemployment in Gaza at close to 50% and 77% of Gaza’s population living under the poverty line.
Where do we go from here? According to Israeli experts, if the current situation continues, we may have unprecedented mass uprisings in the Palestinian territory. That is something that all peace-loving people do not desire. In President Abbas, we have a pragmatic leader who wants to see the conflict resolved through negotiations, but on the Israeli side new and expanding settlements and other measures, including those in east Jerusalem, make the prospects for a negotiated settlement impossible. And yet the Palestinians are accused of launching a diplomatic campaign against Israel, which is why there are now attempts by Israel to delegitimise politically the Palestinian National Authority.
It is true that we Palestinians have to do our part in consolidating our national unity, but that is not possible under present Israeli policies. May I remind your distinguished Assembly that 14 members of our parliament are under arrest and administrative detention by Israel? There has been the recent arrest of our colleague and member of the Palestinian delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Mrs Khalida Jarrar, and scores of young children are being held by the Israeli authorities in conditions that are not fit for children.
At a time when our region is witnessing the atrocities of ISIS and the disintegration of States, it behoves your Assembly to work for peace between Israelis and we Palestinians, a peace that would ensure the establishment of a Palestinian State, living side by side with Israel in peace, security and mutual recognition. Such a development would certainly lift fear from those on one side and give hope to those on the other, and it would certainly have positive repercussions, not only in Palestine and Israel but in the whole region.
Mr SELVİ (Turkey) – Dear colleagues, in Turkey we have been commemorating the start of the naval battles as Martyrs’ Day, which is marked on 18 March every year. The date of 25 April marks the anniversary of the start of the land battles in Çanakkale, and is observed as Anzac Day in Australia, New Zealand and several other Commonwealth States. So that Anzac Day is not overshadowed and we capitalise on the international presence in Turkey on that day, the day before, 24 April, has been established as International Day for more than a decade. Commemorative ceremonies are held on that day.
On the 23rd of this month, leaders of the countries that fought in the Çanakkale battles will come together in a peace summit to send a message of global peace to the entire world. The following day will be devoted to commemoration ceremonies marking the 100th anniversary of the Çanakkale land battles. However, this ordinary sequence of events is unjustly being exploited by the Armenian side, which is deliberately attempting to create confusion between the commemoration ceremony to be held in Çanakkale and the ceremony being held in Yerevan on the same day.
The Armenian allegation that Turkey has deliberately organised the Çanakkale commemorations on 24 April in order to overshadow the ceremony to be held in Yerevan is baseless and overlooks the fact that previous Çanakkale ceremonies have been organised jointly on 24 April for many years. We expected that, by participating in the ceremony, Armenia could, alongside Turkey, represent those Ottoman Armenians who lost their lives in Çanakkale while defending the homeland. Unfortunately, Armenia has once again failed to seize the opportunity and shown that it is far from sharing in the more open-minded approach.
The PRESIDENT* – Thank you. The list of speakers has now come to an end and the free debate is closed.
3. Next public business
The PRESIDENT* – The Assembly will hold its next public sitting tomorrow morning at 10.00 a.m. in accordance with the order of business.
The sitting is closed.
(The sitting was closed at 4.40 p.m.)
CONTENTS
1. Changes in the membership of committees
2. Free debate
Speakers: Ms Durrieu (France), Mr Zourabian (Armenia), Mr Neill (United Kingdom), Ms Kanelli (Greece), Ms Quintanilla (Spain), Mr Rzayev (Azerbaijan), Mr Sobolev (Ukraine), Ms Taktakashvili (Georgia), Ms Magradze (Georgia), Ms Hovhannisyan (Armenia), Ms Zohrabyan (Armenia), Mr Honcharenko (Ukraine), Mr Mignon (France), Mr Pintado (Spain), Mr Tilson (Canada), Mr Csenger-Zalan (Hungary), Ms Pashayeva (Azerbaijan), Mr Kandelaki (Georgia), Ms Johnsen (Norway), Mr Dişli (Turkey), Ms Naghdalyan (Armenia), Mr Chisu (Canada),Ms Gafarova (Azerbaijan), Ms Fataliyeva (Azerbaijan), Mr Imanaliev (Kyrgyzstan), Mr Denemeç (Turkey), Mr Sabella (Palestine), Mr Selvi (Turkey)
3. Next public business
Appendix I
Representatives or Substitutes who signed the Attendance Register in accordance with Rule 11.2 of the Rules of Procedure. The names of Substitutes who replaced absent Representatives are printed in small letters. The names of those who were absent or apologised for absence are followed by an asterisk
Pedro AGRAMUNT
Alexey Ivanovich ALEKSANDROV*
Brigitte ALLAIN*
Jean-Charles ALLAVENA
Werner AMON
Luise AMTSBERG/Annette Groth
Athanasia ANAGNOSTOPOULOU*
Liv Holm ANDERSEN*
Lord Donald ANDERSON
Paride ANDREOLI
Ben-Oni ARDELEAN
Khadija ARIB*
Volodymyr ARIEV
Egemen BAĞIŞ
Theodora BAKOYANNIS*
David BAKRADZE/Giorgi Kandelaki
Gérard BAPT
Doris BARNETT
José Manuel BARREIRO/Ángel Pintado
Deniz BAYKAL
Marieluise BECK*
Ondřej BENEŠIK*
José María BENEYTO*
Deborah BERGAMINI*
Sali BERISHA*
Anna Maria BERNINI/ Claudio Fazzone
Maria Teresa BERTUZZI*
Andris BĒRZINŠ
Gülsün BİLGEHAN
Brian BINLEY/ Robert Neill
Ľuboš BLAHA*
Philippe BLANCHART/ Dirk Van Der Maelen
Maryvonne BLONDIN
Jean-Marie BOCKEL*
Olga BORZOVA*
Mladen BOSIĆ*
António BRAGA*
Anne BRASSEUR/Marc Spautz
Alessandro BRATTI*
Piet De BRUYN/Cindy Franssen
Beata BUBLEWICZ/Michał Stuligrosz
Gerold BÜCHEL
André BUGNON
Natalia BURYKINA*
Nunzia CATALFO*
Elena CENTEMERO*
Irakli CHIKOVANI/Chiora Taktakishvili
Vannino CHITI
Christopher CHOPE*
Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN
Henryk CIOCH*
James CLAPPISON
Igor CORMAN
Telmo CORREIA
Paolo CORSINI
Carlos COSTA NEVES*
Celeste COSTANTINO*
Yves CRUCHTEN
Zsolt CSENGER-ZALÁN
Katalin CSÖBÖR
Joseph DEBONO GRECH*
Reha DENEMEÇ
Alain DESTEXHE
Manlio DI STEFANO*
Arcadio DÍAZ TEJERA
Peter van DIJK
Şaban DİŞLİ
Sergio DIVINA
Aleksandra DJUROVIĆ*
Namik DOKLE
Elvira DROBINSKI-WEIß
Daphné DUMERY/ Hendrik Daems
Alexander [The Earl of] DUNDEE*
Nicole DURANTON/Marie-Christine Dalloz
Josette DURRIEU
Mustafa DZHEMILIEV/ Andrii Lopushanskyi
Mikuláš DZURINDA*
Lady Diana ECCLES*
Tülin ERKAL KARA
Franz Leonhard EßL
Bernd FABRITIUS/Johann Wadephul
Joseph FENECH ADAMI*
Cătălin Daniel FENECHIU
Vyacheslav FETISOV*
Doris FIALA
Daniela FILIPIOVÁ*
Ute FINCKH-KRÄMER/ Gabriela Heinrich
Axel E. FISCHER*
Gvozden Srećko FLEGO
Bernard FOURNIER
Hans FRANKEN
Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO*
Martin FRONC*
Sir Roger GALE*
Adele GAMBARO
Karl GARÐARSSON
Iryna GERASHCHENKO*
Tina GHASEMI*
Valeriu GHILETCHI
Francesco Maria GIRO
Pavol GOGA*
Carlos Alberto GONÇALVES
Alina Ştefania GORGHIU*
Svetlana GORYACHEVA*
Sandro GOZI*
Fred de GRAAF*
François GROSDIDIER/Jacques Legendre
Andreas GROSS
Dzhema GROZDANOVA*
Mehmet Kasim GÜLPINAR*
Gergely GULYÁS/Bence Tuzson
Jonas GUNNARSSON
Nazmi GÜR
Antonio GUTIÉRREZ/ Jordi Xuclà
Maria GUZENINA*
Márton GYÖNGYÖSI*
Sabir HAJIYEV
Margus HANSON*
Alfred HEER
Michael HENNRICH/Volkmar Vogel
Martin HENRIKSEN*
Françoise HETTO-GAASCH*
Oleksii HONCHARENKO
Jim HOOD*
Arpine HOVHANNISYAN
Anette HÜBINGER
Johannes HÜBNER/ Barbara Rosenkranz
Andrej HUNKO
Ali HUSEYNLI/Sahiba Gafarova
Rafael HUSEYNOV/Sevinj Fataliyeva
Vitaly IGNATENKO*
Florin IORDACHE*
Tadeusz IWIŃSKI
Denis JACQUAT/Yves Pozzo Di Borgo
Gediminas JAKAVONIS
Gordan JANDROKOVIĆ*
Tedo JAPARIDZE/Guguli Magradze
Michael Aastrup JENSEN*
Frank J. JENSSEN/Kristin Ørmen Johnsen
Florina-Ruxandra JIPA/Viorel Riceard Badea
Ögmundur JÓNASSON*
Aleksandar JOVIČIĆ/Stefana Miladinović
Josip JURATOVIC*
Antti KAIKKONEN*
Mustafa KARADAYI*
Marietta KARAMANLI*
Niklas KARLSSON*
Andreja KATIČ*
Vasiliki KATRIVANOU*
Ioanneta KAVVADIA*
Charles KENNEDY*
Tinatin KHIDASHELI*
Danail KIRILOV*
Bogdan KLICH/ Helena Hatka
Haluk KOÇ*
Igor KOLMAN*
Željko KOMŠIĆ*
Unnur Brá KONRÁÐSDÓTTIR*
Ksenija KORENJAK KRAMAR
Attila KORODI
Alev KORUN
Rom KOSTŘICA*
Elvira KOVÁCS
Tiny KOX
Borjana KRIŠTO*
Julia KRONLID*
Marek KRZĄKAŁA*
Zviad KVATCHANTIRADZE
Athina KYRIAKIDOU
Serhiy LABAZIUK/ Sergiy Vlasenko
Inese LAIZĀNE
Olof LAVESSON
Pierre-Yves LE BORGN'*
Jean-Yves LE DÉAUT*
Igor LEBEDEV*
Valentina LESKAJ
Terry LEYDEN
Inese LĪBIŅA-EGNERE
Georgii LOGVYNSKYI
François LONCLE*
George LOUKAIDES*
Yuliya L'OVOCHKINA
Jacob LUND
Trine Pertou MACH*
Philippe MAHOUX
Thierry MARIANI
Soňa MARKOVÁ/Pavel Holík
Milica MARKOVIĆ*
Meritxell MATEU PI
Ana MATO
Pirkko MATTILA/Mika Raatikainen
Frano MATUŠIĆ*
Liliane MAURY PASQUIER
Michael McNAMARA*
Sir Alan MEALE
Ermira MEHMETI DEVAJA/Imer Aliu
Evangelos MEIMARAKIS/Liana Kanelli
Ivan MELNIKOV*
Ana Catarina MENDES*
Attila MESTERHÁZY*
Jean-Claude MIGNON
Philipp MIßFELDER*
Olivia MITCHELL
Igor MOROZOV*
João Bosco MOTA AMARAL
Arkadiusz MULARCZYK
Melita MULIĆ
Oľga NACHTMANNOVÁ*
Hermine NAGHDALYAN
Piotr NAIMSKI
Sergey NARYSHKIN*
Marian NEACŞU
Andrei NEGUTA
Zsolt NÉMETH
Miroslav NENUTIL
Baroness Emma NICHOLSON*
Michele NICOLETTI*
Aleksandar NIKOLOSKI
Marija OBRADOVIĆ
Žarko OBRADOVIĆ
Judith OEHRI
Carina OHLSSON*
Joseph O'REILLY
Maciej ORZECHOWSKI/Jagna Marczułajtis-Walczak
Sandra OSBORNE/Michael Connarty
José Ignacio PALACIOS
Liliana PALIHOVICI
Judith PALLARÉS CORTÉS*
Ganira PASHAYEVA
Florin Costin PÂSLARU*
Waldemar PAWLAK/Marek Borowski
Vladimir PLIGIN*
Cezar Florin PREDA
John PRESCOTT*
Gabino PUCHE*
Alexey PUSHKOV*
Carmen QUINTANILLA
Mailis REPS*
Andrea RIGONI
François ROCHEBLOINE/André Schneider
Soraya RODRÍGUEZ*
Alexander ROMANOVICH*
Maria de Belém ROSEIRA*
René ROUQUET
Rovshan RZAYEV
Indrek SAAR*
Àlex SÁEZ*
Vincenzo SANTANGELO*
Milena SANTERINI*
Kimmo SASI*
Nadiia SAVCHENKO/Boryslav Bereza
Deborah SCHEMBRI*
Stefan SCHENNACH
Ingjerd SCHOU/Hans Fredrik Grøvan
Frank SCHWABE
Urs SCHWALLER/Luc Recordon
Salvador SEDÓ
Predrag SEKULIĆ*
Ömer SELVİ
Aleksandar SENIĆ
Senad ŠEPIĆ*
Samad SEYIDOV*
Jim SHERIDAN*
Bernd SIEBERT*
Valeri SIMEONOV*
Andrej ŠIRCELJ
Arturas SKARDŽIUS
Leonid SLUTSKY*
Serhiy SOBOLEV
Olena SOTNYK
Lorella STEFANELLI
Yanaki STOILOV
Karin STRENZ
Ionuţ-Marian STROE*
Valeriy SUDARENKOV*
Krzysztof SZCZERSKI
Damien THIÉRY*
Lord John E. TOMLINSON
Antoni TRENCHEV*
Goran TUPONJA
Ahmet Kutalmiş TÜRKEŞ
Tuğrul TÜRKEŞ
Theodora TZAKRI*
Ilyas UMAKHANOV*
Dana VÁHALOVÁ
Snorre Serigstad VALEN/Ingebjørg Godskesen
Petrit VASILI
Imre VEJKEY/ Rózsa Hoffmann
Stefaan VERCAMER
Mark VERHEIJEN*
Birutė VĖSAITĖ
Anne-Mari VIROLAINEN*
Dimitris VITSAS
Vladimir VORONIN*
Viktor VOVK
Klaas de VRIES*
Nataša VUČKOVIĆ
Draginja VUKSANOVIĆ/Snežana Jonica
Piotr WACH
Robert WALTER
Dame Angela WATKINSON*
Tom WATSON*
Karl-Georg WELLMANN*
Katrin WERNER
Morten WOLD
Gisela WURM/ Nikolaus Scherak
Maciej WYDRZYŃSKI
Leonid YEMETS/ Vladyslav Golub
Tobias ZECH*
Kristýna ZELIENKOVÁ*
Sergey ZHELEZNYAK*
Marie-Jo ZIMMERMANN
Emanuelis ZINGERIS
Guennady ZIUGANOV*
Naira ZOHRABYAN
Levon ZOURABIAN
Vacant Seat, Cyprus*
Vacant Seat, ‘‘The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’’*
ALSO PRESENT
Representatives and Substitutes not authorised to vote
Andrzej JAWORSKI
Kerstin LUNDGREN
Marcel OBERWEIS
Observers
Eloy CANTU SEGOVIA
Corneliu CHISU
Percy DOWNE
Michel RIVARD
David TILSON
Partners for democracy
Najat AL-ASTAL
Kanibek IMANALIEV
Bernard SABELLA