AA15CR25ADD1

AS (2015) CR 25
Addendum 1

2015 ORDINARY SESSION

________________________

(Third part)

REPORT

Twenty-fifth sitting

Thursday 25 June 2015 at 10.00 a.m.

Free debate

The following texts were submitted for inclusion in the official report by members who were present in the Chamber but were prevented by lack of time from delivering them.

Ms FATALIYEVA (Azerbaijan) – The main purpose of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe is to fight for democracy and human rights. We as member States share these values and respect all decisions made by this and other international organisations, and we do our best to respect them.

A couple of days ago, the Parliamentary Assembly discussed the situation in Azerbaijan. It is very surprising to hear untruths and totally incorrect information being presented to our colleagues. Attempts to isolate Nagorno-Karabakh in discussing Azerbaijan are not acceptable. You fight for human rights in Azerbaijan but you never mention the 1 million refugees. You never go further than plain statements about hostages who are illegally arrested by a non-existent court of a non-existent State.

Two resolutions of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and four United Nations Security Council resolutions recognise the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and its state of occupation by Armenia. A decision of the European Court confirms the occupation, which proves the illegitimacy of Nagorno-Karabakh and the complete control of Nagorno-Karabakh by the Armenian authorities. Steps taken by the Assembly while discussing the report prove that this Organisation contradicts itself. The approach taken by most members of the Assembly two days ago proved the existence of double standards and an absence of transparency as regards co-operation. It also showed that certain members were driven by personal ambitions and interests.

In this Assembly, we are always discussing the situation in various countries where democracy is under threat and human rights are violated. Just a few days ago, we observed the terrible events taking place in Armenia. These events showed us the way in which democracy operates in Armenia. They revealed to us how fed up people are with being deprived of decent living conditions, and how little State policy serves the welfare of its people. Hundreds of people, representatives of the opposition, took to the streets to protest against the State’s social policy. The meeting was dispersed by water cannon and more than 200 people were arrested, among them a number of journalists. The people of Armenia live in a difficult economic, social and political situation. Lack of political independence leads to national dissatisfaction and prevents them from benefiting from regional projects.

I strongly believe that this situation must be widely discussed in the Assembly. Perhaps the Assembly should change the priority of its values. Transparency and a collective approach must become a priority for all of us. Furthermore, I wish some members would be more courageous in their political declarations and preferences. Political bargaining could lead to this Organisation collapsing.

Ms GAFAROVA (Azerbaijan) – I support all the comments and opinions of my colleagues from Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijani foreign policy agenda is, to a large extent, dominated by issues related to Armenia’s occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven other provinces of Azerbaijan. Indeed, Armenia, and Armenia alone, is the occupying force in Nagorno-Karabakh and seven other regions. This is a reality; this is a historical fact.

Just a few days ago, on June 16, the European Court adopted a decision on the petition entitled Chiragov and Others v. Armenia concerning the case of a group of Azerbaijani people who have become IDPs and cannot return to their native land due to the occupation of the Azerbaijani lands by Armenia. As a result of Armenia’s failure to comply with Resolution 1416 which was adopted here 12 years ago by the Assembly, the IDPs appealed to the European Court. The decision clearly emphasises the occupation of Azerbaijani lands by Armenia and the violations of Azerbaijani IDPs’ human rights – this clearly shows that Armenia is an occupying force. I do not think anyone can deny that. Resolutions 822, 853, 874 and 884 of the United Nations Security Council call for the unconditional and immediate withdrawal of Armenian troops from the occupied territories of Azerbaijan. Owing to Armenia’s destructive manipulation of the peace process, the conflict remains unsettled. Despite international appeals, officials in Yerevan do not act constructively.

I urge you all to respect the rights of 1 million IDPs and refugees, as well as the four resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and Resolution 1416 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which, unfortunately, was rejected and disrespected by the Assembly itself two days ago with the deletion of the last sentence reconfirming the occupation by Armenia of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven regions adjacent to Azerbaijan. We were bitterly disappointed by that decision in this Assembly, which is known as a house of freedom and democracy.

Ms GASTÉLUM BAJO (Mexico) – The protection of children has always been a human rights priority. In Mexico, this protection has been designated as "Best interests" and has been consolidated with the entry into force on 5 December of the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents as proposed by President Enrique Peña Nieto and revised by the senate. This law represents one of the most important advances of the past 25 years in human rights in Mexico.

This achievement is due to the work that was done in the senate, which involved extensive research and analysis taskforces incorporating into the law the opinions, suggestions and proposals of legislators from different political expressions, civil society, academia and the general public.

It should be emphasised that the Lanzarote Convention was a key inspiration in work on the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents, for it contains many of the points raised by this Assembly. This law includes the right to life; priority; identity; family life; non-discrimination; welfare conditions conducive to overall healthy development; protection of migrant children; and protection against all forms of sale, trafficking, exploitation, abuse, neglect or cruelty, among other rights. It also represents a transformation in our institutions. In order to assist in the protection of children’s rights, the Federal Office for the Protection of Minors was created to enable children to lodge complaints about aggression or violations, as was the National System of Protection of the Rights of Children and Adolescents. In preparing the provisions of this Act, the characterisations set out by the Lanzarote Convention were considered.

It is therefore clear that the Lanzarote agreement, as well as other activities related to the productive meetings of the Council of Europe on human rights, has been of direct benefit to Mexican legislative practice. There is no doubt that these meetings enrich the experiences of legislative bodies, and contribute towards building more comprehensive standards of regulatory protection. The approval of this Act is a product of such important collaboration, and I hope that in coming years both the senate and the Council of Europe will continue to participate fully in safeguarding and promoting human rights.

Mr ROMO MEDINA (Mexico) – The feedback process between rulers and constituents is facilitated thanks to the Internet; society now exercises more control over and supervision of its rulers. This, however, does not suffice; direct intervention and participation is to be sought in greater depth and scope.

Unfortunately, young people tend to stay on the sidelines of political parties and life, making their feelings known through other mechanisms of instant effect. However, their participation should not be circumscribed to merely publishing their opinions. We must encourage and motivate them not only to take political action in this digital sphere, but to become involved in the democratic life of our nations through viable, active political participation. We must bring democracy closer to our citizens, and particularly our youth, if we are to bolster democracy on a daily basis. Democratic participation should not be defined by the mere casting of votes, but should incorporate direct involvement in decision-making processes; the inclusion of young people in party and electoral life would renew and inject strength, energy and sensitivity into political institutions in all countries.

It behoves us to ask ourselves the following question: is the absence of the full participation of our youth part of the crisis that weakens democracies? I believe it is, for when we secure the direct participation of young people, we can learn first hand of the socio-economic and cultural conditions that prevail in our communities. The only way to foster experience in the younger generations is through participation; consequently, we should under no circumstances exclude young people. We must encourage young people to dream politics and work together with the rest of society to establish and fulfil their aspirations. By including youth, we invest politics with renewed value and naturally ensuing ethics. Far from exhibiting a self-centred attitude, but rather through a holistic and integrating vision, let us strive for interaction with our youth in our legislative tasks; let us draw them in and migrate from a mindset of legislation drawn up “for us” to one of “with us”.

Whether in the public administration domain or in the legislative sphere, it is, and will continue to be, fundamental for us to work to fulfil one of the true purposes of our activity: to strengthen representative democracy together with the younger generations – with young people filled with knowledge and drive.