AA17CR25

AS (2017) CR 25

2017 ORDINARY SESSION

________________

(Third part)

REPORT

Twenty-fifth sitting

Thursday 29 June 2017 at 10 a.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.        The text of the amendments is available at the document centre and on the Assembly’s website.

      Only oral amendments or oral sub-amendments are reproduced in the report of debates.

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

5.       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 Gambaro, Vice-President of the Assembly, took the Chair at 10.15 a.m.)

The PRESIDENT – The sitting is open.

1. Europe’s common fight against terrorism: successes and failures

(current affairs debate)

The PRESIDENT – The first item of business this morning is a current affairs debate on “Europe’s common fight against terrorism: successes and failures”.

      The debate is limited to one and a half hours. I remind the Assembly that a three-minute time limit to speeches in this debate was agreed to yesterday for all members, except the first speaker, Mr Küçükcan, chosen by the Bureau on Monday, who is allowed 10 minutes under the rule on current affairs debates.

In the debate I call first Mr Talip Küçükcan. You have 10 minutes.

      Mr KÜÇÜKCAN (Turkey) – I thank the Presidential Committee and the Bureau for unanimously accepting our proposal to debate our common response to the global phenomenon of terrorism.

      I begin by asking an existential question. Are we safe? Do we feel safe in our streets, schools and hospitals? Are we safe in concert halls, museums and train stations? As recent events and trends in Europe and elsewhere indicate, we are not safe. It is obvious that events and terrorist activities and attacks in London, Moscow, Berlin, Paris and Brussels, the capital of the European Union, show that we are not safe. We have to accept this reality and address the coming challenges, otherwise our future will be taken hostage by terrorist organisations.

      This is a global threat. Terrorism recognises no borders, no ethnicity, no religion, no sectarian identity and no regional borders. A terrorist organisation will emerge in one particular area but it will hit many different places. The most recent examples are Daesh, the PKK and the PYD, which threaten our very existence. Terrorism is not just a threat to one country or region but to our common existence, our democratic institutions and our political life. Where there is terrorism and political instability, democratic institutions cannot function. Member States and members of the Assembly must have a comprehensive view and strategy to combat terrorism.

      We must refrain from stigmatising one group of people, one ethnicity, one religion, one sectarian group, when we talk about terrorism. It is a global phenomenon and the victims of terrorism are of many nationalities, ethnicities and religious groups. We need to recognise that this is a global threat and, wherever terrorism occurs, we must have a common response. Your home town or country may not be hit by a terrorist organisation, but that does not mean you will be safe for the rest of your life.

      I come from a country that is fighting various terrorist organisations, so we can share some of our experiences. We must not only look at the end results; most of the time, we discuss the consequences of terrorism yet refrain from looking at the root causes. Unless we resolve those root causes, rather than looking at the victims and the consequences, we will not win the war against terrorism.

      If we look at the root causes of the situation in Syria, for example, Daesh and other non-State actors use terrorism as a means to achieve their goals. There is no political stability in that country because a war is going on among various ethnic and sectarian groups, and terrorism has been instrumentalised. Unless we establish stability in the region – in Syria, Iraq, Libya and Yemen – we will not be able to win the war against terrorism. Those who live in Berlin, London, Moscow and Paris should recognise this.

Terrorism sees no borders. Terrorists travel freely. They can recruit people from your countries, and we have to do something about it. Many young people influenced by terrorist networks and organisations travel from one country to another. We have to set up a mechanism to confront this issue. We call on the members of the Council of Europe to recognise the shortcomings that we face.

      We have seen several hash tags recently, such as #PrayforParis, #PrayforAnkara, #PrayforLondon and #PrayforNice. Regrettably, there have been failures in combating terrorism globally, otherwise terrorists could not hit the cities at the heart of our nations. We therefore feel that the international community should find a new agenda, new perception and new methods to continue fighting all terrorist organisations with determination. We should investigate the effectiveness of the measures that we have taken so far. In my view, despite the steps that we have taken, we face a number of problems in fighting terrorism.

      First, Council of Europe member States should be actively involved in delivering what is stipulated in the Council of Europe additional protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, which addresses the phenomenon of terrorist fighters, through measures to prevent third-country citizens from travelling to Syria to join radical groups. All Council of Europe States should include suspected foreign terrorist fighters on their no-entry lists. Turkey has been doing so actively, and 52 000 names are on our list. Those people should not be allowed to travel. Where Daesh is concerned, Turkey has been doing its duty as well. We are in a volatile region, and as Syria’s neighbour, Turkey is one of the first targets of that terrorist organisation. It is time for us to recognise Turkey’s efforts to combat Daesh terrorism.

I remind you that social media are used actively to recruit young people, so we need to monitor them. People usually object to monitoring social media, in the name of freedom of expression and freedom of the media, but this is not correct. Our existential values are threatened, so we have to take important measures by looking at social media and the media at large. Sometimes we see that terrorists and terrorist ideas are glorified by people in the media, and we have to stop that.

I must address PKK terrorism. Turkey has been facing this terrorist organisation for the past 40 years, and many people have died. We need a common response, because the PKK is active in most of your countries in different ways. Sometimes it is as a civil society organisation or a media outlet, but we know and the United Nations has recognised that the PKK recruits people and raises funds in your countries that are then channelled to the PKK in our region. Let me tell you about the PKK’s latest victim, a female teacher aged 23, who was killed two weeks ago in the place where she was teaching music to Kurdish kids. We need to look at this and recognise that such organisations are now targeting their own people as well.

Finally, I warn all of you about an organisation that tried to overthrow the Turkish Government on 15 July last year, killing 252 people and injuring more than 2 000. Fethullah Gülen’s terrorist organisation sometimes appears to be a society for intercultural dialogue, but as we have seen in Turkey, it is a cult that is recruiting your young people. This is a friendly warning to all of you. We would like your co-operation with Turkey on a regional and a global level to combat terrorism. Of course, we are prepared to co-operate with you on all fronts. I thank you again for holding this debate.

Mr GONCHARENKO (Ukraine, Spokesperson for the European Conservatives Group) – This is an extremely important issue, and I think that we are making the right decision in debating this topic. Ukraine is suffering a lot from terrorism. Two days ago, in the centre of Kiev, a car was bombed, killing the Ukrainian Colonel Shapoval. Yesterday, another explosion in the eastern part of Ukraine killed another colonel in the Ukrainian special forces. This keeps happening. In my native city of Odessa, a number of attacks and bombings have been carried out.

It is clear that terrorism is taking new forms. Yes, we all know about terrorism by individuals and radical groups, but now, in Europe and worldwide, we have terrorism by a regime – I am speaking about the regime of Vladimir Putin. Today, Mr Putin is global terrorist No. 1, because he organised a regime that is killing people all over the world. Not only does he bomb people and kill them in the streets; after the hybrid war started by the Russian Federation against the whole Western world – Ukraine is its first and main victim for the moment, but I assure you that the Russian Federation has further plans – the Russian Federation is now providing hybrid terrorism.

What is hybrid terrorism? I have mentioned explosions and killings, but I want to tell you what is going on in Aleppo in Syria. Hundreds of people have been killed by Russian aircraft, and the result has been a huge wave of migration into Europe, causing many problems in all member States of the Council of Europe. Three days ago, Ukraine became the first, but not the last, target of a cyber-attack. Now Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and all European countries are suffering from a huge cyber-attack targeting essential systems such as electricity and banking. Now this computer virus is on the way.

In these days, all our countries face big problems. It is not the terrorism of 10 or 20 years ago; these are new forms of terrorism. We as members of the Council of Europe should react. We should find the solution that will help our countries face this extremely difficult challenge. This issue is so important that we should speak of it in each part-session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

Mr Michael Aastrup JENSEN (Denmark, Spokesperson for the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe) – I thank the Turkish delegation for raising this important issue. Like all my colleagues, I always feel heartbroken when I see pictures from a recent terrorist attack. Terrorist organisations launch cowardly attacks on completely innocent civilians, killing whatever age groups they can get their hands on, as we can see from those heartbreaking pictures. As a politician, you sometimes feel helpless to stop it. We should not forget that terrorist organisations are now adopting new methods to attack our civilian populations, using rented trucks or other crude equipment.

What should we do? First, of course, we must attack the terrorist organisations’ home bases, and a lot of our European countries are involved right now in the fight against the so-called Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, but we should also remember that this must never be a fight between two religions. If it develops into that, the terrorist organisations have won. Therefore, we also need to embrace young people of different religions, who right now may be feeling isolated or left out due to rising unemployment, social injustice or other issues. We need to make certain that all European countries have immigration policies that ensure that there will never be breeding grounds for radical views in minority regions.

      We should remember that the fight against terrorism must never be an excuse to fight liberal values such as freedom of expression and democracy, which this Organisation has fought for since its creation. Although, on one hand, I salute the Turkish delegation for taking up this issue, I must also say frankly that there are problems in Turkey. There are problems in a democratic country such as Turkey when the fight against terrorism is used as an excuse for labelling a lot of people terrorist sympathisers. We have seen mass arrests of ordinary people, perhaps just because they downloaded a Gülen app or something. That must not stand in a European country that calls itself democratic. That is not the way forward. That only ends up creating a breeding ground for terrorist organisations and radical views, and it must stop.

      Mr VILLUMSEN (Denmark, Spokesperson for the Group of the Unified European Left) – Terror is a terrible thing that needs to be fought. We have seen terrible attacks hit many places in Europe – in my country, Copenhagen has experienced terror attacks. We will not let extremists divide us. We need to stand together in solidarity against hate. Extremists want to destroy freedom and democracy. All of us who want freedom and democracy should stand together.

      We cannot win the fight against terror by compromising on human rights. We cannot win the fight against terror by compromising on democracy. We cannot win the fight against terror by allowing governments to label the opposition in their countries as terrorists. Unfortunately, that is exactly what is happening in Council of Europe member States.

      I had the honour of being invited to participate in this Assembly’s delegation to observe the Turkish referendum. As you are all aware, that referendum did not live up to democratic standards. When the delegation said that, President Erdoğan clearly became angry with us. All of a sudden, despite having been invited to Turkey by Erdoğan’s government, I was pointed at as a terrorist, as was one of my colleagues. Luckily, I am not a parliamentarian in Turkey. If I were, I would probably be in jail right now, as many of our colleagues are. I am a parliamentarian in Denmark, so I can stand here today and tell my story, which shows that the fight against terror is not taken seriously in Turkey. It is misused to jail the opposition.

      It is simply not acceptable for a Council of Europe member State to misuse the fight against terror to jail its opposition. When we say clearly today that terror must be fought, it is important that we also say clearly to the Turkish delegation that the jailed opposition parliamentarians must be released.

      Mr ARIEV (Ukraine, Spokesperson for the Group of the European People’s Party) – Since 1951, terrorism in Europe has often been linked to separatist movements – notably the Irish Republican Army in the United Kingdom, Euskadi Ta Askatasuna in Spain and the PKK in Turkey. Other perpetrators have been linked to far-right and far-left extremism and anarchism. Since 2001, there has been a sharp increase in attacks linked to extremist Islamist groups, and Islamic State is now the main source of terror and fear.

      European co-operation in the field of counter-terrorism includes the European Police Office, which is a European Union agency, and Interpol. Many countries have developed their own strategies to prevent or combat terrorism and to secure their citizens from that threat. In 2005, the United Kingdom Government introduced its CONTEST strategy, which seeks to improve co-operation between security services and other public and private organisations. In July 2014, the French Government introduced legislation to combat terrorism by toughening surveillance and making it lawful to detain individuals linked to radical Islamist groups and to block Internet sites that incite anti-Semitism, terrorism and hatred. The European Union keeps trying to find proper answers to new terrorist attacks and to establish protections from new styles of attack, such as attacks with trucks on crowds.

      In recent days, Ukraine has faced a new wave of terrorism, allegedly sponsored by aggressive top Russian officials. Only this week, Ukraine was targeted by the largest ever cyber-attack, which damaged the computer systems of power plants, energy systems, international airports, banks, post companies, web services, and so on. The Assembly recently adopted a report regarding cyber-terrorism. Our timely reaction to such occurrences is important. Two days in a row, the cars of Ukrainian intelligence and national security officers were blown up, and two officers died. The style of those attacks was similar to that of the explosion of Belarusian journalist Pavel Sheremet’s car last year.

      The new wave of terrorism spread by the Russian Federation in Ukraine is a hybrid answer to the clear position of Western States, which keep calling a spade a spade with respect to the Kremlin’s aggressive conduct and do not lift sanctions. That is why Ukraine, like other States I have mentioned, is taking care of its security by developing stronger security controls. Ukraine has blocked access to Russian social networks that have been used by Russian intelligence services to gain information about users, including militaries, and, in the framework of the hybrid war, to spread fake information that causes hatred and war.

      It is time to understand that we must apply drastic measures to protect human life. We must ensure that governments do not misuse their power. Our unity and our good understanding of one other will be the basis of our victory over terrorism, whatever its origin.

      Ms DURRIEU (France, Spokesperson for the Socialist Group)* – I thank the Turkish delegation for proposing this topic for a current affairs debate. As has rightly been said, Europe is not the only victim of terrorism; Africa, Asia and other parts of the world have also fallen victim to that scourge. No country can claim that it has been spared. Terrorists fight for many reasons – they may be independence or separatist movements, or extreme right or left groups – but the purpose of terrorism is always to use force and violence to obtain something that people are not prepared to try to obtain by other means.

      We do not have a generally agreed definition of terrorism; it is defined in each country as that country sees fit. It is therefore subjectively defined. That is why you can put all kinds of movements together and say they are all terrorist movements. Obviously, people always think that the other person is wrong. As we know, one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter. It depends on how you look at it. We have never had a clear definition of what we mean by terrorism.

      We have also never had a clear definition of what we mean by resistance to oppression. If we go back to Article 2 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man in France, we can see a reference to the right to resist oppression, but that is not reflected in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. If we think right back to the days of Aristotle – of course, Aristotle was always right – we should remember that he said when people decided that something belonged to them, they would claim a right to defend their property against everyone else, which is where the whole idea originated.

      We now have to deal with Daesh – I very much hope we will soon see the end of Daesh in Syria – and many States have found themselves caught up in the fight against terrorism. We have had some successes, through intelligence sharing, in thwarting a number of attacks, but we must also acknowledge our failures. We must recognise that the root cause of radical jihadism in all its forms is a radical ideology that is manipulated and funded by certain powers. I am thinking of Libya, Iran and Turkey – and we know who we are talking about. This phenomenon is still with us and it is evolving. It only takes someone to have a truck or a van to be able to kill people, or someone can just go out with a knife and kill people, as we have seen.

      People have been radicalised, and if we are to combat terrorism, we need to understand its causes and the thinking behind it. We need to understand it and see it for what it really is, because unless we truly do so, we will never be able to combat it. We want a stable and free society throughout the world, and that is what will enable us to defeat terrorism. In Turkey, people should certainly be released, which would be a step towards eradicating terrorism.

      Mr BAK (Turkey)* – Terrorism is one of the greatest threats to us, and only through international co-operation will we be able to deal with it effectively and successfully. We need to fight against all terrorist organisations, and Turkey is very much involved in this fight. If the wall falls, as it were, many terrorist organisations could enter Europe, so we should support Turkey’s fight against terrorism. Turkey is combating the PKK, the PYD, Daesh and other organisations simultaneously. Since July 2015, more than 700 people have been killed by Daesh. The PKK has killed a lot of innocent civilians, and it has also attacked Turkish schools, hospitals and infrastructure.

      What this really amounts to is that the PKK and the PYD are linked. They have entered the camps for Syrians. We are told that weapons are being given to the PYD to fight against Daesh, but the same weapons are being used by the PKK to attack innocent civilians. Just because one terrorist organisation is fighting against another one does not legitimise its actions. It is definitely wrong to combat terrorism by siding with one terrorist organisation and using it as an intermediary; only States can fight terrorist organisations. Three thousand ISIS militants in Syria have been neutralised, but we know that the PKK is doing very bad things in Europe, including human trafficking and heroin trafficking. We have provided police authorities in Europe and the United States with such information, and reports of such activities have been published.

      In addition, we are told the PKK is using Yazidi and Kurdish children to forward its aims, but the abuse of children must not be allowed to continue. Many Kurdish children have been kidnapped by the PKK, and girls have been raped, executed and burned by the PKK. Their fathers and mothers are still waiting for them to come home, so we must recognise the bloody side of the PKK. The Council of Europe has values, and in accordance with them we must fight against all these organisations. We should not fund them or allow them to use their symbols at public events.

      Ms PASHAYEVA (Azerbaijan)* – I support what Mr Küçükcan said. In all our countries, we are suffering greatly from terrorist attacks, and nobody can consider themselves safe. As an Azerbaijani representative, I have suffered greatly from terrorism, having lost several friends in terrorist attacks. We are seeing an increase in the number of terrorist attacks, and we should make no distinction between terrorist organisations. We should not use different yardsticks when condemning terrorism or when adopting strategies to combat it. Countries in Europe should end such double standards in the fight against terrorism.

      In Azerbaijan, a number of terrorist attacks have been supported by our neighbours in Armenia, with many hundreds of innocent people being killed or injured. More than 2 000 people have lost their lives in the 373 terrorist incidents that have occurred. We know that some of those terrorists have been supported by Armenia. Monte Melkonian, who is known internationally as a terrorist, has been responsible for several assassinations. He played an important role during the years of occupation of Azerbaijani territories. What have the Armenians done? They have declared him a national hero and even erected a statue to him.

      Unfortunately, our appeals have fallen on deaf ears in other European countries. When terrorist attacks have happened in Paris, London, Brussels or other European cities, we have always spoken out in condemnation of them. We have come out in support of you and stood shoulder to shoulder with you in the fight against terrorism in your own countries, and we expect the same kind of support from European countries when we are targeted by terrorism. Some European countries have double standards when it comes to countries such as Azerbaijan and Turkey. Both those countries, but particularly Turkey, are doing their best to fight terrorism – there have been several martyrs – but not enough European countries have come out in support of Turkey. Terrorist organisations feel emboldened because they are even supported by some European countries, which is not acceptable in the fight against terrorism. We need a stronger show of support for Turkey.

      Ms GAFAROVA (Azerbaijan) – I thank the Turkish delegation for raising this very important issue. In the context of globalisation, processes for the preparation and acceleration of integration are particularly important for regional and international security. The role of national States is crucial in this process.

      Of course, nowadays one of the most dangerous threats to the development of international relations, security and co-operation between States is terrorism. This issue is relevant to all peoples and States. Terrorist attacks in the last few years in Turkey, France, Belgium, England and various other countries have cost hundreds of people their lives, saddened us and showed us that the threat of terrorism has reached the level where it cannot be fought by a single country or organisation alone. International terrorist organisations, military separatist groups and organised crime networks seriously threaten the entire world community. Regardless of the reasons or motivations behind them, terrorist acts should be regarded as a crime against humanity.

      Azerbaijan is one of the countries suffering from terrorism. That terrorism is an integral part of the aggressive policy of Armenia towards Azerbaijan. As a result of terrorist acts committed in Azerbaijan by Armenian terrorist organisations, more than 2,000 Azerbaijani citizens have lost their lives. At the same time, by committing environmental, cultural and other forms of terrorism, Armenia has caused huge damage to Azerbaijan, which is estimated at billions of dollars. Unfortunately, Armenia and the Sargsyan regime will not stop their terrorist activities. Therefore, we are highlighting the importance of our struggle against Armenian terrorism, which is a real danger to the sovereignty of our country, the security of our people and the development of the region, and we urge the international community to contribute to a process to end it.

      In the fight against international terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, my country is actively involved in international co-operation on bilateral and multilateral frameworks. Azerbaijan, which has signed all the international documents relating to the fight against terrorism, is constantly gathering and sharing information, and developing relevant reports. Azerbaijani peacekeepers in Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan work alongside soldiers from other countries that are also members of the anti-terror coalition, and contribute to the maintenance of international security.

      The first and most important way of fighting terrorism is co-operation. Therefore, I call on you all to spare no efforts in developing close co-operation between our States to fight and overcome this global turmoil, which threatens peace and security in our common home.

      Mr KÜRKÇÜ (Turkey) – Thank you for having this debate, through which we can convey our point of view about the ongoing conflict in Turkey.

      Yesterday, in my city of Izmir, 12 academics from Dokuz Eylül University were suspended for having signed a petition for peace in 2016. Thousands of other academics were also tried for having signed this petition, which criticised the Turkish Government’s security operations, which are carried out under the pretext of combating terrorism, and the human cost of around-the-clock curfews and indiscriminate shelling of several districts, which has already cost the lives of almost 1 000 civilians.

      The majority party in the Turkish Parliament has lifted the immunity of our parliamentary colleagues and now 12 of them are in prison for words they used in outdoor rallies that are a replica of what they have said in the Turkish Parliament. Freedom of speech is punished with imprisonment. Yesterday, Turkey’s Customs and Trade Minister criticised the march for justice by the main opposition party, which is going from Ankara to Istanbul on the European highway, by saying that Turkey is building highways not for terrorists to march on but for people to travel on. This is an oblique way of approaching the matter of terrorism and it will not help anything. Therefore, we need a clear definition of terrorism and we need the Turkish Government to establish a clear distinction between terrorism and insurgency. What we are witnessing in Turkey is not simply terrorism as such but a very complex issue, which has now assumed violent forms.

      In its declaration in 2013 – Resolution 1925 – the Assembly called on the Turkish Government to start negotiations with Kurdish insurgents and find a peaceful way out of this situation. That is in our records. I call on the Assembly to stick to that position and call on the Turkish Government again to find a peaceful way out of the Kurdish insurgency, which has cost the lives of hundreds, even thousands, of people since its beginning in 1984. The insurgency can only be stopped by finding a peaceful solution.

      Mr PACKALÉN (Finland) – Last year, 184 000 migrants came from Libya to Europe. This year, the figure is estimated to be more than 200 000. A great number of people have drowned in the Mediterranean, while voluntary organisations, which are assisting smugglers, pick up refugees from rubber dinghies that are not even capable of making it all the way to Italy. This vicious cycle needs to be stopped. If the voluntary organisations were paid money directly by the smugglers, their members would go to prison for this kind of activity, but currently there are no punishments for them. New refugee centres should be established in Libya, funded by the European Union. Refugees would be returned to those centres from the Mediterranean instead of being transported to Europe.

      In essence, the European Union needs to strengthen its external border control as much as it can. Europe has already taken in more migrants than it can integrate. The security of European people needs to be the top priority. As the security of European Union countries has quickly deteriorated due to the massive waves of migrants, each European Union country should tighten its immigration policy. Anyone with permanent or temporary residence in Europe who joins terrorist organisations abroad should be permanently banned from entering European Union countries. European Union countries should seriously consider removing the citizenship and passports of those migrants who commit terrorist activities or take part in them in any form.

      In addition to the urgent need for strict immigration policies, one must ensure that national authorities have enough funding and rights to enable them to assess and tackle terrorist threats. In Finland, there are important legislative changes to civil and military intelligence in progress, to enable the Finnish authorities to respond better and faster to terrorist threats. We need more co-operation between anti-terrorism authorities to safeguard the most important human right – each individual’s right to live.

      Mr SIMMS (Canada, Observer) – Coming from Canada, being here is always a different experience for us, simply because we are observers. I thank you, Madam President, and every colleague here for inviting us and allowing us to be here to participate in these very important debates. We are unable to vote, obviously. Nevertheless, we contribute: we sit here, we observe and we listen. I thank colleagues who have spoken previously and made some great comments.

      The observers from Canada are from different political parties. My colleague sitting to my left, Senator Maltais, is a Conservative, and I am a Liberal. When we come here, we present as a united front the values embedded in our constitution through the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We are true defenders of human rights, which is why we have such great respect for this institution.

      In Canada, there are two elements to counter-terrorism: diplomatic and parliamentary engagement, and domestic intelligence, which has not been mentioned much in this debate. We are now making cyber-security investments. We recently had a Five Eyes meeting, involving Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom, as well as Australia and New Zealand. Yesterday, we agreed to engage with private companies such as Google, Microsoft, Twitter and Facebook to discuss methods of encryption and how we can combat them so that we can find the information we need to cut down the terrorism that is organised through encrypted messages.

      We have six themes in Canada. We are a relatively small country, by population, although we are bigger than some member States, but because we live next to the most powerful nation in the world – the United States of America – we tend to punch above our weight. In terms of law enforcement, the military and intelligence, we contribute to many organisations around the world.

      I thank everybody here for their comments, particularly Mr Jensen, who said that counter-terrorism should not go against liberal values; it is about their protection – we totally agree. This is not a war against religion. These are the tenets we believe in.

      The six themes I mentioned include law enforcement, legal assistance and border and transportation security. We are now involved in a high-level global coalition against Daesh, and we are making major investments in cyber-security. We have had domestic terrorist incidents – there was an attack on our parliament several years ago – so we are investing more so that we can be involved internationally, not only with groups such as the Assembly, but with organisations around the world that work on counter-terrorism and the protection of all citizens.

      Mr ÖNAL (Turkey)* – The recent increase in terrorist threats underlines the importance of international co-operation. If we are to face down the threat, we need a rapid response at a global level. In spite of the fact that Turkey is, of course, one of the countries that has suffered the most from terrorism, Europe is not supporting us sufficiently. The PKK attacks not only the forces of law and order, but teachers, health workers, and even local civilians, who are killed mercilessly because we do not have external support. The PKK has tortured Kurdish peasants, used them as human shields and killed them. According to Amnesty International, the PKK sometimes destroys entire families of Kurdish civilians who do not support it and who are accused of being collaborators.

      In August 2015, the PKK declared so-called autonomy in the south and south-east. It supports terrorist organisations and forces people to leave their homes and even their districts. It has built trenches in some towns, put parcel bombs in certain streets and districts, and suppresses the right to life, which is of course enshrined in a number of international conventions. The PKK has been found to use municipal vehicles to carry out booby-trap car attacks and to dig trenches to stop the advance of the forces of law and order. In spite of all that, because Turkey has attacked the municipalities where there is support for terrorism, we have been criticised here in the Assembly, so what is the point of talking about international co-operation in the fight against terrorism? There have been thousands of victims of terrorist attacks in Turkey, yet we hear in the Chamber rhetoric in support of the PKK. What kind of international co-operation are we talking about?

      Turkey co-operates with all countries in the fight against Daesh. With our Operation Euphrates Shield, we are the country that has had the greatest success in the fight against Daesh, but unfortunately we do not see similar support from countries in Europe for our fight against the PKK. As part of its fight against Daesh, the United States co-operates with the PKK branch in Syria – the YPG, which is a terrorist organisation – and even supplies it with arms. That is not right. How can you fight against a terrorist organisation when you are an ally of a branch of that same organisation? It is not about good terrorists and bad terrorists; all terrorists are bad and all forms of terrorism are not only bad but lethal. Terrorism is the biggest threat facing all countries in Europe, so I appeal to members to bring pressure to bear on their governments and ask them whether they are really sincere when they talk about the fight against global terrorism.

      Ms TOPCU (Turkey)* – For years now, there have been terrorist attacks against millions of people, and millions of people have lost their lives as a result. We recognise that terrorism is one of the major threats we face today. Terrorism is of course multidimensional, but there are things that are common to all terrorists, particularly their use of violence. However prosperous a country is and whatever the ethnic origin of its people, in today’s world every country, society and community can end up being the target of terrorists.

      We know that the causes of terrorism include social, economic and political issues, as well as reasons relating to ethnic or religious discrimination, but the most significant factor is when countries manipulate terrorism and terrorist attitudes as part of their foreign policy. That is why an international policy to fight terrorism is so difficult. Our lack of a common approach strengthens terrorists and allows them to become even more violent and to commit even more bloody actions. It is becoming impossible to fight terrorism because people behind the scenes are pulling the terrorists’ strings. Terrorism is even becoming such a huge problem in those people’s countries that they themselves can do nothing about it.

      The safety and security of every country depends on that country itself. It has been recognised for many years that each country is responsible for its own security. Voltaire said that people who were willing to be manipulated by others were nothing more than slaves. That kind of thing has been said for hundreds of years and remains true today. Whether we are talking about the PKK, the YPG or other groups, it is clear that in Turkey we are fighting this scourge on many fronts. We recognise it for what it is. Let us not forget the truth of the situation: if Turkey is left alone to fight all these adversaries, the effects will be felt by Europe and by the whole world – no one will be spared. We cannot hide behind some idea of peace. There can be no peace when there are people who are willing to go out and kill anybody: teachers, children, babies and pregnant women – even babies in the womb. We know what is involved, including drug trafficking. Supposedly in the name of peace, people are involved in the kinds of activities I have mentioned and are launching attacks on others. When are we finally going to stand up and fight?

      Mr ROUQUET (France)* – For some years now, our continent has faced a new form of terrorism that seeks to impinge on the cohesion of our European countries and the unity of our peoples. Owing to that, the fight against terrorism has become a must if we wish to protect the security of our fellow citizens and to defend our democratic achievements in our pluralist and open societies.

      More than ever before, that struggle is premised on co-operation between States. A lot of progress has been made in that respect, although unfortunately not all attempted attacks have been thwarted, as shown in tragic circumstances in recent events in Manchester and London. Our governments are currently mobilising tools such as intelligence sharing, co-ordinating our stabilisation activities – we are helping to stabilise displaced populations in the conflict zones in Iraq, Syria and the north of the Sahel – and joint initiatives by several States to deal with social networks and the giants of the Internet.

      The successes of the policy choices made by our States are by definition not particularly visible. Notwithstanding that, it is important to point out that, since 2014, dozens of planned attacks have been foiled on the continent of Europe. Unfortunately, the prevention of terrorism is not always successful. Many member States of the Council of Europe – I am thinking of France, Belgium, Germany, Turkey, Sweden and the United Kingdom by way of a few examples – have suffered terrible attacks in the past three years.

      As I see it, all those failures – any attack that results in the death of innocent parties is undeniably a failure of our democracies – are the consequence of one-off mistakes and not of obvious errors made by public authorities, and yet at every turn our societies have demonstrated their resilience and cohesion. We must foster that mindset if we want to be stronger than fear and hatred, and if we wish to defeat terrorism. Faced with terrorism, we must never let our guard down when it comes to our principles. The rule of law is not something we should quibble over. In fact, it is a guarantee. We should therefore expect our politicians to be dignified in public debate. Let us not be divided by discord, because that is precisely the trap that Daesh and its affiliates are trying to get us to fall into.

      Mr Rafael HUSEYNOV (Azerbaijan) – The nightmare of terror is gradually enlarging its scale and reaching more and more countries. We raise our voices, express our solidarity and try to be more organised against terrorism only after the perpetration of terrible terrorist attacks. Fifteen years ago, on 14 June 2002, I had prepared the motion for a recommendation entitled “Terrorist organisations protected by Armenia in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan”. I called on the Assembly to debate that problem seriously and to take measures, but there was no action. At that time, terror had not revived in Europe and the world as it has now. We are now witnessing a terrible situation, but the silence of that time directly affects it.

      Armenia, one of the most active States in supporting and instigating terrorism on a global scale, is inside the Council of Europe. Let me draw the Assembly’s attention to a few undeniable facts about the involvement of Armenia in State terrorism – the facts could occupy several books. ASALA, the Armenian terrorist organisation famous for its numerous terrorist attacks in Europe and the Near East, has considerably enlarged its geographical reach since the late 1980s, and now covers the South Caucasus as well. From the beginning of Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan, ASALA perpetrated more than 30 grave terrorist attacks in the 1990s in Azerbaijan in close co-operation with the Armenian secret services.

      The first author of so-called underground terrorism is also in ASALA. The most vivid example of Armenian support for terrorism at State level is Monte Melkonian. He was arrested twice by French law enforcement agencies after terrorist attacks perpetrated in Paris, but then released, which was when he came to Armenia. He is one of the most well-known names of the global terror network and his nickname is Hannibal. He headed a special terrorist group during the bloody and tragic Khojaly genocide of Azerbaijanis perpetrated in February 1992. By the way, ASALA, together with its sub-groups Arabo and Aramo, played a leading role during the genocide of Khojaly.

      Today, ASALA and other Armenian terrorist organisations are being integrated into the Armenian secret services and armed forces. Flags belonging to Armenian terrorist organisations have emerged in the territories occupied by Armenia and among the external forces patronising it. The flag of ASALA was raised in combat positions on the contact line towards the District of Tartar, which is an important ground for launching international anti-terrorist operations in those territories.

      I fully support Mr Küçükcan’s remarks and agree with him that, irrespective of the venue and purposes of terrorism, or the personality of the perpetrator, terror is a crime against humanity, and everybody should think initially of themselves, their families and their motherlands. They should be prepared for a decisive fight against that terrible evil.

       The PRESIDENT* – That concludes the list of speakers.

      I remind you that, at the end of a current affairs debate, the Assembly is not asked to vote, but the matter has enabled an interesting exchange between members of the Assembly. The Bureau may at a later stage suggest that it be referred to a responsible committee for a report.

2. Putting an end to sexual violence and harassment of women in public space

      The PRESIDENT* – We now come to the debate on the report from the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination, titled “Putting an End to Sexual Violence and Harassment of Women in Public Space”, Document 14337, presented by Ms Françoise Hetto-Gaasch, and an opinion presented by Mr Stefan Schennach, Document 14361, on behalf of the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media.

      I remind the Assembly that a three-minute limit on speeches in this debate was agreed yesterday.

      I call Ms Hetto-Gaasch, rapporteur, to present the report. You have 13 minutes in total, which you may divide between presentation of the Report and reply to the debate.

      Ms HETTO-GAASCH (Luxembourg)* – The Assembly will recall the Cologne attacks and the new year events in 2015 that affected other cities, which led to a public outcry. One has to appreciate that sexual harassment and aggression against women happens everywhere in the world all the time. It creates a feeling of fear and a lack of safety. It jeopardises women’s lives. The report deals with questions that have an effect on equality between men and women. It follows the Gunnarsson report and urgent debate.

      Since that time, some countries have reacted – some more than others. Harassment seems to have become commonplace in streets and public transport. Various attacks have shocked public opinion, and led to outcries and a great deal of debate. You will find examples in the report, be they events in Turkey, Germany, Belgium, France and other countries.

      Harassment creates a feeling of a lack of safety and leads women to adapt their behaviour. They have coping and avoidance strategies. They might dress in a different way, trying not to attract attention. They might put headphones on even if they are not listening to music, just to avoid hearing insults. Some women end up isolating themselves. Some feel ashamed, others feel guilty and some experience post-traumatic stress, and the lack of reaction from witnesses makes things considerably worse. In such situations, people are more likely to step in if there is no one else around. That is the bystander effect – an abdication of responsibility. The perpetrators of the aggression are convinced that they own public space and can do anything they want, and the indifference of the bystanders reinforces the perpetrators’ desire to dominate the space.

Who are the harassers? A doctor of sociology in Geneva says that they can come from any class, culture or age group. For them, women are an object of desire. According to researchers, these men have no empathy for their victims – they see them as objects. In that context, we talk about objectivising and dehumanising women. In groups, people can feel able to do things they would not do if they were on their own. They feel less responsibility, and cast aside their identity and the normal constraints – this is de-individualisation. A specific category to mention is those people who rub up against women – strangers – on crowded public transport for sexual gratification. This is a mental disorder, a kind of obsession with unusual sexual behaviour with people who do not consent. We particularly have to consider that minors can be subject to such behaviour as well. A common pattern here is that the perpetrators might have been subject to child abuse themselves. There is a problem with managing the underlying anger and, therefore, a need to dominate women. To prevent such behaviour we must educate children and bring them up to respect others, master their emotions and cope with frustration and conflict without recourse to violence.

So who can contribute to doing something about the violence? There are, of course, the forces of law and order and, as the special committee of inquiry said after the Cologne events, we have to anticipate risk situations so that we can plan and react. There has to be a greater presence of the forces of law and order in the public space. We have to co-ordinate prevention so as to achieve results. We need to increase public awareness, which is, indeed, being attempted, particularly on public transport. We need public demonstrations to combat this kind of thing and the insecurity that is created. New technologies that offer a number of ways to combat the problem include “HandsAway”, an app that can highlight sexist attacks. There are a number of interesting apps that enable victims immediately to flag up aggression, and Street Angels can then be present and help: the French “My Chaperone”; “BSafe”, which is a GPS tracking system that works in Paris, London and New York; and “WayGuard”, in Germany, which enables the victim to request help.

It is up to the media to be as fair as possible in their coverage of violence against women. It is important that we enhance the visibility of awareness campaigns and help any charities or NGOs that are working against violence. We also need to think about how we organise public space. It should be gender-neutral and organised in such a way that it is not so in favour of men. It should be egalitarian and welcoming for everyone, so that there are spaces where everyone feels comfortable. There should be no zones reserved for men. We need polyvalent spaces, where everyone can walk about, play sport and so on. We need to involve men in combating harassment. They should stand up and be counted publicly, denounce this kind of thing and play a role in changing attitudes.

I ask everyone to support the draft resolution and implement it in their countries. I appeal to member States to sign and ratify the Istanbul Convention and I stress the need to show zero tolerance towards sexual harassment in public spaces.

      (Ms Mendes, Vice-President of the Assembly, took the Chair in place of Ms Gambaro.)

THE PRESIDENT* – Ms Hetto-Gaasch, you have five minutes and 40 seconds left to respond to all the speakers in the debate. The next speaker is Mr Schennach, who will introduce the opinion of the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media. Mr Schennach, you have three minutes.

Mr SCHENNACH (Austria)* – Once again I stand before you, and I have the honour of presenting an opinion in response to a report by Ms Hetto-Gaasch. All I can say is, congratulations. I am so impressed. As far as Ms Hetto-Gaasch’s appeal is concerned, I can but subscribe to it. We should all support the report.

The report touches on an issue – a wound if you like – that we need to deal with. We have come some way in doing that, through the awareness raising we have being doing these past few years, but the situation is still complicated. For instance, in playgrounds young girls are pushed to the sides. If young boys learn that they can displace young girls in that way they will unfortunately take that lesson with them into adult life. As for the young girls, they just watch the boys fighting, playing and doing whatever they want to do. And it is not only in playgrounds; it is in all areas where young girls and young women are unfortunately subject to attacks and harassment. This is about revisiting public space. Parks need to be redesigned, and Ms Hetto-Gaasch made the point that we now have real problems with unacceptable practices on public transport.

As far as the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media is concerned, we have decided to pick up on a particular point: zero tolerance and the necessary awareness-raising campaigns. We have taken the liberty of tabling some amendments on awareness raising in schools, to ensure that we have role models, that we raise awareness among both male and female teachers, and that we do not have this displacement of young girls being pushed to the sides by young boys in schools. We also speak about the responsibility of the media in our amendments. After all, the media produce stereotypes, and they do not seem to have the courage to tackle the issue. Ms Hetto-Gaasch rightly said that people act as bystanders or turn away when women and girls are being harassed. You need to have courage and speak out, and we call upon the media to do that.

Turning to the chair of our committee, Ms Centemero, I would like to mention a point I forgot about when we were making motions for amendments. It is something that struck me after I arrived here in Strasbourg: the sexualisation of young girls, the posters on our streets advertising sexualisation. Ms Centemero, surely that is something your committee should deal with in the very near future. May I ask you to take up that fight as well?

      Mr GRIN (Switzerland, Spokesperson for the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe)* – On behalf of ALDE, I thank Ms Hetto-Gaasch for her report, which contains a detailed analysis of sexual violence and harassment of women in public spaces. The attacks in Cologne on the night of 31 December 2015, to which thousands of women fell victim, brought the subject out into the open. Of course, sexual violence and the harassment of women in public spaces are not specific to Cologne; they are universal problems that have a negative psychological impact on victims. The threat of sexual violence and harassment makes women fearful and insecure, and that affects their day-to-day lives. They may go out less, particularly in the evenings, or avoid areas in which they do not feel safe.

      Verbal sexual harassment is a form of violence against women, although it is often ignored or thought of as less serious than physical violence. It can cause women to experience stress in the workplace or on the street, and give rise to permanent feelings of insecurity, guilt and shame. The report deals with harassment in public spaces, but we must also combat the growing phenomenon of harassment on social networks.

      The report underlines men’s role in preventing such violence in public areas and makes it clear that the media have a responsibility to report objectively on the matter. The draft resolution, which was unanimously adopted by the committee, airs the various problems and calls on all member States and observers of the Council of Europe to react quickly to the problem and to promote non-violence and equality between men and women. It suggests that we do so by educating young people in schools, by running awareness raising campaigns and by implementing prevention measures, such as providing information to refugees about host countries’ customs and traditions. We must encourage zero tolerance and end impunity by pursuing those responsible for such violence through the courts.

      The amendments are designed to strengthen the educational response by raising awareness of the need to respect human dignity. We need to improve teachers’ understanding of such violence and help them better to identify its silent victims. Amendment 5 is designed to promote dialogue with suppliers and sellers of video games and mobile phones. I appeal to the members of the Assembly to adopt the resolutions and the amendments.

      Ms KERESTECİOĞLU DEMİR (Turkey, Spokesperson for the Group of the Unified European Left) – I thank the rapporteur, Ms Hetto-Gaasch, for her great efforts in preparing this report on sexual violence and harassment, which are significant problems for every woman. Every female member of this Assembly must have experienced the same feelings. The prevalence of sexual harassment can sometimes prevent us from going out, working or using public transport. Concerns about sexual harassment at home, at work and on the street can cause us to hide our bodies and our sexuality.

      Unfortunately, almost every woman in Turkey is exposed to street harassment at some point in her life. Street harassment and sexual violence are common, because the government has not developed policies to promote the equality and freedom of women, and many instances of street harassment go unpunished. According to research from 2016, 74% of women using public transportation in Istanbul do not feel safe, and 74% of respondents to the study had witnessed or been subject to acts of sexual violence in public transport.

      Women’s struggle against sexual harassment has gone on for a long time. In Istanbul in 1989, a group of feminist women organised a demonstration in the public arena for the first time. In our hands, we held purple-beribboned needles, which had belonged to our grandmothers, to draw attention to street harassment. This is known as the purple needle campaign. Women sold such needles to other women, with an ironic marketing message, to use as an effective weapon against harassment. Women have since organised dozens of protests against street harassment.

      As the report successfully explains, harassment is never unique to one country or culture. Around the world, women are blamed for sexual violence in the public arena. The victims of violence may be asked questions such as “What were you doing on the street alone at night?” and “Why were you wearing shorts and tights?” Even the courts may consider such things mitigating factors. It is not enough for the law to be good; judges have to apply the law. They should show zero tolerance of sexual abuse, instead of looking for mitigating factors. It is crucial to make it clear that police forces and related institutions will take very strict measures to prevent such abuse and that they will follow a zero-tolerance policy, as happened after the attacks in Cologne.

      I call on all member States to sign the Istanbul Convention and implement the measures for combating harassment and sexual violence. Once again, I express my support for this excellent report.

      Ms KYRIAKIDES (Cyprus, Spokesperson for the Group of the European People’s Party) – On behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party, I congratulate our colleague Ms Hetto-Gaasch and the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination on raising awareness of this important topic. Sexual violence and harassment are not minor offences. Violence against women happens every day, in every country, but the majority of incidents are never reported. Sexual violence and harassment occur in the street, on public transport, in schools and in the workplace.

      The failure to condemn such behaviour has almost normalised it, and demeaning words, gestures and actions are more or less tolerated in our society. This must stop. Implicit and explicit sexual violence and harassment affect women’s access to fundamental rights and hold back their inclusion and potential in society. Women are very well aware of what is and what is not a genuine compliment. They know when a compliment becomes intrusive, insulting, vulgar or uncomfortable. The problem is that only some women are likely to react to unacceptable body language and coercive behaviour. The overwhelming majority of women will bypass the incident and not press charges, while focusing on what they did wrong. They will ask themselves, “Is it the clothes I wear? Was it something I said?” They will blame themselves and bear the harassment. The report details the negative repercussions of such an experience for victims’ social and personal development.

      We need to do much more. We need to ratify the Istanbul Convention, which provides for a wide variety of measures. We need to raise awareness, and we need to change attitudes and stereotypes. Of course, we need to respect cultural diversity and traditions in our European societies but, in some Council of Europe member States, the boundaries are blurred, and perpetrators, rather than victims, are protected. This is not a women’s issue; it is relevant to the whole of society. Men can play an important role in fighting all forms of violence against women. The only way forward, as Mr Schennach and others have said, is to adopt a zero-tolerance approach.

      Ms De SUTTER (Belgium, Spokesperson for the Socialist Group) – Sexual violence and harassment in public spaces is an important and urgent matter, and I congratulate the rapporteur on a comprehensive and balanced report. I will limit my intervention to some specific points in the report.

      Although sexual violence is often gender-based, we should be careful not to see all men as the enemies of all women. First, many male offenders have themselves been victims of sexual violence. By protecting men too, and raising awareness, we are also breaking a cycle of future offending. Secondly, men should be allies to women in annihilating sexual violence. Most men do not condone sexual violence, and bringing the subject to the public’s attention may well be a relief for them, since they realise then that they do not need to accept a culture of sexual aggression.

      I also want to reiterate that sexual violence occurs in all social circles and in all cultures, and is not specific to certain ethnic or religious groups. Moreover, it is not only women who are victims of sexual violence, but so too are children, men, and LGBTI persons. They should not be forgotten in our efforts.

      We indeed need more awareness campaigns. However, we must be careful not to reinforce paternalistic and macho clichés, and I am sceptical if the report encourages speaking to men in their function of fathers, friends and so forth, because we are then perpetuating the idea that a woman’s value is linked to her relationship to a man. It is not because a woman is a sister, mother or daughter of some man that she should be respected; we should respect women because they are human beings and worthy of respect in their own right. Instead of the idea that men are knights riding to the rescue of women, we should encourage them to empower women.

      Inquiries into sexual harassment and sexual violence should be conducted by independent bodies, because governments sometimes use data on gender-based violence in order to target minorities as part of their anti-migration policies. In this respect, I stress that asylum seekers and refugees are not more prone to sexual violence than European people. Research in the Netherlands has shown that people of other origins are more prone to what women considered “light” sexual violence – whistling or catcalling, for example – but that men of Dutch origin committed more heavy forms of sexual violence: touching, following, persistent harassment, and rape.

      I applaud the report for adopting a zero-tolerance approach to sexual violence. It is never okay to sexually harass a woman, even when and where it is still considered culturally appropriate. However, such repression is not the only answer. Research also shows that police forces do not always make women feel safer, and nor do they prevent sexual violence. We therefore need, on the other side, to educate police forces about sexual violence.

      Respecting the physical and sexual integrity of women is not just a feminist matter; it is a human rights matter.

      Ms ŞAHİN USTA (Turkey, Spokesperson for the European Conservatives Group)* – This subject addresses one of the major problems encountered by women globally. I thank the rapporteur for her in-depth analysis, and I wish to highlight a number of issues.

      First, there should be no impunity. People who sexually harass women should be held accountable, and therefore the forces of law and order must be able to take the necessary measures. We need to strengthen our legislative arsenal so that people who commit such crimes know they will be severely punished. We need to have a zero tolerance policy towards sexual assault and rape and to ensure that the punishment really does fit the severity of the crime.

      Secondly, in order to eradicate this problem, we need to educate children from a very early age, so that they respect each other’s personal space and physical integrity. We must also ensure that children understand that problems and issues can be resolved without violence. That must be taught in the home as well as at school. Therefore, we must support awareness raising campaigns intended to prevent sexual violence, and we must educate children through such campaigns and in other ways to understand all the issues involved.

      We must also take due account of the suffering caused to the victims of sexual harassment and assault. The consequences stay with the victims for years; people go on living in fear. Moreover, what is shown and written in the media can cause them further trauma; many of the ways in which women are portrayed can reinforce negative messages. We need to support victims, therefore.

      What we saw in Cologne and elsewhere shows how problematic the existence of women in public spaces can be. Women need to be stronger; they need to speak up and defend their rights. They also need to make it clear that potential attackers must not be allowed to continue to behave in such ways; there can be no humiliation of women in public spaces. We need to put an end to this once and for all, and men clearly have a major responsibility to bear.

      The PRESIDENT – As Ms Hetto-Gaasch would rather respond at the end, we will move on to those on the speakers’ list. I call Mr Ghiletchi.

      Mr GHILETCHI (Republic of Moldova) – I thank Ms Hetto-Gaasch for presenting this important report. In common with the majority of the reports presented and debated in this Assembly, it addresses a very serious issue, but I feel that at times it fails to mention important details and omits important solutions that might work in practice.

      One reason for undertaking this report was the events in Cologne on new year’s eve 2015. What I find particularly interesting is the fact that the report does not mention anything about the perpetrators of the sexual harassment. On the contrary, it states: “This phenomenon is universal and can affect all women, while the perpetrators of this violence come from all social categories and all cultures and are of all ages." That might be the case in general, but it is definitely not the case when talking about what happened in Cologne that night. The majority of the news outlets wrote in describing the events that “about a thousand men, described by police as mainly migrants of North African or Arab origin, began massing between Cologne’s railway station and cathedral." If that is the reality, I find no reason to not take into account what are the roots and who exactly are the perpetrators.

      The report continues: “The media also have an important responsibility to cover the facts objectively by focusing on the violence and its impact on the victims instead of on the behaviour of the women subjected to that violence or on the actual or presumed origins of their attackers.” Since when is it not objective to mention the background of an attacker? Yes, Mr Schennach, courage is important, but objectivity is also important. Moreover, we are talking about 1 000 attackers, so it should be the other way around and it should be considered unfair and biased to completely disregard the background of 1 000 attackers.

      The last point that I find difficult is that member States should “implement specific preventive measures, especially by developing school sex- and relationship-education programmes and by providing support for education staff responsible for delivering them, with the aim of informing children about gender equality, gender stereotypes, the impact of sexual violence on victims and the notion of consent”. With all due respect, Ms Hetto-Gaasch, do you not think that we are missing an important piece here? It seems that we have forgotten about parents. What is the role of the family? Why do we not consider that the family plays an important role in this? We say to the government or policy makers that they have the right to decide about education, but is that part of any convention? I know that the Convention on Human Rights guarantees that parents have this right, however, and our Assembly adopted a resolution and recommendation reinforcing that fundamental right.

      I wish the report had taken account of these important aspects of the issue of violence and sexual harassment, but I will nevertheless support it for its many good parts.

      Mr TORNARE (Switzerland)* – Like my colleagues, I congratulate Ms Hetto-Gaasch on presenting an excellent report from our committee.

      The public space should be a place for freedom and fraternity; it should also be a secular space. Everybody should thrive within that space, whatever their sex, religion or social class. To live together, we need to respect one another, and the public space should not be at the mercy of small autocrats who try to dominate it. Public spaces do not belong to them.

      This is a universal, not just a local, finding. We sometimes forget that the exclusion of women in some public spaces is actually a form of violence. We have seen this recently in some of our countries – there are cafes, squares and restaurants to which women have no access.

      The objectives of this report are clear: to ratify the Istanbul Convention, as my colleagues have already said. Mr Grin talked about social media and social networks. That is very much to the point because things have become paralysing for women. The report mentions awareness-raising campaigns, prevention and the role that the media play – they do not play it perfectly in some countries. Governments, too, are falling short of the mark.

      We are not talking about stigmatising a particular part of the population such as refugees or asylum seekers. That is a populist discourse that unfortunately we hear more and more. We are talking about prevention, and since Cologne 2015, that has become a categorical imperative. It is a matter of urgency.

Prevention also means zero tolerance and sanctions. The report refers to checking alcohol and drug use. As the former mayor of a big city, Geneva, I know that we need to look at spatial planning. Very often urban planning can help to foster women’s fulfilment in public spaces; as long as certain obstacles are removed, they can thrive. We must remember that obstacles are very often in our mind, and we have to change our mentality. One of our colleagues said, quite rightly, that we need to speak out against the kind of macho discourse that makes women feel guilty about their actions.

This is a universal problem which has been around for ever. Dark forces and male chauvinist approaches have crept into religious discourse – that is simply irresponsible. Our policies should be proactive. As members of the Council of Europe, we should remember that we were premised on universal values, and we need to recall them. Violence against women in a public space should be seen as unacceptable.

      Ms FRESKO-ROLFO (Monaco)* - “When I go out, I sometimes have the impression of being ogled as if I were a slab of meat in a shop. I’m told ‘You’re fit’, or ‘Hi, darling’.” So says Julia, aged 20. Hayatte, aged 26, says, “I don’t put lipstick on any more when I go out.” These words, taken from a French magazine article, shocked me deeply. Why can women not just be ordinary women in an everyday environment? Why can they not live as they would like to?

      I thank Ms Hetto-Gaasch for this excellent report, which reminds us how difficult it is in today’s world to move beyond stereotypes and to fight against the psychological violence generated by harassment in public areas. The right kind of town planning is important because it ensures that there are spaces where women can live their lives freely and in tranquillity. Women come up against sexist advertising; they are prisoners of a role foisted upon them which prevents them living their lives freely.

      What can we do when most infrastructure for recreational purposes is designed by men? Football and basketball grounds abound but access is difficult for girls and women. Very often town planners relegate girls and young women to public parks. If we changed our educational methods, we could achieve much. Education is a most powerful tool – or weapon – when it comes to changing the world, according to Nelson Mandela. Girls do not necessarily want to grow up playing with dolls, nor are boys by definition destined to play football. In children’s story books, boys are the saviours and girls the hapless princesses, fragile and incapable of defending themselves. I appeal to the writers of such books to put an end to these stereotypes.

I encourage colleagues from the Council of Europe to support the report and enable women to feel safe in their everyday lives.

Mr KARLSSON (Sweden) – I thank Mrs Hetto-Gaasch for her very important report and its conclusions. It highlights the problem of sexual violence and harassment, but today’s discussion is about something bigger – it is about human dignity. Let me develop my thoughts on this.

It has been almost 100 years since women and men gained equal political rights in Sweden. In the pursuit of social and economic equality and gender equality, the Scandinavian welfare model was successfully designed. The basic idea was that women and men would acquire their social rights as individuals. The development of the welfare state became an important part of women’s emancipation and was governed by the principle that women and men should have the same power and opportunity to shape society and their own lives. Nevertheless, the journey for reaching the total goal of gender equality and equal political, social and economic rights is continuing. For example, on average, women earn 16% less per hour than men. The pay gap affects everyday life in a very tangible way. It determines possibilities to travel on vacation or to buy new clothes when the old ones wear out.

Violence against women represents another dimension of gender inequality. Gender-based violence happens everywhere, in every society, regardless of social background, whether at home, at work, at school, in the street or online. Combating gender-based violence and protecting and supporting victims is extremely important.

Gender equality is a value in itself. All men and women are equal; it affects prosperity and success. A European Union report stated that, when both men and women’s potential is taken advantage of, it has positive effects on economic growth as a whole for creating jobs.

Gender equality concerns us all; it is not only a question for women. It is our responsibility to promote gender equality, react when we see sexual harassment, respond to sexist remarks and challenge the beliefs and social norms that tolerate gender inequality. Because it is a problem for society as a whole, it is the responsibility of us all.

Ms TOPCU (Turkey)* – I thank our rapporteur, who has done an excellent job. This is a very detailed and comprehensive report that looks at all aspects of this issue.

Wherever we go, we see the effects of globalisation and new technologies. We are now living in a world without borders in many ways. We have heard a lot about technology today, including the fifth industrial revolution, and about the benefits that it will bring us all. We hear about drones and all the wonderful things that they will be able to do, and all kinds of new technologies that will transform our lives and the future of humankind.

      That is where we are, and that is all marvellous, but on the other hand, we are still talking about something with which we have been grappling since the earliest days of human civilisation: an age-old problem. What is the problem? Where does it come from? Who is creating it, and why have we not yet managed to solve it? Why are we still talking about it?

      The fact is that at most meetings on women’s issues, most of the participants are women. We can see that. We face a problem, and given the existing structures, we still have a long way to go to resolve it. Look at humankind. We have two genders – half the people we deal with are men, and half are women – yet women’s issues seem predominantly to interest women. The overwhelming majority of people who come to meetings about women’s issues are women. That is a very primitive approach. If we are ever to resolve the problem, we need to take a holistic approach, starting with education. There is a lot to be done there. There are also things to be done on the media and legislation; there is a lot to do. When it comes to violence against women in public spaces, there are things that we must do in both the short and the long term.

      In the short term, we need to establish zero tolerance for harassment and violence against women. We need to raise awareness of it and to create call centres so that if women find themselves in a situation where they do not feel safe, they can get in touch with someone. We need to use new technology. Women in Turkey can now use a kind of ring with an app attached to it that they can press to alert a call centre if there is any kind of problem. We need to talk about this together – men and women – to solve the problem.

      Mr THIÉRY (Belgium)* – Ms Hetto-Gaasch, thank you for this excellent report that takes into account phenomena that are not new in any way but are growing. Sexual violence and harassment of women in public spaces needs particular attention, which is why your work is so good. We must continue to denounce this thing that has become commonplace in the street, on public transport and basically everywhere. The fight is important and has yielded results. In the committee, we have shared our experience, and a number of initiatives have resulted and been presented in various member States, leading to recommendations to fight this scourge.

      Worryingly, we have found that harassment does not happen only in certain countries: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights research showed that by the age of 15 or even younger, between 45% and 55% of girls in the European Union have been victims of sexual harassment. These figures are most alarming. This phenomenon happens across the board; it is universal. We must be aware of that.

      You mentioned various examples, which we also discussed in committee, including new year’s eve in Cologne, as well as instances in Turkey, Belgium and Portugal. This problem is all-pervasive. It is also important to mention the psychological effect that such abuse can have on women, not just at the time but later. Sometimes women are so overwhelmed by what happens to them that they cannot overcome it. New technology will help us to tackle the problem to some extent; you mentioned various initiatives taken by some countries. We must draw on technologies of the future, but any kind of initiative in this respect is welcome to help combat this phenomenon. You referred to the Istanbul Convention, which is the most advanced piece of law so far against any form of violence against women. We must encourage all countries and member States to ratify and apply the convention. The Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media has done another piece of work leading to several amendments, which were unanimously adopted, complementing the work that you have done.

      Ms BÎZGAN-GAYRAL (Romania) – Unfortunately, sexual harassment and other forms of violence in public spaces are still an everyday reality for women and girls around Europe, whether in urban or rural areas. The statistics are horrifying. Various studies indicate the magnitude of the phenomenon no matter what European country is analysed. For example, in Croatia, a study in 2012 showed that 99% of women had experienced some form of street harassment in their lifetime and that 50% had experienced it by the age of 18. In France in 2013, one in five women said that they had suffered from verbal harassment and one in 10 said that they had been kissed or caressed without their consent.

In Romania in 2014, one in three women said that they had experienced at least one form of violence in their lifetime and one in four had been physically and/or sexually abused by their partner. In the Netherlands in 2016, 59% said that they had experienced some form of harassment, including whistling, hissing, aggressive demands for sex, following and sexual assault. In the United Kingdom in 2016, 64% of women of all ages said that they had experienced unwanted sexual harassment in public places.

From unwanted sexual remarks to touching, rape and even femicide, women and girls experience and fear too many types of harassment and violence in their own homes, in the streets, on public transportation and in their schools and workplaces. Violent behaviour against women and girls affects our everyday lives and limits the application of our fundamental rights, from freedom of movement to education, work and participation in public life – not to mention its immediate and future negative impact on physical and psychological health and well-being.

There is an important battle to be led for gender-sensitive education. “Education is the most powerful weapon one can use to change the world,” as Nelson Mandela said. It is crucial that we work together to educate men and boys about these issues, so that they can be more aware, avoid engaging in harassing or abusive violent behaviours and speak out when they see it happening. It is also essential that we educate women and girls about their rights, where they can get help and how to help themselves through high self-esteem, unbiased and non-stereotyped behaviour, solidarity and sorority.

Why is it so important that we take a stand and action on harassment and public violence against women and girls? It concerns not only the victims but us all as a community, especially as women and girls make up half the total population. To be more precise, the victims are our daughters, our sisters, our friends and colleagues. This violence is everywhere. We must remember that a community that blames or excludes one group today may do the same to another group tomorrow. No matter what the form of violence, no matter what the reason – whether it is gender-based, ethnic, racial or religious – we are all victims, because a divided society cannot prosper. Many risks threaten our long fight for unity nowadays. To tolerate evil is to encourage and enable it. Let us stand together against violence on women and girls as one more issue that unites us and strengthens our value as modern society. Thank you for this report.

      Mr NISSINEN (Sweden) – We owe the rapporteur, Ms Hetto-Gaasch, and the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination, a big thank you for taking up the urgent issue of sexual violence against women. They did so none too soon, for sexual violence and harassment have become a true epidemic in many member States.

      The report deals extensively with the dreadful events in Cologne on new year’s eve 2015, which clearly demonstrated the close relationship between sexual violence and harassment of women on the one hand, and massive immigration – especially of younger men from outside Europe who have a different value system when it comes to the treatment of women – on the other. In Cologne, the young men were mainly from northern Africa. In my country, young men from northern Africa, the Middle East and central Asia are clearly over-represented when it comes to sexual violence and harassment of women.

      As you know, Sweden has admitted up to half a million new immigrants from outside Europe since 2010. The preponderance of young men from outside Europe among immigrants to Sweden has led to a gender imbalance: there are 115 men to every 100 women in the 15 to 19 age group. That imbalance, which is unprecedented across the world and historically, creates enormous social tension and fear. Many women in Sweden no longer dare to go out alone after dark. Swedish police reported last week that rapes and attempted rapes in Sweden have increased by 16% so far in 2017 compared with the same period in 2016. There have been a staggering 2 200 cases in the past five months. Every day, the police drop 13 reports of rape because they do not have time to process them, and only 8% of reported rapes are prosecuted.

      I fully agree with the call in the report for member States to take strong action and for our Assembly to state firmly that the dignity and physical safety of women are hallmarks of European and Western civilisation and must be respected by all. In 1280, one of Sweden’s first kings, Birger Jarl, enacted a law for the protection of women – the so-called Kvinnofrid – to shield them from violence of all kinds. Given the current situation in Sweden and Europe, he is presumably spinning in his grave. Let us hope that the report we adopt today will make him rest a little easier.

      Ms BLONDIN (France)* – Ms Hetto-Gaasch’s detailed report reminds us that violence against women sadly takes many forms and is present in the public space. Such violence prevents women from moving about freely and obliges them to adapt their behaviour to fit in with a male-dominated system. In the words of Danielle Bousquet, who chairs the High Gender Equality Council in France, women do not have the right to be fully free in the public space. The report clearly demonstrates the universal nature of the male domination that has been handed down to us and that is based on prejudice.

      I would like to highlight two points. First, walking safety audits, which originated in Canada, allow women, who may feel ill at ease in the street because of social pressure, or may not want to go into a café where there are a lot of men because they do not want to feel the male gaze on them or hear what the men are saying, to take back ownership of public places and craft their own security and safety. Walking safety audits allow women to identify areas that create a sense of insecurity for them. As you know, men do not look at things in the same way as women. Too often, those who make urban planning decisions are men – decisions are made by men and predominantly for men. However, thanks to these audits, women have been able to reclaim their right to public space. Since 2014, a network in France has co-ordinated a national trial of walking safety audits, in which the ministries responsible for women’s rights and for urban planning are involved. When women can go out and walk freely, everyone in a neighbourhood benefits.

      Secondly, according to a number of studies, all women have at some time been victims of sexual harassment or sexual aggression on public transport. As Ms Hetto-Gaasch said, 85% of women in Paris believe that they would not be helped if they were to fall victim to sexual abuse on the Metro. That is why two years ago, 12 specific measures targeted at enhancing women’s safety and security on public transport were included in a national plan to combat sexual harassment and violence in France. Those measures refer to prevention, rapid response and better support for victims. In addition, a special police unit has been set up and appropriate sanctions introduced.

      I am afraid my speech was intended to last four minutes, so I have not quite come to the end of what I wanted to say, but I hope that our words will be reflected in action in our countries.

      Ms ÅBERG (Sweden) – I thank Ms Hetto-Gaasch for her important report. Sexual violence and harassment of women are derived from the view that women are inferior to men. That view is significantly more common in patriarchal cultures than in societies with a high degree of equality. It is therefore highly relevant to pose the question, “What is the role of the perpetrator’s origin and values?” Society must find relevant correlations to solve the problem.

      The sexual assaults in Cologne, Stockholm and other European cities, where women were held down by several men, who took turns to assault them, were committed by men with North African, Middle Eastern and central Asian origins. Sexual assaults committed by several perpetrators acting in collusion stem from societies where women and children do not have any rights – where rape is blamed on women because they had not sufficiently veiled themselves. Many politicians do not dare to speak about that, for fear of being accused of racism, but it has nothing to do with racism.

      For integration to work, we must speak about the rights and responsibilities we have in society. There has been a worrying development in Sweden, where certain suburbs have become their own isolated societies in which clan leaders and imams have taken power from politicians and administrative authorities. In those suburbs, women cannot move freely, sit in cafés or talk to men they know. Brothers control their sisters, and single mothers are controlled by their sons. Women who do not follow those unwritten laws are renounced, or even murdered, by their kin. Norms that oppress women can never be accepted. They must be completely condemned and fought without mercy.

      Ms BİLGEHAN (Turkey)* – Imagine that you were travelling home on the bus at the end of a working day, you were tired and perhaps thinking of your sick child at home, and you found yourself exposed to sexual harassment. What could be more humiliating than that?

      Harassment is a form of violence against women that is very often ignored or considered less serious than physical violence. As the report shows, however, 98% of Belgian women say they have been victims of harassment on the street at least once, and the figure is even higher in France, where 100% of female users of public transport say that they have been victims of a form of harassment at least once on public transport. In my own country of Turkey, harassment and sexual violence in public spaces has been the subject of much heated debate recently; fortunately, there has been a strong reaction against such behaviour. This is a universal phenomenon, and it is not restricted to certain countries.

      More worryingly, although such violence occurs in public areas – sometimes in front of dozens of other people – women are very often left to face their aggressors alone. They may not have the courage to talk about what has happened, and they may not wish to file a complaint afterwards. This is very serious: feelings of fear and insecurity in public spaces, such as public transport, can have a psychological impact on victims and affect women’s day-to-day lives. As has been said, the events in Cologne on Christmas Eve, 31 December 2015, really brought home that message, and it helped to break the silence on this issue. Ms Hetto-Gaasch’s excellent report follows the one prepared by Jonas Gunnarsson after those events, and which brought the issue out in to the open.

      Ms Hetto-Gaasch’s report proposes ways of combating violence. It looks at the impact of such violence on the victims and highlights the need to reflect on how we use public spaces. Is it, for example, an effective solution to have women-only parking places or compartments, or is that only yet more visible discrimination? The report underlines the positive role that men can play in combating such violence in public areas, and it draws attention to the role of the media. Some recent media campaigns have contributed to the fight against harassment by alerting the public about the issues. Those campaigns have even prompted a public reaction in ending the passiveness of the witnesses of such violence. It is important that the Istanbul Convention is signed and ratified. I warmly support the report, and I congratulate the rapporteur and the secretariat on it.

      Ms ANTTILA (Finland) – I thank the rapporteur, Ms Hetto-Gaasch, for her excellent report and presentation on this important and topical matter. Sexual harassment and violence against women and girls remains one of the most dominant human rights violations in the world. Violence against women knows no social, economic or national boundaries. The report points out that sexual violence also takes place in public spaces, as the events in Cologne showed. There is still a culture of silence on this topic, and witnesses seldom react even though they can play a crucial role.

      Sexual violence against women is a historically rooted expression of power inequalities between women and men. It undermines the health, dignity, security and autonomy of its victims. If we are to combat it, we need a fundamental change of mindset away from focusing on the behaviour of women and towards concentrating on the violence itself. We need to ask why there is still so much violence in our society. Why do some men still feel they have a right to violate women? Why is sexual violence still considered a women’s issue, even though it clearly cannot be brought to an end without men being involved?

      The media have a very important responsibility to report sexual violence incidents objectively, to raise awareness and to engage men in the debate on this issue. If we are to succeed, we need to acknowledge that sexual violence is not only the act of a single perpetrator, but a much more structural problem. To analyse the root causes of sexual violence, we must look at the culture of sexualising women and at notions of manhood. We need to question gender stereotypes and make gender equality education available to all.

      I agree with the report that women should not have to change their lifestyle because of the risk of harassment. I also agree that women should not be accused of dressing provocatively or being in the wrong place at the wrong time. This kind of victim-blaming fosters men’s control of public spaces and limits women’s mobility. It is a reflection of a sexist and patriarchal society, as the report rightly states. I agree that the Istanbul Convention is a highly advanced international legal instrument, and there must be no more delays in its ratification and implementation by member States.

      The PRESIDENT* – Ms de Santa Ana, is not here, so I call Ms Crozon.

      Ms CROZON (France)* – I thank the rapporteur for this excellent report. It highlights an issue experienced by women of all classes and origins, but which is still very much ignored by the authorities. We are well acquainted with the mechanisms used by men to harass or dominate women in their private and family lives and in the world of work. Interpersonal relations at home and at work can lead to women having to put up with harassment for long periods, and they often make light of or play down the abuse to which they are subjected. Such control mechanisms can be highly detrimental to women’s health and self-esteem, and they can lead to isolation, depression, physical and sexual violence, and sometimes even suicide, or to the murder of the aggressor.

      There is no public awareness of those issues in relation to public spaces. Even though almost all women say that they have experienced sexist or sexual approaches – the report gives a figure of 98% – the predominant view is that while such behaviour is not a good thing, it is not that serious either. In fact, we are increasingly realising, as the report helps us to understand, that fleeting encounters involving furtive and anonymous harassment have a pervasive influence on equality between men and women and can even affect the public spaces themselves. Because the harassment is anonymous – there is no social relationship between the victim and the aggressor; it is only that one person is a woman and the other is a man – in public spaces, women are treated just as bodies.

      Such harassment is sexual in nature, but although such behaviour seems to suggest an attempted sexual relationship, that is not the goal of the aggressor. By reducing women to our sex, the aggressor is telling us what the role of our sex should be in public, which is that we should not be in the public space at all. Our response should lie in educating people about gender stereotyping. That will also raise awareness among victims, who in many cases may not see such treatment as abuse. Even town planning can play a role, as has been said.

      There have been good reactions from the public when they have learned that public spaces are being privatised in such a way, with a district or establishment becoming off limits to women. As the report rightly says, such behaviour does not belong to any one culture; it can be found, more or less insidiously, in all cultures. It is dangerous to stigmatise one community, because that may lead us to overlook stereotypes existing within our own community.

      Ms JOHNSEN (Norway) – I thank the rapporteur for this honest and good report, which describes the phenomenon in a very reflective way. Harassment of women in public places is a rather new phenomenon in Europe and it was really brought to people’s attention after the public events in Cologne on new year’s eve in 2015. What frightened me about those events was the slow reaction of the police to the first 200 complaints; they took too long to react. However, harassment and sexual violence in public spaces are not specific to certain countries. Between 45% and 55% of women in Europe have been victims. It is particularly sad when women are attacked in public and nobody acts; people look the other way. We must end that situation.

      The attacks in Cologne speeded up the ratification of the Istanbul Convention and led to the introduction of the principle of “No means no” in the criminal code. I am glad to say that the Istanbul Convention has been ratified by my country and that Article 36 of the convention makes it a criminal act to engage in non-consensual acts of a sexual nature. That article establishes the nature of consent, which must be given voluntarily.

      The fight against harassment is constant. Recent events in Turkey, where a woman was attacked on a bus because she was wearing shorts, is a reminder of that. In addition, the murder of a young woman who was attacked by the driver of a minibus in Turkey caused a riot and inspired the “Tell your story” campaign, whereby young women share on Facebook and other social media their stories of being harassed or even raped. Before, they had been too ashamed to do so.

      What can be done? The report emphasises the need to focus on education, architecture in public spaces, the role of the media and men acting as positive role models condemning sexual harassment. The report also addresses the issue of facilitating discussions with refugees and asylum seekers regarding values and social codes in host countries. However, there is also a need for religious leaders and leaders of youth organisations, whether sporting or cultural, to address the issue of the sexual harassment of women.

      Maybe this process should start at the dinner table: we should discuss the sexual harassment of women and state that “No means no”.

      Mr GUNNARSSON (Sweden) – I thank Ms Hetto-Gaasch for a very well-balanced report, which is of course important. The work that the committee and Ms Hetto-Gaasch have done on this report follows the report for an urgent debate that I prepared for this Assembly after the events of new year’s eve in Cologne and other cities roughly 18 months ago.

      The first reaction at that time among many political figures – even among decent political figures –was to make a connection between those events and migrants who had come to Europe in recent times. Thankfully, at that time, the Assembly showed itself to be collectively very wise and rejected any such arguments and thoughts, by voting almost unanimously in favour of that report. Let us do the same today.

      I think that all of us know that this problem is not an ethnic problem but a male problem. We know that, in Sweden, where prominent political figures can run around the streets in Stockholm and call women whores without any repercussions or reactions from their party. We cannot approach the issue of gender inequality by thinking that such problems affect only women. Gender inequality is not only a woman’s issue. First and foremost, it is an issue for men to solve.

      As I stated about 18 months ago in this Chamber, the participation of men in finding solutions to these problems is important. What I did not say at that time – it needs to be said in this discussion, however – is that all men have an individual responsibility to act and react against gender inequalities. Until men realise their collective responsibility for gender inequalities and the importance of their individual actions against misogyny, the struggle for a fairer society and gender equality cannot be won. The importance of campaigns such as HeForShe, and of the efforts by NGOs to organise men to stand up for gender equality, cannot be stated strongly enough.

      As well as showing my appreciation of the work of Ms Hetto-Gaasch, I thank the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media and its rapporteur, Mr Schennach, for helping us to create a better report. Your amendments really solved political problems in our committee and I am very thankful to you all for that.

      I urge everyone to give this report and the work of Ms Hetto-Gaasch their full support.

      Ms OHLSSON (Sweden) – I thank Ms Hetto-Gaasch for an excellent report. I have been engaged with this issue and concrete work around it for many years in Sweden, with the umbrella organisation for women’s shelters and young women’s empowerment. Our goal is a gender-equal society that is free from violence.

      If we are to end men’s violence against women, we must work towards greater equality in a number of areas. Notions of what is considered “feminine” or “masculine” influence and limit our behaviour and our understanding of ourselves. We are not born into gender roles, and it must be possible to change the way that women and men are perceived, and to break the link between violence and masculinity.

      Men’s sexual violence and the harassment of women occur everywhere: in public spaces, in work, at home, in school, in sport and even in parliament. As the report shows, it is a universal problem that is widely ignored, so we are collectively raising awareness of the full extent of the phenomenon and of the need to fight against such violence. We must work in many different areas at the same time: protecting and supporting victims; signing and ratifying the Istanbul Convention; and having strong and good legislation to stop men’s violence against women. Legislation can also be useful in preventing violence. States must be clear and strong in their opinions and in the signals they give. The report covers other types of prevention work, for example – it is a good example – sex and relationship education programmes in schools.

      As has already been said, it is so important that men act and are engaged in this process. To achieve equality for women, men need to be part of the solution. Gender equality is only achievable if we work together. It is good that there have been both men and women from different countries on the speaker’s list today. So, come on – let us work together to combat this violence. We demand zero tolerance.

      The PRESIDENT* – I thank all the speakers. The speaker’s list is now closed. Ms Hetto-Gaasch, you have five minutes and 40 seconds to respond to the debate.

      Ms HETTO-GAASCH (Luxembourg)* – I thank all colleagues for their contributions. Many members spoke about harassment on the streets of their own countries. We discussed the Purple Ribbon Campaign in Turkey, which tries to highlight this problem, as well as other campaigns. It is important to put on record that it is not women’s fault if they are the victims of harassment – I think we all agree on that, as well as on it being totally unacceptable to tolerate harassment. Men can play a primary role. We need zero tolerance of sexual violence, which, as most members said, happens in all our cultures and across all social strata. We all agree that there should be no impunity, and colleagues also mentioned children’s education several times.

      Mr Ghiletchi said that the report does not discuss the nationality of the perpetrators in Cologne: they were of different nationalities, but their profiles are mentioned in the explanatory memorandum. I should also flag the fact that the report says that most of the perpetrators were under the influence of alcohol and drugs. The report is not about the Cologne events specifically; it talks generally about sexual violence and the harassment of women in public space. The fact is that perpetrators come from all social categories, all cultures and all walks of life, and the draft resolution reaffirms that.

      The report makes an important point about the need to think ahead. We have learned from Cologne that we need to see risks on the horizon and ensure that we plan correctly for a possible threat and respond appropriately. The police officers in Cologne underestimated the problem. It was said immediately afterwards that we need to respond straightaway to any incident of this kind; we should all learn that lesson.

      Harassment and violence are universal phenomena that we need to fight from the earliest age through gender-equality education. Ms Fresko-Rolfo said that education is the most powerful weapon, and she is absolutely right. Everyone should be able to feel safe and at ease in public spaces. We need to use short-term measures, zero tolerance, hotlines and new technologies – all such measures are apposite. Harassment is not always considered particularly important, but we need to speak out every time. We need the appropriate measures in place so that we can prosecute the perpetrators, and we need the staff – the human resources – required to deal with each case and to follow up on complaints. Media campaigns such as HeForShe are also very important.

      I thank all colleagues for their contributions. Special thanks go to Ayşegül Elveriş and Elise Cornu, as well as to Elodie Fischer, who is with us today and has been working so hard, burning the midnight oil before she goes on maternity leave to ensure that this report happened. Thank you for your commitment, Elodie – it was really quite remarkable. I thank all my colleagues from the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination, including, of course, our chairperson and all committee members for their contributions. I also thank colleagues from the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media for their constructive approach and for flagging up the education issue, about which I too feel very strongly.

      The PRESIDENT* – I call the chair of the committee, Ms Centemero.

      Ms CENTEMERO (Italy)* – On behalf of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination, I wish to thank very much our colleague Ms Hetto-Gaasch for her report, which has at last put this important issue – sexual violence and the harassment of women – at the heart of the Assembly’s concerns. Women should be able to feel safe not only in private but in public spaces, but they do not.

      We can all recall the first time we discussed this issue in January 2016, when we were all very shocked by what had happened in Germany on the previous new years’ eve. Ms Hetto-Gaasch’s report shows that the situation has perhaps worsened. A study found that in one way or another, 100% of women have been exposed to harassment or sexual abuse on public transport at some point in their lives – 100%! Colleagues have cited other facts and figures that are very worrying indeed. They illustrate the fact that this is a universal phenomenon and that it is not abating. We see violence and abuse everywhere: on public transport, in public areas and in shops, and even when people are travelling by bicycle. It is a universal phenomenon that has been met with indifference in the past, particularly when violence and harassment happens in public areas.

      The committee is proud of Ms Hetto-Gaasch’s report. As many members said, education is a driving force for change, and the media also have an important role to play. How many of us come to the Chamber when we discuss sexual violence against women? Sexual violence has to become a central concern for the Assembly. It must not be a marginal issue that concerns only the scant few of us currently left in the Chamber. The Assembly has to carry out a major campaign to counter sexual violence against women on the broadest possible scale.

      The PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Ms Centemero.       The debate is closed.

      The committee has presented a draft resolution to which six amendments have been tabled.

      I understand that the Chairperson of the Committee on Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination wishes to propose to the Assembly that Amendments 1 to 5 to the draft resolution, which were unanimously approved by the committee, should be declared as agreed by the Assembly.

      The committee also unanimously agreed Amendment 6, but as sub-amendments have been tabled to that amendment, I must take it separately.

      Is that so, Ms Centemero?

      Ms CENTEMERO (Italy)* – Yes.

      The PRESIDENT* – Does anyone object? That is not the case.

      Amendments 1 to 5 are adopted.

      The PRESIDENT* – We come now to Amendment 6. We will now take the sub-amendments in the order in which they were tabled. I remind you that speeches on amendments are limited to 30 seconds.

      I call Ms Şahin Usta to support Amendment 6. You have 30 seconds.

      Ms ŞAHIN USTA (Turkey)* – We would like to strengthen our campaign against Islamophobia and anti-Semitism. Women are affected by violence independently of their religion. All the sub-amendments have gone through unanimously anyway.

      The PRESIDENT* – I call Ms Hetto-Gaasch to support Sub-amendment 1 on behalf of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination. You have 30 seconds.

      Ms HETTO-GAASCH (Luxembourg)* – The three amendments, which hopefully we will approve, are internally consistent and in line with Amendment 6. We pointed out that it was too specific compared with the purpose of the report and we wanted to couch it in more general terms, which is why the committee decided yesterday to replace “Islamophobia and anti-Semitism” with the more general words “racism and intolerance”. The first sub-amendment goes very much along those lines.

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

      What is the opinion of Ms Şahin Usta?

      Ms ŞAHIN USTA (Turkey)* – In favour.

      The PRESIDENT* – What is the opinion of the Committee?

      Ms CENTEMERO (Italy)* – The committee is in favour.

      The PRESIDENT* – I shall now put the sub-amendment to the vote.

      The vote is open.

      I call Ms HETTO-GAASCH to support Sub-amendment 2. You have 30 seconds.

      Ms HETTO-GAASCH (Luxembourg)* – Sub-amendment 2 is consistent with Sub-amendment 1. I suggest that we replace the words “their origin and/or religion” with “their origin, religion, disability and/or sexual orientation”.

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

      What is the opinion of Ms Şahin Usta?

      Ms ŞAHIN USTA (Turkey)* – I agree.

      The PRESIDENT* – What is the opinion of the Committee?

      Ms CENTEMERO (Italy)* – The committee is in favour.

      The PRESIDENT* – I shall now put the sub-amendment to the vote.

      The vote is open.

      I call Ms Hetto-Gaasch to support Sub-amendment 3. You have 30 seconds.

      Ms HETTO-GAASCH (Luxembourg)* – Sub-amendment 3 applies to the second sentence. We suggest replacing the words “xenophobic, anti-Semitic and Islamophobic perpetrators” with “racist and intolerant perpetrators”.

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

      What is the opinion of Ms Şahin Usta?

      Ms ŞAHIN USTA (Turkey)* – I agree.

      The PRESIDENT* – What is the opinion of the Committee?

      Ms CENTEMERO (Italy)* – The committee is in favour.

      The PRESIDENT* – I shall now put the sub-amendment to the vote.

      The vote is open.

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

      What is the opinion of the committee?

      Ms CENTEMERO (Italy)* – The committee is in favour.

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

      The vote is open.

      We will now proceed to vote on the draft resolution contained in Document 14337, as amended.

      The vote is open.

      Congratulations to the committee and the rapporteur. I thank all those who participated in our lively and important debate this morning.

3. Next public business

      The PRESIDENT* – The Assembly will hold its next public sitting at 3.30 p.m. in accordance with the agenda for this part-session.

      The sitting is closed.

(The sitting was closed at 12.55 p.m.)

CONTENTS

1. Europe’s common fight against terrorism: successes and failures

Speakers: Mr Talip Küçükcan (Turkey), Mr Goncharenko (Ukraine), Mr Michael Aastrup Jensen (Denmark), Mr Villumsen (Denmark), Mr Ariev (Ukraine), Ms Durrieu (France), Mr Bak (Turkey), Ms Pashayeva (Azerbaijan), Ms Gafarova (Azerbaijan), Mr Kürkçü (Turkey), Mr Packalén (Finland), Mr Simms (Canada), Mr Önal (Turkey), Ms Topcu (Turkey), Mr Rouquet (France) and Mr Rafael Huseynov (Azerbaijan),

2. Putting an end to sexual violence and harassment of women in public space

Presentation by Ms Hetto-Gaasch of report of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination, Document 14337

Presentation by Mr Schennach of opinion of the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media, Document 14361

Speakers: Mr Grin (Switzerland), Ms Kerestecioğlu Demir (Turkey), Ms Kyriakides (Cyprus), Ms De Sutter (Belgium), Ms Şahin Usta (Turkey), Mr Ghiletchi (Republic of Moldova), Mr Tornare (Switzerland), Ms Fresko-Rolfo (Monaco), Mr Karlsson (Sweden), Ms Topcu (Turkey), Mr Thiéry (Belgium), Ms Bîzgan-Gayral (Turkey), Mr Nissinen (Sweden), Ms Blondin (France), Ms Åberg (Sweden), Ms Bilgehan (Turkey), Ms Anttila (Finland), Ms Crozon (France), Ms Johnsen (Norway), Mr Gunnarsson (Sweden), Ms Ohlsson (Sweden),

Replies: Ms Hetto-Gaasch (Luxembourg) and Ms Centemero (Italy)

Amendments 1 to 5 and 6 as amended, adopted

Draft resolution in Document 14337, as amended adopted

3. Next public sitting

Appendix / Annexe

Representatives or Substitutes who signed the register of attendance in accordance with Rule 12.2 of the Rules of Procedure.The names of members substituted follow (in brackets) the names of participating members.

Liste des représentants ou suppléants ayant signé le registre de présence, conformément à l’article 12.2 du Règlement.Le nom des personnes remplacées suit celui des Membres remplaçant, entre parenthèses.

ÅBERG, Boriana [Ms]

ÆVARSDÓTTIR, Thorhildur Sunna [Ms]

ANDERSON, Donald [Lord]

ANTTILA, Sirkka-Liisa [Ms]

ARENT, Iwona [Ms]

ARIEV, Volodymyr [Mr]

ÁRNASON, Vilhjálmur [Mr]

ARNAUT, Damir [Mr]

AST, Marek [Mr] (TARCZYŃSKI, Dominik [Mr])

BADEA, Viorel Riceard [M.] (BRĂILOIU, Tit-Liviu [Mr])

BAK, Osman Aşkın [Mr] (TORUN, Cemalettin Kani [Mr])

BALÁŽ, Radovan [Mr] (PAŠKA, Jaroslav [M.])

BALIĆ, Marijana [Ms]

BAYKAL, Deniz [Mr]

BERGAMINI, Deborah [Ms]

BERNACKI, Włodzimierz [Mr]

BEUS RICHEMBERGH, Goran [Mr]

BİLGEHAN, Gülsün [Mme]

BÎZGAN-GAYRAL, Oana-Mioara [Ms] (PRUNĂ, Cristina-Mădălina [Ms])

BLONDIN, Maryvonne [Mme]

BRASSEUR, Anne [Mme]

BRUIJN-WEZEMAN, Reina de [Ms] (MULDER, Anne [Mr])

BRUYN, Piet De [Mr]

BÜCHEL, Roland Rino [Mr] (HEER, Alfred [Mr])

CENTEMERO, Elena [Ms]

CERİTOĞLU KURT, Lütfiye İlksen [Ms] (DİŞLİ, Şaban [Mr])

CHRISTOFFERSEN, Lise [Ms]

CILEVIČS, Boriss [Mr] (LĪBIŅA-EGNERE, Inese [Ms])

CORSINI, Paolo [Mr]

COWEN, Barry [Mr]

COZMANCIUC, Corneliu Mugurel [Mr] (CIOLACU, Ion-Marcel [Mr])

CROZON, Pascale [Mme] (KARAMANLI, Marietta [Mme])

CRUCHTEN, Yves [M.]

DAMYANOVA, Milena [Mme]

DIVINA, Sergio [Mr]

DURRIEU, Josette [Mme]

EBERLE-STRUB, Susanne [Ms]

ECCLES, Diana [Lady]

FRESKO-ROLFO, Béatrice [Mme]

GAFAROVA, Sahiba [Ms]

GAMBARO, Adele [Ms]

GARCÍA ALBIOL, Xavier [Mr]

GHILETCHI, Valeriu [Mr]

GIRO, Francesco Maria [Mr]

GODSKESEN, Ingebjørg [Ms] (WOLD, Morten [Mr])

GOGA, Pavol [M.] (MAROSZ, Ján [Mr])

GOLUB, Vladyslav [Mr] (BEREZA, Boryslav [Mr])

GONÇALVES, Carlos Alberto [M.]

GONCHARENKO, Oleksii [Mr]

GOSSELIN-FLEURY, Geneviève [Mme] (ALLAIN, Brigitte [Mme])

GRIN, Jean-Pierre [M.] (FIALA, Doris [Mme])

GÜNAY, Emine Nur [Ms]

GUNNARSDÓTTIR, Bjarkey [Ms] (JAKOBSDÓTTIR, Katrín [Ms])

GUNNARSSON, Jonas [Mr]

HAGEBAKKEN, Tore [Mr] (VALEN, Snorre Serigstad [Mr])

HAJDUKOVIĆ, Domagoj [Mr]

HALICKI, Andrzej [Mr]

HAMID, Hamid [Mr]

HAMOUSOVÁ, Zdeňka [Ms] (VÁHALOVÁ, Dana [Ms])

HERKEL, Andres [Mr] (NOVIKOV, Andrei [Mr])

HETTO-GAASCH, Françoise [Mme]

HOPKINS, Maura [Ms]

HUSEYNOV, Rafael [Mr]

JENIŠTA, Luděk [Mr]

JENSEN, Michael Aastrup [Mr]

JOHNSEN, Kristin Ørmen [Ms] (JENSSEN, Frank J. [Mr])

JORDANA, Carles [M.]

KALMARI, Anne [Ms]

KANDEMİR, Erkan [Mr]

KARLSSON, Niklas [Mr]

KERESTECİOĞLU DEMİR, Filiz [Ms]

KESİCİ, İlhan [Mr]

KLEINBERGA, Nellija [Ms] (LAIZĀNE, Inese [Ms])

KLICH, Bogdan [Mr]

KOÇ, Haluk [M.]

KÖCK, Eduard [Mr] (AMON, Werner [Mr])

KRESÁK, Peter [Mr]

KRIŠTO, Borjana [Ms]

KRONBICHLER, Florian [Mr]

KÜÇÜKCAN, Talip [Mr]

KÜRKÇÜ, Ertuğrul [Mr]

KYRIAKIDES, Stella [Ms]

LEITE RAMOS, Luís [M.]

LESKAJ, Valentina [Ms]

LEŚNIAK, Józef [M.] (MILEWSKI, Daniel [Mr])

LOGVYNSKYI, Georgii [Mr]

MADEJ, Róbert [Mr]

MAHOUX, Philippe [M.]

MANNINGER, Jenő [Mr] (NÉMETH, Zsolt [Mr])

MARKOVIĆ, Milica [Mme]

MASIULIS, Kęstutis [Mr] (BUTKEVIČIUS, Algirdas [Mr])

MAURY PASQUIER, Liliane [Mme]

MENDES, Ana Catarina [Mme]

MİROĞLU, Orhan [Mr]

MULARCZYK, Arkadiusz [Mr]

MÜLLER, Thomas [Mr]

MUNYAMA, Killion [Mr] (TRUSKOLASKI, Krzysztof [Mr])

NĚMCOVÁ, Miroslava [Ms] (BENEŠIK, Ondřej [Mr])

NENUTIL, Miroslav [Mr]

NICOLETTI, Michele [Mr]

NISSINEN, Johan [Mr]

OHLSSON, Carina [Ms]

ÖNAL, Suat [Mr]

O’REILLY, Joseph [Mr]

OVERBEEK, Henk [Mr] (MAEIJER, Vicky [Ms])

PACKALÉN, Tom [Mr]

PALLARÉS, Judith [Ms]

PASHAYEVA, Ganira [Ms]

PECKOVÁ, Gabriela [Ms] (KOSTŘICA, Rom [Mr])

POLIAČIK, Martin [Mr] (KAŠČÁKOVÁ, Renáta [Ms])

POMASKA, Agnieszka [Ms]

POSTOICO, Maria [Mme] (VORONIN, Vladimir [M.])

PREDA, Cezar Florin [M.]

PUTICA, Sanja [Ms]

RODRÍGUEZ RAMOS, Soraya [Mme]

ROUQUET, René [M.]

RUSTAMYAN, Armen [M.]

ŞAHİN USTA, Leyla [Ms]

SANDBÆK, Ulla [Ms] (BORK, Tilde [Ms])

SANTA ANA, María Concepción de [Ms]

SCHENNACH, Stefan [Mr]

SCHNEIDER-SCHNEITER, Elisabeth [Mme] (LOMBARDI, Filippo [M.])

SCHOU, Ingjerd [Ms]

SCHRIJVER, Nico [Mr] (STIENEN, Petra [Ms])

SCHWABE, Frank [Mr]

ŠEPIĆ, Senad [Mr]

ŠIRCELJ, Andrej [Mr]

SOBOLEV, Serhiy [Mr]

SOTNYK, Olena [Ms]

STRENZ, Karin [Ms]

THIÉRY, Damien [M.]

TOPCU, Zühal [Ms]

TORNARE, Manuel [M.] (FRIDEZ, Pierre-Alain [M.])

VAREIKIS, Egidijus [Mr]

VEN, Mart van de [Mr]

VILLUMSEN, Nikolaj [Mr]

VITANOV, Petar [Mr] (JABLIANOV, Valeri [Mr])

VOVK, Viktor [Mr] (LIASHKO, Oleh [Mr])

WENAWESER, Christoph [Mr]

WOJTYŁA, Andrzej [Mr]

YAŞAR, Serap [Mme]

YEMETS, Leonid [Mr]

ZAMPA, Sandra [Ms] (QUARTAPELLE PROCOPIO, Lia [Ms])

ZELIENKOVÁ, Kristýna [Ms]

ZINGERIS, Emanuelis [Mr]

ZOHRABYAN, Naira [Mme]

ZOTEA, Alina [Ms] (GHIMPU, Mihai [Mr])

Also signed the register / Ont également signé le registre

Representatives or Substitutes not authorised to vote / Représentants ou suppléants non autorisés à voter

BONET, Sílvia Eloïsa [Ms]

MELKUMYAN, Mikayel [M.]

NAGHDALYAN, Hermine [Ms]

OYARZÁBAL, Iñaki [Mr]

RIBERAYGUA, Patrícia [Mme]

SUTTER, Petra De [Ms]

WILSON, David [Lord]

Observers / Observateurs

LARIOS CÓRDOVA, Héctor [Mr]

MALTAIS, Ghislain [M.]

SANTANA GARCÍA, José de Jesús [Mr]

SIMMS, Scott [Mr]

Partners for democracy / Partenaires pour la démocratie

ALQAWASMI, Sahar [Ms]

BOUANOU, Abdellah [M.]

CHAGAF, Aziza [Mme]

EL MOKRIE EL IDRISSI, Abouzaid [M.]

LABLAK, Aicha [Mme]

SABELLA, Bernard [Mr]

Representatives of the Turkish Cypriot Community (In accordance to Resolution 1376 (2004) of

the Parliamentary Assembly)/ Représentants de la communauté chypriote turque

(Conformément à la Résolution 1376 (2004) de l’Assemblée parlementaire)

Mehmet ÇAĞLAR

Erdal ÖZCENK