AA17CR29

AS (2017) CR 29

2017 ORDINARY SESSION

________________

(Fourth part)

REPORT

Twenty-ninth sitting

Monday 9 October 2017 at 3 p.m.

In this report:

1.       Speeches in English are reported in full.

2.       Speeches in other languages are reported using the interpretation and are marked with an asterisk

3.        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.

(Sir Roger Gale, Acting President of the Assembly, took the Chair at 3.05 p.m.)

      The PRESIDENT – The sitting is open.

1. Election of the President of the Assembly (Result of first round)

      The PRESIDENT – I have the results. The number of Members voting was 212. The number of spoilt ballot papers was two, so the votes cast and valid were 210. The votes needed for an absolute majority are 152. That is the magic number. Neither candidate has achieved the required absolute majority. Ms Kyriakides received 126 votes; Mr Zingeris received 84 votes.

2. Election of the President of the Assembly (Second round)

      The PRESIDENT – Neither of the candidates having obtained an absolute majority of the representatives of the Assembly, a second round of voting will now be held from 3 p.m. until 5 p.m. Again, an absolute majority of representatives of the Assembly will be required.

      While voting is taking place we will continue with the business as on the agenda, but because this is a new ballot, we have to appoint two new tellers.

      The names of Ms Ceritoğlu Kurt and Mr Batrincea have been drawn. Please be available to act as tellers when the ballot closes at 5 p.m. I shall then briefly suspend the sitting while the votes are counted.

      You will notice that the sitting will be suspended for the afternoon group meetings at 5 p.m. anyway, but if the votes are counted, as we expect they will be, I intend to announce the results of that ballot, and only the results, at 5.45 p.m. The formal handover may take place tomorrow morning. Please understand that means that anybody wishing to attend the announcement of the ballot will need to come out of group meetings or end their group meetings to be here in the Chamber for 5.45 p.m. when the business will resume.

3. Changes in the membership of committees

      The PRESIDENT – Briefly, we have to consider the changes proposed in the membership of committees. These are set out in Document Commissions (2017) 07 Addendum 2.

      Are the proposed changes in the membership of the Assembly’s committees agreed to?

      They are agreed to.

      The second round ballot for the presidency of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe is now open. Please do not rush out, because the next business is of significance to the whole Assembly, and particularly to some very important people who are present – and indeed to one important person who is not.

4. Prize Award Ceremony: Václav Havel Human Rights Prize

      The PRESIDENT – The first item of business this afternoon is the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize award ceremony. I declare open the ceremony and invite you all to watch a video.

      A film was shown, accompanied by the following narrative:

      “On 10 May 1990, the President of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic entered the Assembly Chamber of the Council of Europe. It was an emotional Parliamentary Assembly that welcomed the former political dissident, the figurehead of the Velvet Revolution who in 1989 brought an end to the Communist regime. In his welcoming address, the Assembly President paid tribute to the courage of one of the key figures of the opposition in the Czechoslovak Socialist republic: ‘You, Mr President, are a symbol of the victory of freedom over totalitarianism.’In

      In his speech, the philosopher-president, an atypical politician, spoke of his years of opposition when dreams took the place of hope: ‘Everything seems to point to the fact that we should not be afraid of dreaming of what seems impossible if we want something impossible to become a fact and a reality. Without dreaming of a better Europe we shall never be able to build it.’

      Following the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, which marked the end of the liberalisation process of the Prague Spring, Václav Havel remained faithful to his convictions. As chairperson of the Circle of Independent Writers, his commitment led to the banning of his plays. The international community quickly became aware of this dissident. In 1977, Václav Havel co-founded Charter 77, an organisation defending human rights in Czechoslovakia. Because of his activities he was imprisoned on three occasions, for almost five years. In 1989, the crowd spontaneously placed Václav Havel at the head of the Civic Forum, an association uniting opposition movements. He became a key figure in the Velvet Revolution.

      Almost a quarter of a century later, in March 2013, the prize was launched in Prague to honour what Václav Havel was and what he did. This prize will be awarded each year by the Parliamentary Assembly, in partnership with the Václav Havel Library and the Charter 77 Foundation, to reward outstanding civil society action in the defence of human rights. The first ever Václav Havel human rights prize was awarded in 2013 to Belarusian human rights activist Ales Bialiatski. Azerbaijani human rights defender Anar Mammadli was awarded it in 2014 and veteran Russian human rights defender Ludmilla Alexeeva got the prize in 2015. Last year, the prize went to Yazidi human rights activist Nadia Murad.

      For the fifth edition of the prize, the three candidates shortlisted are: Murat Arslan, President of the now dissolved Association for the Union of Judges and Prosecutors, who has been in detention since 2016; the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, an NGO that focuses on access to justice and the rights of refugees; and Father Georg Sporschill, an Austrian Jesuit who has devoted his life to the care of the most vulnerable.

      In 1990, Mr Havel spoke in Strasbourg of the immense strength embodied by the ideals of the Council of Europe. Referring to the Organisation’s emblem, he said that for him the 12 stars did not express the idea that the Council of Europe would succeed in building a heaven on earth, as there would never be a heaven on earth, but that ‘in my opinion these 12 stars are a reminder that the world can become a better place if we have the courage to raise our eyes to the stars’. The Václav Havel Human Rights Prize pays tribute to this distinguished European, and it also pays tribute to all those who, through their determined and tireless work, bring us closer to the ideal of a better world.”

      The PRESIDENT – Friends, nominees, your excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, it gives me great pleasure to welcome you to the fifth edition of the award ceremony of the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize.

      I should like to start by thanking all our partners: the Government of the Czech Republic – in particular, Minister Zaorálek, who is with us today – the Václav Havel Library and the Charter 77 Foundation for their strong determination in preserving the legacy of Mr Havel. Allow me also to express my sincere gratitude to the members of the selection panel: Dr Marie-Louise Bemelmans-Videc, Professor Martin Bojar, Ms Nuala Mole, Mr Marek Nowicki, Mr Martin Palouš and Mr Christos Pourgourides. Without your support and professionalism, this prize would not exist, so thank you for your continued and most valued commitment.

      The Secretariat always gets worried when I go off-script – I am about to go off-script. On my office wall in the Palace of Westminster, which is the home of the House of Commons, I have photographs of only two politicians. One is an election poster for the election of Nelson Mandela, at which I was privileged to be an observer. The other, which I bought from a young man in Prague after the Velvet Revolution, is a photograph of Václav Havel taken during the Velvet Revolution. When I said outside that I would not be here today if it was not for Václav Havel, I meant it. His courage and determination were the inspiration that drove a then relatively young man into politics.

      Václav Havel dedicated his whole life and his political activity to opposing despotism and injustice, to promoting respect for human rights and the rule of law, and to striving for freedom and democracy. His vision, his ideals and his strong spirit continue to be – today more than ever – a source of inspiration for all those hoping to make a positive change in society. Hope is the key to change. But hope should not be confused with dream, optimism or even illusion.

      “Hope is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out,” Václav Havel said. To that I would add something I saw on the office wall in the Václav Havel Library, which hosted us when we visited Prague during our work: “Truth and love must triumph over lies and hate.” Wi

      With the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize, we honour all human rights defenders who, every day, make an outstanding contribution to the protection and promotion of human rights. They strongly believe in their cause and that each one of us can make a difference. We applaud their efforts to build a more just and peaceful society, as Václav Havel himself advocated; to prompt us to reflect on what we are, or are not, doing; and to guide us, like a moral compass, in the right direction. The prize honours the nominees’ contribution.

      Ladies and gentlemen, the three shortlisted nominees for the 2017 prize have demonstrated exceptionally strong determination and commitment to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. I will present the shortlisted nominees in alphabetical order.

      The first nominee is Mr Murat Arslan from Turkey. Mr Arslan is a former rapporteur of the Turkish Constitutional Court and president of the now-dissolved Association for the Union of Judges and Prosecutors. He has been an ardent supporter of the independence of the judiciary. He cannot be present with us today because he is in detention; that is why his chair is empty.

      The second nominee is the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, a non-governmental human rights organisation founded in 1989 and based in Budapest. The Helsinki Committee carries out a broad range of activities in the area of human rights, with particular focus on access to justice and the rights of asylum seekers, refugees and stateless persons.

      The third nominee is Father Georg Sporschill from Austria, who is a Jesuit who has devoted his life to the care of the most vulnerable, notably children. He set up an association, Elijah, that carries out numerous projects in Austria, Bulgaria, the Republic of Moldova and Romania, where he is now based.

      You will realise that it has been a difficult decision for the panel this year. I should add that this is a shortlist from a very, very long list.

      Your excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, it is now time to announce the winner.

      The winner of the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 2017 is Mr Murat Arslan. [Applause]

      As Mr Arslan is in detention, we cannot give him the trophy and the diploma personally today, so I will hand them over to Ms Simone Gaboriau, a member of the organisation Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés, which is one of the main sponsors of Mr Arslan’s nomination. Please come to the rostrum.

      I now invite the other nominees to join us.

      We will now have what is known as the family photograph. I invite the members of the selection panel, Minister Zaorálek, the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe and the Secretary General of the Assembly to join the nominees for the group photograph.

      It is my pleasure to give the floor to Ms Simone Gaboriau, who will read a message written by the winner of the prize, Mr Murat Arslan.

      Ms Simone GABORIAU (Honorary Judge, Speaking on behalf of the winner of the Václev Havel Prize)* – I speak to you from a prison, in a country where the rule of law is suspended and where the values of democracy are gradually moving further and further away; where dissenting voices are suppressed and where human rights defenders, journalists, those who want to see peace and those who shout to make their voices heard so that children do not die are all labelled terrorists; where prison is the natural place for the defenders of rights and freedoms to end up – a place where fear is gradually plunged into darkness. I speak from a country that has never learned the lessons of Europe’s painful experiences at the beginning of the 20th century; from a State that, 100 years later, is living the experience of being a laboratory for totalitarianism.

      Nevertheless, the situation should not lead us into despair. We have never sunk into despair. The very presence of our children will not allow us to cast away hope. Our tomorrows will always be better if there are people who are prepared to take every risk to lead this battle for rights and freedoms. It is in that hope that we committed to setting up a professional organisation within the justice system. In 2006, we set up the Union of Turkish Prosecutors and Judges – YARSAV – so that in our country we would have a system that conformed to universal standards, based on human rights; a modern, totally democratic, State based on the rule of law; and an independent and impartial system of justice and a judiciary, in which the security of rights and freedoms would be guaranteed.

      Through our fight, the independence and impartiality of the judiciary and the values of the rule of law have been highlighted in a country where the democratic culture and knowledge of the rule of law are low. Nowadays, people are aware of those values and there is no possibility of returning to the past. To achieve total independence and modern values, we were guided purely by secularism, the pre-eminence of the rule of law and a democracy based on the law and on freedom – a democracy with a social vocation focused on freedom and equality.

      We reacted to every event that threatened or rocked those values. We opposed everything to avoid a growth in the wall of fear that enclosed society. We showed how sound our values were at a time when prejudice and unfounded allegations sought the people’s ear. We did not give ground on any of the values that we were defending, despite all the threats and pressure exerted against us.

      Despite what we were living through, we turned towards international society to see what the outside world thought of us and to get an objective judgment of what we were doing. In the world, we became the representatives of a respected organisation that was often consulted for its vision of justice in its own country.

      We did not leave – and we will not leave – our country to go to rack and ruin or allow the system of justice to go into decline. We have set reference points on fundamental values and will not rest until those benchmarks are achieved. The fact of our living in exile today or being imprisoned in a cell will not change that reality. On the contrary, the price we are paying serves to increase our desire to fight for better days in favour of the values of the rule of law and democracy.

      We are showing – and we will show – that in an empire of fear, where those who should be speaking out are forced into silence, we will not be silent. We are among those who will make their voice heard loud and clear and with pride in the face of any injustice and any denial of rights. We will continue to be more and more disruptive to stress that there are voices within and outside the country rising up against an authoritarian regime, so that our suffering is heeded. This opposition is the last resistance to stop a total break with our democracy and our freedoms. All our efforts are bent towards a democratic, modern State based on the rule of law and human rights. Let us not forget that history is full of men whose revolution was their only raison d’être and who paid the price for that. Progress was achieved by those people who carried it on their shoulders.

      I am delighted and honoured to receive this prize, which bears the name of a great intellectual and politician, Václav Havel. Thanks to the moral support that the prize represents, it will be a great contribution to those in my country who are fighting for rights and freedoms. I dedicate it to all those who are deprived of their job unjustly, all the workers who have been thrown in prison and all those who are fighting for rights and freedoms.

      I thank all members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the members of the selection jury, everyone who has supported me during this time and all those who are defending rights and freedoms in my country. I thank the International Association of Judges, of which I am very proud to be a member, the European Association of Judges, Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés – MEDEL – the Association of European Administrative Judges, Judges for Judges, and my friends in YARSAV, alongside whom I am so proud to have fought this fight for so many long years. I also thank my wife Sevilay, who keeps my morale up, allows me to stand in these difficult moments and gives meaning to my life, and my children, Burak Emre and Yigit Eren.

      I want to convey to all of you my respectful best wishes and my hope and belief in a luminous future based on peace that is worthy of the honour of man.

      The PRESIDENT – Thank you, Ms Gaboriau, for delivering those words on behalf of the prize winner. That concludes the ceremony.

      Now back to earth! I must remind you that the vote is in progress for the election of the President. The poll will close at 5 o’clock. Those who have not yet voted may still do so by going to the area behind the President’s chair.

5. Communication from the Committee of Ministers

      The PRESIDENT – The next item on the agenda this afternoon is the communication from the Committee of Ministers to the Assembly presented by Mr Lubomír Zaorálek, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic and Chairman of the Committee of Ministers. After his address Mr Zaorálek will take questions from the floor.

      I invite Mr Zaorálek to address the Assembly.

      Mr ZAORÁLEK (Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Chairman of the Committee of Ministers) – Mr President of the Parliamentary Assembly, Mr Secretary General, Madam Deputy Secretary General, Madam President of the Congress, distinguished members of the Parliamentary Assembly, ladies and gentlemen, I will begin by touching on the ceremony that has just taken place, during which the 2017 Václav Havel human rights prize was awarded to Mr Murat Arslan. I extend my congratulations to the winner. I express my gratitude and that of my country to the Assembly for establishing the prize in memory of this great intellectual and statesman who embodied the values of freedom, conviction and courage, which are at the heart of the European project. The award of the Václav Havel prize brings a welcome note of optimism at a time when, unfortunately, those values are being seriously challenged.

      Once again, the period since your last session has borne the ugly stamp of terrorism. My strong message of support goes to all the member States affected by such attacks in recent months. Faced with the scourge of terrorism, we must remain mobilised and continually intensify our co-operation. That can be brought about particularly by implementing Council of Europe instruments such as the additional protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism concerning foreign terrorist fighters. As you know, the protocol has been in force since 1 July as a result of the six ratifications made up to that date. I have the honour of informing you that my country, the Czech Republic, ratified that important instrument two weeks ago.

      I also welcome the fact that the Convention on Offences relating to Cultural Property, which was adopted in Nicosia last May, has attracted eight signatures. However, those instruments will not be fully effective until they have been ratified by the greatest possible number of States. I therefore take the opportunity to invite you again to use your influence in your respective Parliaments to accelerate the process of signature and ratification.

      To combat terrorism effectively, co-operation must not be confined to States. International organisations such as the Council of Europe must work together as closely as possible and strengthen synergies. Last July, Ms Mogherini, the High Representative of the European Union, took part in an exchange of views with the Committee of Ministers, during which she insisted on the two organisations’ shared desire to establish more intensive and structured co-operation. In relation to the fight against terrorism, she pointed out that the European Union, which is a party to the additional protocol, carefully ensures that its terrorism legislation complies with Council of Europe standards.

      The Council of Europe works closely with other organisations. I refer of course to the United Nations, but also to the OSCE, which is holding the 26^th meeting of the co-ordination group for our two organisations in Vienna at the end of this month to discuss, inter alia, co-operation in the fight against terrorism. I know that the Parliamentary Assembly also attaches great importance to this subject, as you had a current affairs debate on Europe’s common fight against terrorism in June. Moreover, you are due to discuss this Thursday the crimes against humanity committed by Daesh.

      In addition to the fight against terrorism, I would like to consider a number of other political issues, which continue to retain the Committee of Ministers’ attention. The first of those concerns was the situation in Turkey. Last spring, Mr Bozdağ, the Turkish Minister of Justice, announced to the Committee of Ministers that a commission would be set up to review the measures taken pursuant to the legislative decrees that were adopted following the declaration of a state of emergency, including the dismissal of civil servants and the closure of media outlets. I was pleased to learn that the commission started its work this summer and I hope that it will advance at a steady pace and ensure strict compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights. That is essential in the difficult period that Turkey is undergoing.

      I am thinking particularly of freedom of expression in the media and freedom of association, which are the keys to democracy. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly emphasised that. It is also essential that human rights defenders can carry out their work freely and without interference, other than that permitted by international law, and particularly the relevant Council of Europe standards.

      I would like to take the opportunity to express my concern about the two Turkish teachers who are currently being held in preventive detention and have been on hunger strike for many weeks. I call on the Turkish authorities to consider all possible means of ensuring, on humanitarian grounds, that these two cases have a positive outcome.

      The Committee of Ministers also continues closely to follow developments in Ukraine in the hope that the efforts to settle the conflict in the east of the country will be successful and that all stakeholders will do what is needed for this to be achieved, fully implementing the Minsk agreements. For its part, the Council of Europe continues to assist in strengthening Ukrainian democracy in areas as crucial as the reform of the judicial system, the fight against corruption, decentralisation and the freedom of the media. The action plan that is currently being implemented for that purpose will come to an end at the end of the year, and the Council of Ministers will shortly be asked to discuss a new action plan for the years to come. The Committee of Ministers has also started work on adopting a new, comprehensive decision on the situation in Ukraine.

      On Wednesday, the Assembly is due to hold a joint debate on the situation in Azerbaijan. The Committee of Ministers’ Rapporteur Group on Democracy is currently examining a report on implementing the commitments that Azerbaijan entered into on joining the Council of Europe. The Committee is also keeping a close eye on how Azerbaijan executes the European Court of Human Rights’ leading judgments, particularly on freedom of the media and elections.

      As I said at your previous session, the most prominent issue remains the Ilgar Mammadov case. Last month, the Deputies held their regular meeting on supervising the execution of the Court judgments. They expressed their gravest concern that, almost three years after the Court’s judgment became final, Mr Mammadov remains in prison. They instructed the Secretariat to prepare a draft interim resolution giving formal notice to Azerbaijan, as provided by paragraph 4 of Article 46 of the Convention, of the Committee’s intention to bring before the Court the question of whether Azerbaijan has failed to fulfil its obligation under Article 46. The Deputies will consider the draft interim resolution at their meeting on 25 October should no tangible progress be made in ensuring the applicant’s release. I sincerely hope that such progress will be made.

      What I have just said about Azerbaijan leads me to a more general comment that strikes at the heart of our Organisation’s work. At a time when international legal standards and the legitimacy of international bodies for co-operation are increasingly disputed, including in Europe, it is important to me to point out that all member States accepted the requirement and therefore have a duty to ensure that the European Court of Human Rights’ judgments are fully, effectively and promptly implemented. I know that the Assembly is very sensitive to that issue and that you do everything you can in your own national parliaments to promote the execution of the Court’s judgments. That is most welcome and appreciated.

      Our chairmanship will come to an end in a few weeks’ time and we believe that our priorities have helped to draw attention to some of the key areas of the work of the Council of Europe. We have concentrated our efforts on several areas where we saw the greatest added value for the current activities of the Council of Europe and for human rights in general. Since my last speech before the Assembly at the end of June, several important events for our chairmanship have taken place, but many others are yet to be held. Our priorities have focused on the rights of persons belonging to vulnerable groups and people in a disadvantaged position. Children take a very special place in that regard. In September, we hosted two important conferences in Prague that were devoted to children’s rights. A two-day conference opened by the Czech Minister of Justice sought to shed light on the phenomenon of child detention in the context of migration. Numerous experts and panellists, including the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, discussed the dynamically evolving human rights standards in that field and acknowledged the need to expand and improve alternatives to detention of migrant children as an important tool in safeguarding their human rights.

      On 11 September, an expert conference was held in Prague on the detention of children in institutional care facilities within the system of social protection of children. The Czech Minister of Labour and Social Affairs participated in the conference, which provided a valuable opportunity to discuss and assess a number of practical issues against the background of human rights obligations in the area.

      As another priority of our chairmanship, we have signed up and aimed to contribute to the Council of Europe’s activities in support of local and regional democracy. A few weeks ago, the Czech Minister of the Interior hosted a widely attended a conference in Prague on improving the quality of public administration at local and regional level.

      Finally, I want to highlight our support for the Council of Europe’s work in promoting gender equality. Before the end of our chairmanship next month, we will organise a conference in Prague on gender equality statistics, which will be followed by an off-site meeting of the Council of Europe’s Gender Equality Commission.

      I have certainly not covered all the events that frame the second part of our chairmanship, but I have picked out a few of those that raise some timely topics. I believe that our priorities have your support and that the co-operation of the Council of Europe will continue beyond the horizon of our chairmanship.

      I want to address the question of the relationship between the Council of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly, which are the two main pillars of our Organisation. I will attend Wednesday afternoon’s debates on two important reports; one is on European unity and the other is on defending the acquis of the Council of Europe. Rest assured that the Committee of Ministers shares the Assembly’s ambition to raise the profile of the Council of Europe and to step up its activities to help member States meet the challenges they face. The committee will therefore follow your discussions carefully and attach particular importance to any recommendations you might make to it.

      Mr Nicoletti’s report on the potential fourth summit of heads of State and government of the member States gives rise to a particular question. Mr Nicoletti proposes that a procedure be set up to harmonise the rules governing the participation and representation of member States in the Parliamentary Assembly and the Committee of Ministers, while fully respecting their independence. Without anticipating the results of the discussions you are due to hold on Wednesday, or the position that the Committee of Ministers may adopt, it seems to me that that is an interesting idea that should be given further consideration while bearing in mind our respective bodies’ own rules and functions. The Joint Committee’s meeting next Thursday will be a chance to begin a frank and open discussion on the subject, and I will closely follow the outcome.

      On the budgetary situation brought about by the Russian Federation’s decision to suspend its contribution to the Organisation’s 2017 budget, I wrote in July to my Russian counterpart, Mr Lavrov, to express my strong regret at the decision, which jeopardises the proper functioning of the Council of Europe. I reminded the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs that the contribution was an unconditional obligation that the Russian Federation had willingly accepted. I also stated that, in co-operation with the Secretary General, I stood ready to make an active contribution to the discussions to overcome the situation. The Committee of Ministers is, of course, following the matter very closely and I hope that it will be settled rapidly so that our Organisation can discharge its important mandate effectively, with the full participation of all our member States.

      Lastly, the election of the next Commissioner for Human Rights is another important aspect of our institutional relations. The term of the current Commissioner, Mr Nils Muižnieks, expires on 1 April 2018 and the Assembly is due to elect his successor in January. The timetable leading up to the election was set by the Ministers’ Deputies and the deadline fixed for candidatures is 20 October 2017. The candidatures will be examined by the Ministers’ Deputies and a list of the candidates will be sent to you in November.

      Those are the main issues that I wanted to raise today. They are proof, if such proof were still needed, that we face many serious challenges. I am confident that they can be met through more intensive dialogue and co-operation between the 47 member States. We are striving to raise that culture of consensus. That dialogue and co-operation, founded on our shared values and our compliance with them, and the obligations that we have all willingly accepted, are in the interest of everyone here. We should devote all our efforts to them.

      It is with that message that I shall conclude my statement. This is the last time I will speak before the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in my capacity as chairperson of the Committee of Ministers.

      I would like to take advantage of this opportunity to thank you for your excellent co-operation with our chairmanship. My thanks also go to the Secretary General for his commitment and support. Lastly, I offer the Czech Republic’s full support to our Danish successors. We will be passing the baton of the chairmanship to them on 15 November. Thank you for your attention. I will now gladly answer your questions and hear your proposals.

      The PRESIDENT – Thank you very much, Mr Zaorálek. We will now proceed to questions. I gently remind members that questions must be limited to 30 seconds and have a question mark at the end. Colleagues should be asking questions and not making statements.

      The first question is from Mr Ghiletchi on behalf of the EPP.

      Mr GHILETCHI (Republic of Moldova, spokesperson for the Group of the European People’s Party) – As you mentioned in your speech, Minister, the Council of Europe is facing many serious challenges. One of the latest challenges is the decision by the Russian Federation to stop paying its contribution to the Council of Europe. How will that impact on the role of the Russian Federation in the Council of Europe? How will the Committee of Ministers tackle the issue if the Russian Federation does not come back? What are the potential solutions from your perspective?

      The PRESIDENT – Mr Zaorálek, I will ask you to respond to each of the individual questions from party groups. We will then group the remaining questions.

      Mr ZAORÁLEK – Thank you for the question, Mr Ghiletchi. It is perhaps not easy to find a way out of this situation. We want the Russian Federation to be a member of the Council of Europe, so long as it fulfils its obligations as a member State. There are obligations and commitments that have to be fulfilled. It is clear that if we are to find a way out of this complicated impasse, it depends on the Russian Federation’s position and approach. The Russian Federation has to contribute to the situation. I hope we will be able to find a way out of the impasse, but a prerequisite of that is the Russian approach.

      Ms BLONDIN (France, spokesperson for the Socialist Group)* –       I would like to ask a question about the specific consequences of the Russian Federation suspending its contribution. What measures are we taking to adapt to the situation? In particular, what does the Committee of Ministers expect to do in response to this gesture by the Russian Federation?

      Mr ZAORÁLEK – Thank you for the question. As I mentioned during my speech, on 3 July, the Russian Federation’s Foreign Minister, Mr Lavrov, informed me that his country had decided to suspend payment of contributions to the Council of Europe’s budget for 2017 and until the credentials of its delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly are restored. The Russian Federation’s outstanding balance amounts to some €22.3 million. As I indicated, I wrote to Mr Lavrov to express my strong regret at the decision, which jeopardises the proper functioning of the Council of Europe. I reminded the Russian Foreign Minister that the contribution was an unconditional obligation that the Russian Federation had willingly accepted. I also stated that in co-operation with the Secretary General, I stood ready to make an active contribution to discussions to overcome the situation.

      The Committee of Ministers is following the issue very closely, and I hope the matter will be settled rapidly so that our Organisation can effectively discharge its important mandate with the full participation of all member States. That is our position. The Secretary General regularly informs the Deputies of his contacts on this matter, and he has already taken steps to safeguard the proper functioning of the Organisation. Discussions on the draft programme and budget for the next biennium have started on the basis of budget stability and the working assumption that member States will honour their financial commitments.

      Mr HOWELL (United Kingdom, spokesperson for the European Conservatives Group) – Should the Committee of Ministers not appoint a special envoy to deal with the situation between Catalonia and Spain?

      Mr ZAORÁLEK – I am convinced that we do not need a special envoy. I am convinced, and I hope that this is the position of other colleagues, that the problem is an internal problem for Spain. The issue has to be solved through dialogue between Madrid and Barcelona. That is true for other organisations. It is an internal problem that has to be solved in Spain.

      Mr M. A. JENSEN (Denmark, spokesperson for the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe) – There is growing tension regarding the decisions by the European Court of Human Rights limiting the rights of member States to expel foreigners with a criminal record. For many Europeans, that seems to be an unfair protection of criminals and threatens the overall support for the European Convention on Human Rights and respect of the Court. With that in mind, how is the Committee of Ministers planning to deal with that great challenge?

      Mr ZAORÁLEK – The Czech chairmanship is, like all member States, strongly committed to the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court plays an indispensable role in ensuring observance of the engagements undertaken by the high contracting parties to the Convention and its protocols. The Convention system has played a major role in improving human rights protection on our continent in countless ways. As I have said, all member States have a duty to ensure that the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights are fully, effectively and promptly implemented. The procedure of the Committee of Ministers for the supervision of the execution of judgments has been significantly improved in recent years. That has resulted in an increase of almost 80% in the number of judgments found by the Committee of Ministers to have been fully executed. The Parliamentary Assembly’s contribution to that process has been concrete and useful. As I mentioned earlier, parliamentarians have a very important role to play in promoting the execution of the Court’s judgments in their national parliaments. It is a commitment for us all.

      Mr PSYCHOGIOS (Greece, spokesperson for the Group of the Unified European Left) – Minister, thank you for your presentation. According to the recently published “Fifteenth Report on Relocation and Resettlement”, the Czech Republic has only relocated 12 of the 2,961 people allocated to the country. The numbers for Hungary and Poland are even worse. It is not compatible with the obligations deriving from the relevant European Union decisions, nor is it compatible with the Council of Europe resolutions calling for full implementation and even expansion of the programmes. What is your comment on that disappointing contribution to a European and international issue?

      Mr ZAORÁLEK – Thank you for the question. As you have indicated, the question of the relocation of migrants and refugees is dealt with by the European Union and not within the Council of Europe. It is within the Union that the issue needs to be settled. However, I can assure you that my country pays particular attention to the issue and is committed to respecting its international obligations.

      As far as the Council of Europe is concerned, the human rights of people belonging to vulnerable or disadvantaged groups – including migrants and refugees – is one of the priorities of our chairmanship. As I mentioned in my communication, they organised no later than last month in Prague an international expert conference on the question of the detention of migrant children and its alternatives. The Czech Republic also actively contributes to the migration and refugees fund established by the Council of Europe’s development fund. Along with the other member States, we contributed financially to implement this funding project. During the migrant crisis, our government decided on many concrete ways to contribute to many countries which were afflicted. Finally, my government had the pleasure of extending the secondment of Ambassador Tomáš Boček, special representative of the Secretary General for migration and refugees, for another two years. In other words, we care and we want to share the burden, because we know that only together we can manage a programme like migration. We are interested in the transformation of the asylum procedures common to us, which we have to elaborate to be ready for the future.

      Ms PASHAYEVA (Azerbaijan, spokesperson for the Free Democrats Group) – I ask my question on behalf of a new group in our Assembly – the Free Democrats Group. Mr Minister, in your criminal law, the convention to prevent and combat the illicit trafficking and destruction of cultural property is open for signature in May this year. The Convention on Offences relating to Cultural Property is an important one. What has been done under this chairmanship to promote the signature and ratification of that convention, as well as increasing its visibility?

      Mr ZAORÁLEK – I agree that the Convention on Offences relating to Cultural Property is a most useful instrument in the legal arsenal at our disposal to fight terrorism and its financing. I am pleased that the convention has already been signed by eight countries. However, in order for it to come into force, five ratifications, including by at least three member States, are needed. I can therefore only encourage all member States to take appropriate steps to rapidly sign and ratify it. As I indicated in my communication, you as members of the national parliaments can play a key role in this respect.

      The PRESIDENT – I remind the Assembly that the vote is in progress for the election of the President. The poll will close at 5 o’clock. Those who have not yet voted may still do so by going to the area behind the President’s chair.

      I am going to group the next questions in threes. The first three will be from Mr Huseynov, Ms Alqawasmi, and Mr Hollik. Mr Huseynov first, please.

      Mr R. HUSEYNOV (Azerbaijan) – Dear Minister, relying on a number of external forces, Armenia has been intensively violating the ceasefire regime, recently apparently threatening to hit the Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline, the Mingachevir water power plant, and other important strategic objects of Azerbaijan. A real threat of large-scale war arose in the South Caucasus which can enable the intervention of external forces in the region for different purposes. What urgent measures – not common words but concrete initiatives – can the Committee of Ministers take towards preventing the indicated aggressive actions of occupant Armenia, which pose serious threats to the entirety of Europe?

      Ms ALQAWASMI (Palestine, Partner for Democracy) – Mr Minister, the Council of Europe was founded on principles and values of respect for human rights and international law, strengthening democracy, and transparency. Your Committee of Ministers represents a body that can empower change. In Palestine, a Partner for Democracy in the Council of Europe, human rights and international law are continually at risk. Israel, as an occupying power, refused to implement an international resolution passed either by the United Nations Security Council or the General Assembly. In particular, it is turning its back on the two-State solution that is supported by the Council of Europe. Do you not think that its inability to push towards the implementing of this resolution negatively affects the public perception both in Europe and the Middle East of the credibility and activity of the distinguished Council of Europe and of our respective international institutions?

      Mr HOLLIK (Hungary) – Mr Minister, in the light of the recent upheaval in Ukraine, I am thinking of Ukraine’s new law on education. How do you assess the means of this Organisation to efficiently enforce the relevant norms and standards by the member States in the field of minority rights? How do you see your own role as Chairman of the Committee of Ministers? Do you intend to convey messages to us, the respective authorities?

      Mr ZAORÁLEK – Thank you for those three questions.

      I would like to start with the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. We do not have a specific role in this case. Mediation for the settlement of the conflict is the responsibility of the OSCE Minsk Group. This has been repeatedly underlined by the Committee of Ministers. It is essential that Armenia and Azerbaijan abide by the commitment to the Council of Europe to settle the conflict by peaceful means. Our ongoing efforts under the aegis of the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group towards a negotiated solution have my full support. I fully support also the call by the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group to the parties last June to consider measures that would reduce tensions and to re-engage in negotiations on substance in good faith and with political will. I hope that the upcoming meeting between the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan will result in tangible progress towards a negotiated solution to the conflict. The Council of Europe can help to establish conditions conducive to a peace agreement by encouraging confidence-building measures.

      The second question was on Palestine. The Israel-Palestine conflict falls outside the scope of the mandate of the Council of Europe, but I hope that a political solution can be found in the appropriate international fora in order ensure sustainable peace in the region. I know how important and fundamental that is also for us here in Europe. That said, any solution will need to fully comply with the values on which our Organisation is based – human rights, democracy and the rule of law. These are universal values. I hope that we will have the opportunity to see progress in this territory.

      The third question was on Ukraine. I am aware that some member States, including yours, have expressed concerns regarding this matter. Respecting the rights of persons belonging to national minorities, especially their linguistic rights, is indeed important. Ukraine has undertaken specific commitments in this respect as a party to the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. There is a need for dialogue. Ukraine’s minister for education came to Strasbourg last Friday to discuss this matter in person with the Secretary General. I also welcome the decision of the Ukrainian authorities to submit the law to the Venice Commission for opinion. I trust that the Ukrainian authorities will give the appropriate follow-up to this opinion and will draw on any further expert advice of the Council of Europe on the matter.

      Mr CORLĂŢEAN (Romania) – Returning to the new legislation drastically limiting the right of national minorities living in Ukraine, including ethnic Romanians, to education in their mother tongue, I agree that Ukraine is putting in doubt European standards and international multilateral and bilateral commitments. Should not the Committee of Ministers use its tools to add to the call for Ukraine to respect European standards and international commitments?

      Ms GROZDANOVA (Bulgaria) – On the same subject, the Bulgarian national minority in Ukraine is loyal to the Ukrainian state and legal order, fulfilling the requirements of Article 20 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. However, the recently adopted law on education raises concerns among Bulgarians in Ukraine, and in Bulgaria, too. Is the Committee of Ministers committed to assisting Ukraine to ensure that its law on education conforms to the Council of Europe standards on education in the mother tongue?

      Mr ÇAĞLAR (Representative of the Turkish Cypriot Community)* – On the one hand, democracy, human rights and the rule of law are important values for members of the Council of Europe. On the other hand, in many ways there is an ongoing process to unify Europe, but in some countries we see the emergence of nationalism and efforts to secede. What mistake are we making, and what can we do to make sure that we do not suffer dire consequences as a result?

      Mr ZAORÁLEK – Thank you for those three questions. I will answer the first two questions together. Romania and Bulgaria, like some other member States, have expressed concern about the Ukrainian language law, to which Thursday’s emergency debate attests. I will not repeat what I have just said, except to underline once again that I strongly hope that this matter will be settled in accordance with the relevant Council of Europe standards. I trust that the Ukrainian authorities will abide by their commitments, and the opinion to be prepared by the Venice Commission will assist them in that respect.

      It is not easy to answer the question on the rise of nationalistic movements in Europe, and how we work for unity, not division. The rise of extremist movements in Europe, including nationalistic groups that advocate hatred and violence, is very worrying, and that such movements are gaining ground on the mainstream political scene makes it even more worrying. We have to do everything possible to counteract their narrative in order to convince our citizens that these parties, and the ideologies they promote, are in no way a solution to our problems.

      As political leaders, we have a primary responsibility in that respect but, beyond political circles, we must mobilise all democratic forces in our countries to combat extremist views and opinions. Civil society organisations can be most instrumental in that respect. Much has been done within the Council of Europe over the years to combat racism and intolerance. That work clearly needs to be continued, and even reinforced, to defend our shared values.

      Mr FOURNIER (France)* – On Wednesday afternoon our Assembly will debate the report of our colleague Mr Nicoletti on the appeal to hold a Council of Europe Summit in 2019 to celebrate the 70^th anniversary of our Organisation. What is the position of the Committee of Ministers on this issue of the greatest political importance for the unity of our continent?

      Earl of DUNDEE (United Kingdom) – Minister, in acknowledging your country’s useful chairmanship of the Council of Europe, do you agree that future improved focus and direction depend not least on two necessary aspects of management: on better co-ordination of common purpose forged between one six-month chairmanship and the chairmanships that follow it, and on much closer work and co-operation between the country chairmanships themselves and the office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe?

      Ms YAŞAR (Turkey)* – Minister, as the Chair of the Committee of Ministers, you have undertaken a very important task given the current challenges threatening Europe, namely rising Islamophobia, racism and intolerance. The Council of Europe’s mission has become more important than ever. How do you plan to address those challenges during your chairmanship?

      Mr ZAORÁLEK – First, the holding of a fourth summit is obviously a very important matter. Careful consideration is required before we launch such an initiative. The central element is to define an agenda identifying key political issues that can attract heads of State and heads of government, and calling for the adoption of new important decisions for the Organisation’s future. That is a prerequisite and precondition for everything. We must also be sure that the political environment on the pan-European scene is conducive to the holding of such a summit, and I trust that those considerations will be at the centre of the Assembly’s discussion on Wednesday on the important report by Mr Nicoletti. The Committee of Ministers will give careful consideration to the report once the Assembly has decided on its recommendation to the committee.

      Secondly, thank you for the question on how to co-operate closely with the Secretary General. The priorities of the different chairmanships of the Committee of Ministers are clearly not prepared in a vacuum. The member State in question will take into account what it considers to be the most pressing issues facing Europe that fall within the competence of the Council of Europe. However, it will also be aware of what previous and forthcoming chairmanships achieved or hope to achieve during their time in office, and member States will sometimes join forces and adopt common priorities in order to ensure continuity and effectiveness in certain fields.

      Similarly, the member State concerned will discuss its proposed priorities with the Secretary General. The Secretary General makes an annual report, and he raises various issues in his weekly communication with Ministers’ deputies. In addition, as chair I will try to stay in touch with the Secretary General, and he with me, so that we co-ordinate on the more challenging and complicated political issues.

      Allow me to finish with what is probably the last question, which concerns how we want to face current challenges such as rising Islamophobia, racism and intolerance. It is true that unfortunately we are witnessing a rise in racism, intolerance, hate speech and other forms of extremist and xenophobic expression across our member States, and that phenomenon constitutes one of the major threats to our democratic societies. Action against that phenomenon is among the priorities for me and the Committee of Ministers, and it will no doubt remain high on the agenda of the Organisation in the future. I hope so.

      I believe that, to be more effective, we must join forces and co-ordinate our response to these challenges. To that end, we have organised in the framework of our chairmanship, a high-level round table, in co-operation with the Austrian OSCE chairmanship, to discuss activities undertaken by those two organisations to combat extremism and radicalism. I hope we will be able to co-operate and join forces, and that we have a chance to be successful.

      The PRESIDENT – That brings an end to the questions to Mr Zaorálek. Minister, it is not the duty of the President of the Assembly to be partisan on the eve of a domestic election, but whatever the future holds for you, we wish you well. I thank you most warmly on behalf of the Assembly for the answers you have given this afternoon. Thank you for being with us, and thank you for your time.

      I remind the Assembly that the vote is in progress for the election of the President. Polls close at 5 p.m., so those who have not voted may still do so by going to the area behind the President’s chair.

6. Progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee

Observation of the parliamentary elections in Albania (continued)

      The PRESIDENT – We turn finally to continue consideration of the progress report of the Bureau (Document 14409 and addenda 1 and 2), which has been combined with consideration of the report of the Ad hoc Committee of the Bureau on the observation of parliamentary elections in Albania (Document 14392).

      May I remind the Assembly that at this morning’s sitting it was agreed that speaking time in all debates be limited to three minutes?

      This debate must conclude at 5 p.m. I therefore propose to interrupt the list of speakers at about 4.50 p.m. Is that agreed? It is agreed.

      In the debate I first call Mr Stroe.

      Mr STROE (Romania) – Dear members of the Assembly. I had the opportunity to be a member of the ad hoc committee that was created to monitor the parliamentary elections in Albania, and as such please allow me to congratulate Mr Paolo Corsini on this comprehensive and well-balanced report. We must salute the visible progress made by Albania in the electoral process. As the report makes clear, the elections held on 25 June 2017 were free and democratic. Fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of expression, freedom to associate and freedom to demonstrate peacefully, were respected throughout the period of electoral campaigning and on the day of the elections. It is true that unrest was reported in several police stations, and there were some accusations of vote buying, but such incidents remained isolated and did not influence the final result to any significant degree.

      I consider that the significant improvements in the electoral legislation, and the overall process of elections, are the result of the spirit of dialogue and democratic compromise that characterised the agreement of 18 May 2017 between the government and the opposition. That is solid evidence that the Albanian political establishment has gained in maturity, which can only improve the country’s political stability and European Union-membership aspirations. Albanian decision makers must remain steady in their willingness to bridge political gaps and disputes through democratic dialogue. Authorities must continue to improve the legislative framework for elections, in close co-operation with the Venice Commission. Inconsistencies between laws that regulate electoral conduct must be eliminated, and the interparty committee tasked with electoral reform must resume its activity. Legislators must find ways to level the playing field and eliminate the sense of bias that now exists in favour of the two main parties – the socialists and the democrats.

      Democratic elections are crucial for a stable and prosperous Albania. Only that can make Albanian citizens regain confidence in the political establishment, and convince them to build a future for themselves and their children in their home country. Thank you very much.

      Ms DALLOZ (France)* – Despite a very tense situation during the election campaign, I am delighted that the election itself was very calm, which is rather unusual in Albania. I must, however, regret the very low turnout which, as in my own country, I believe ought to alert the people’s representatives. It is important that the country continues on the road to reform, particularly of the judiciary, because that is important for Albania, as well as other Europeans.

      Above and beyond elections, I wish to say what a wonderful instrument election observation is. Having taken part in a number of observation missions, I assure the Assembly that our role is crucial in fostering democracy and the rule of law, because free elections are the foundation of both those things. As part of those efforts, under the auspices of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, the OSCE centralises all observation missions, although our roles are not necessarily always the same. We are not judges. I believe that we should be there to denounce fraud and to emphasise the – at times – impressive efforts that countries make to allow the vote to proceed under the best possible conditions. A sense of humility, as well as respect for voters and those running polling stations, is indispensable. Above all, a joint press release should reflect flawless impartiality, as that is the basis of our credibility.

      This week we are talking about the future of the Council of Europe, and there will be a whole host of elections in 2018. I very much hope that together we can reflect on the future of our observation missions, because the values that we champion through our specialised institutions such as the Venice Commission make it possible for us as parliamentarians in the Assembly to contribute our specific experience, and show that the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe will not close the door on anyone, but is here to use dialogue to lead towards greater democracy.

      Mr GONCHARENKO (Ukraine) – First, I congratulate the Assembly on the fact that the very difficult situation with our former President, Mr Agramunt, is finally resolved. Mr Agramunt voluntarily resigned – it would have been better if he had done so in April, but better late than never. I now wait to see him in the chair of some new Gazprom project, but the story in our Assembly has finally ended happily. What happened next? Next, we saw a new attack on the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Immediately after our June session, when our Assembly had changed the rules and procedures, we had the possibility to dismiss the President and it was clear that the days of President Agramunt would be short. Immediately after that, the Russian Federation stopped making its financial contribution to the Council of Europe. I remind the Assembly that financial contribution is unconditional, but the Russian Federation said that it would pay the money only if the Assembly restored the full credentials of the Russian delegation. However, the credentials of the Russian delegation were suspended because of huge violations of the values of the Council of Europe – democracy, human rights, the rule of law – such as when the Russian Federation annexed Crimea, occupied Donbass, and violated human rights everywhere.

      What is going on now? The Russian Federation wants to say that whoever pays the piper calls the tune. It means that it is blackmailing us and, really, the Assembly. What would happen if this blackmailing was effective? Just imagine. Tomorrow, any other government or country whose behaviour we discuss will say, “Okay, you are discussing us and we will not pay anything”. What could this Organisation become if such blackmailing was effective?

      The key question is: what is the Council of Europe? Is it an Organisation that exists to defend the core values of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, or one that just wants to spend money? That is how the Russian Federation thinks. It is absolutely the behaviour of Putin’s regime. It either threatens people with its rusty bombs or with its money. It is behaviour to which we should say no. This Assembly is a healthy body that thinks about its reputation. Blackmailing us is a huge mistake.

      Mr BUSHATI (Albania) – Dear colleagues, it is an honour for me to address this audience on a matter of major importance for Albania: the successful organisation and development of the parliamentary general election of 25 June 2017. The conduct of the democratic election and its accomplishment with European standards was in line with OSCE/ODIHR recommendations. As outlined in its final report, this year’s general elections were conducted in accordance with OSCE/ODIHR recommendations, international standards and domestic legislation. This year’s election left the conflict situation behind. The process of the election’s administration was improved. Complaints and appeals were closed in a short time, without any claims and without delaying the counting process and the output of the election results.

      It has been our constant concern to achieve the democratic development of Albania in accordance with the European integration agenda. Indeed, the pre-election situation in Albania was tense, but the political agreement between the leaders of the two main parties improved the political situation. The opposition joined the elections and electoral law improved. The election process was monitored by the opposition within executive institutions.

      The agreement proved positive. It ensured the opposition’s participation, improved some of the electoral law, removed the excessive politicisation of this process, lowered the financial costs and developed a correct campaign. However, we are conscious that we can do better. Political forces have expressed their political will to advance deep reforms to end all the negative phenomena that hinder standards.

      It is important that voters re-establish trust in the political process and that their votes are guaranteed. Political influences on the electoral administration need to be eliminated to ensure fair, free and equal elections.

      We must start a profound and comprehensive electoral reform, so we are engaged and working closely with the OSCE. Albania will work very hard to hold high standards in line with European values and be ready to apply them in the coming local elections in two years.

      The PRESIDENT – Thank you. Mr Kandelaki is not here, so I call Ms Naghdalyan.

      Ms NAGHDALYAN (Armenia) – Mr President, dear colleagues, we have listened to the report on the past activities, during which many important statements for our Assembly and European democracy were realised. It is very important that the Assembly, despite such difficult times, about which Mr Ian Liddell-Grainger spoke, persistently follows the path of eradicating the corruption and violations to redeem its good name. I join in greeting the reporter and the whole team that worked over the past months – the bureau, secretariat, Vice-Presidents, heads of political groups and national delegations – for their great job.

      I want to address an issue that is becoming more pressing. For decades, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has been the platform for the protection of human rights and democratic values. We have discussed the most urgent issues of the international agenda, which gives me the right to raise a question: which is of value for us, the people or countries’ borders?

      The recent referendums in Catalonia and in Kurdistan confirm that this problem exists both in the West and in the East. We do not have the right to close our eyes to this serious issue. One by one, people express their will to self-determination and remain unheard. Instead of peaceful democratic processes, conflict situations appear. Yesterday, there were Nagorno-Karabakh, Kosovo, and other known cases. Today, it is Catalonia and Kurdistan. Whose turn will it be tomorrow?

      The Scottish referendum in 2014 remains unique. The British Government was ready to recognise the result of the referendum and this definitely affected the referendum outcome.

      We, the international community, have given a clear signal and strong message that there is no room for speculation: the principles of territorial integrity and of people’s self-determination contradict each other, or one has priority over the other. The United Nations Charter says that self-determined nations enjoy the right of territorial integrity, but the European political culture, which often relies on the international architectural basis of the status quo, has not given a clear implication. Which has the highest priority: the territory as a part of the country or the people as a part of the nation? This speculation and misinterpretations in international law make the people who stand for their independence and freedom suffer and go through ordeals. Who defends their rights?

      Practically, the democratic world not only neglects the fact that people can decide their own dignity, but does not let them say yes or no. Is it possible that by being advocates of human rights we also support violation of people’s rights? Without going into detail on referendums’ causes, forms and consequences, we have to understand why the world is not ready to recognise the legal consequences of this form of the expression of people’s will. It means not taking measures to regulate certain conflicts, but offering fundamental political solutions.

      Ms TOPCU (Turkey): The selection panel of the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 2017 identified Murat Arslan as the winner of the prize. Mr Arslan is charged with membership of the Fetullah Terrorist Organisation, which organised a bloody coup attempt whereby the Turkish Parliament and presidential complex were bombed and 250 Turkish citizens were martyred. Mr Arslan, former president of the now dissolved Association for the Union of Judges and Prosecutors and who was by profession actually a commissioner of audits, not a judge as announced, has been detained as a result of evidence that indicates his strong ties to and membership of Fethullah Gülen’s terrorist organisation, which orchestrated the coup attempt of 15 July 2016.

      Every member of the Assembly should condemn such a decision by the selection panel and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which gives credit to a terrorist organisation that is responsible for the 15 July 2016 coup attempt. This political decision, lacking sufficient reasoning and identifying a former commissioner of audits as “a well-known and reputed judge” is recognised, unfortunately, as a purely hostile attitude towards Turkey and the Turkish people. It is unacceptable for the Assembly to legitimise rewarding those who attempted a coup d’état to overthrow the elected civilian government and suspend the constitutional order.

      Mr SHEHU (Albania)* -        Distinguished members of the Assembly, I have carefully read the two reports – Mr Corsini’s report on the electoral observation mission of the Council of Europe and the final report by OSCE/ODIHR on the 2017 elections. They found that there had been a serious deterioration of conditions in Albania and, when concluding whether the required standards had been met, felt that there were a number of shortcomings in 2017. International observers saw the massive wholesale buying of votes, with dirty money coming from drug trafficking and corruption in the country. Money was often used to try to stifle the opposition – people voting against the government – all of which was in violation of citizens’ rights. We saw for ourselves enormous pressure on voters during the election campaign and huge pressure to vote in favour of the government. Moreover, for the first time, we also saw violations of the right to vote in terms of the private sector. Vote-buying was done by major criminal organisations, funded by proceeds from the sales of cannabis. Resources were used to shore up the majority of the governing party and public revenues were used to influence voters’ choices, in violation of the separation of powers between government and the political parties. In many instances, we saw violations of the right to confidential voting and issues relating to family voting.

      In the light of all those findings, international observers issued priority warnings for the first time. Since 2013, when the socialist government took power, the electoral reform process has not been pursued, which is why the 15 recommendations of 2013 are still pending. That therefore constitutes a serious violation of Albania’s commitment to the Council of Europe, as well as to the OSCE. ODIHR has called for immediate reform – with no further delays – and that is why we again call for this Assembly to redouble its monitoring efforts. That is absolutely crucial in Albania if we are to preserve democratic values.

      Ms BUSHKA (Albania) – Dear President and colleagues, it is a privilege for me to take the floor as a member of the Albanian Parliament delegation, aiming to contribute by upholding the shared values of human rights, democracy and the rule of law – the common heritage of the people of Europe.

      I would like to express my appreciation for the concrete and objective conclusions in the observation report on the parliamentary elections in Albania, prepared by the Ad hoc Committee of the Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly. The recommendations encourage Albania to improve its legal and institutional framework for elections while emphasising support and co-operation with the Assembly in fulfilling that. The report talks positively about the political agreement of 18 May 2017 between the Democratic party and the Socialist party as a step towards an all-inclusive process that lowered political tension and ensured the participation of opposition parties in the election. Indeed, that agreement in Albania was a step towards a culture of political dialogue and compromise instead of political confrontation. This political agreement laid foundations for decreasing the financial cost for campaigns and preventing electoral offences. These amendments contributed to transparency for financial expenses, improved the professional conduct of the central election committee and resulted in fewer cases of electoral offences.

      National minorities had equal opportunities to exercise their rights in the voting process. I am pleased to take this opportunity to inform you that this week the Albanian Parliament will discuss and approve the law on national minorities as a national instrument to advance the effective protection of minority rights in Albania. That commitment by Albania is a step towards its international obligations and especially towards its integration into the European Union.

      Returning to the observation report, some recommendations need immediate attention from the Albanian authorities. That attention is being given. Despite all the comments, this week the Parliamentary Assembly will establish the electoral reform committee on a political all-inclusive basis to address all the recommendations in the new electoral code in Albania. Improvement of the electoral legal framework in close co-operation with the Venice Commission and under the framework of Parliamentary Assembly monitoring procedures will contribute to increasing Albanian citizens’ confidence in democratic elections. This is in line with the Albanian majority and the Albanian Government’s work and commitment to fostering democracy and consolidation of the rule of law in Albania. I express my gratitude to all of you here who have contributed in this regard.

      The PRESIDENT – Mr Liddell-Grainger, you have four minutes to respond to the debate.

      Mr LIDDELL-GRAINGER (United Kingdom) – Thank you very much, Mr President. This has been a most interesting debate. I was taken by many of the contributions from the floor. Many were to do with the situation of the Council of Europe at this precise moment. Many views from esteemed colleagues were about where we go and how we try to get out of the position that we are in. I was most taken by the contributions from Hungarian colleagues, and those from the party spokespeople from Austria, the United Kingdom, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. All centred on the Russian Federation and on how democracy within the European Union and Europe works. We must take that on board.

      Lord Foulkes, from the United Kingdom, made a great contribution and spoke eloquently about the way in which we have urgent debates and how people want to see us deal with things. Mr Seyidov, from Azerbaijan, rightly made the point that there should be a progress report addressing where we are going for the future. We have to learn the lessons of history to move forward in the future. That is a challenge for us all to face. That is why we look forward to the leadership and safe hands of a new President, when we have one, to move us on.

      There were many contributions from our Ukrainian delegates about the Russian situation; one totally understands that in the Ukrainian context. They obviously have grave concerns about the future and about Russian funding. You can look at that whatever way you wish; I would merely point out that we are where we are. A decision has been made by one country and we must deal with that the best way we can.

      There were also some very good contributions from those from Albania and those speaking about Albania. I am sorry that I was not able to hear all of those, but I was interested to hear how the election had moved on and had been dealt with by the election monitors.

      I was also taken by the various views on the fact that we must get over the corruption situation and move on. I am grateful to delegates who have supported the President, the Bureau and the Standing Committee, through understanding the enormous amount of work we have done as colleagues to take the seriousness of the issue on board, and to address the challenges that we face. What has been brought out today is that we must listen to the people of our respective countries.

      I will touch on two contributions made about the difficult and awkward situation in Spain. We have been urged to talk about it much more openly and we were asked to have a more serious debate on the issue. The problem is one of time. Secondly, what would we achieve from a debate, considering that the government in Madrid and the government in Catalonia need time to reflect, to try to resolve the position? I strongly believe – I have some experience of this in the United Kingdom, with Scotland and others – that sometimes it is time to take a deep breath, stand back and allow democratic processes to take their course, and then try to help where we can. The idea of this institution is to help the democratic process. We are not here to disrupt the democratic process – that would not be in our charter.

      A delegate from the United Kingdom made a point about the people in Myanmar. We are not the United Nations. We are certainly not an international organisation in the sense of being able to provide direct help outside our borders. We all know the situation in Myanmar is appalling and ghastly, but countries across the Assembly are working as hard as they can to help those people and ensure their dignity. A million stateless people is disastrous.

      I thank you, Mr President, for your time as president. It has been a great honour to bring forward the views of the Bureau and the Standing Committee. I look forward to continuing to serve the Assembly as best I can. I thank my colleagues for such a constructive, interesting and generally good debate.

      The PRESIDENT – The Bureau has proposed references to committees for ratification by the Assembly, set out in Document 14409 and Addendum 1. Is there any objection to the proposed references to committee? There is no objection, so the references are approved.

      I invite the Assembly to approve the decisions of the Bureau, as set out in the progress report, Document 14409 and Addendum 2. There is no objection. The progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee is approved.

      The ballot for the presidency is now closed. Could the tellers please make themselves available to count the votes?

      I suspend the sitting for 45 minutes while the votes for the presidential election are counted.

      (The sitting, suspended at 5 p.m., was resumed at 5.45 p.m.)

7. Election of the President (Result of second round)

      The PRESIDENT – I have the results of the second round of the election: some 191 members voted; one ballot was spoilt; 190 votes were cast. For an absolute majority, 152 votes are required. The votes cast were as follows: Ms Stella Kyriakides received 121 votes; Mr Emanuelis Zingeris received 69 votes. Neither candidate has received an absolute majority, so we will hold a further ballot tomorrow morning from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. The vote will take place with the election of a judge in respect of Georgia, but for the presidential election a simple majority only will be required.

8. Next public business

      The PRESIDENT – The Assembly will hold its next public sitting tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. with the agenda that was approved this morning.

      The sitting is closed.

      (The sitting was closed at 5.50 p.m.)

CONTENTS

1. Election of the President of the Assembly (Result of first round)

2. Election of the President of the Assembly (Second round)

3. Changes in the membership of committees

4. Prize Award Ceremony: Václav Havel Human Rights Prize

5. Communication from the Committee of Ministers

Address by Mr Lubomír Zaorálek, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Chairman of the Committee of Ministers

Questions: Mr Ghiletchi, Ms Blondin, Mr Howell, Mr Michael Aastrup Jensen, Mr Psychogios, Ms Pashayeva, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Ms Alqawasmi, Mr Hollik, Mr Corlăţean, Ms Grozdanova, Mr Çağlar, Mr Fournier, the Earl of Dundee, Ms Yaşar

6. Progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee

Observation of the parliamentary elections in Albania on 25 June 2017 (continued)

Speakers: Mr Stroe, Ms Dalloz, Mr Goncharenko, Mr Bushati, Ms Naghdalyan, Ms Topcu, Mr Shehu, Ms Bushka

7. Election of the President of the Assembly (Result of second round)

8. Next public business

Appendix I

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]

ALLAVENA, Jean-Charles [M.]

ANDERSON, Donald [Lord]

ANTTILA, Sirkka-Liisa [Ms]

ARENT, Iwona [Ms]

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

BALIĆ, Marijana [Ms]

BARNETT, Doris [Ms]

BAYKAL, Deniz [Mr]

BEREZA, Boryslav [Mr]

BERNACKI, Włodzimierz [Mr]

BĒRZINŠ, Andris [M.]

BEUS RICHEMBERGH, Goran [Mr]

BILDARRATZ, Jokin [Mr]

BİLGEHAN, Gülsün [Mme]

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

BLONDIN, Maryvonne [Mme]

BRASSEUR, Anne [Mme]

BUSHATI, Ervin [Mr]

BUSHKA, Klotilda [Ms]

BUSTINDUY, Pablo [Mr] (BALLESTER, Ángela [Ms])

CENTEMERO, Elena [Ms]

CEPEDA, José [Mr]

ČERNOCH, Marek [Mr] (MARKOVÁ, Soňa [Ms])

CHRISTOFFERSEN, Lise [Ms]

CILEVIČS, Boriss [Mr] (LAIZĀNE, Inese [Ms])

CORLĂŢEAN, Titus [Mr]

CORSINI, Paolo [Mr]

COZMANCIUC, Corneliu Mugurel [Mr] (PLEȘOIANU, Liviu Ioan Adrian [Mr])

DALLOZ, Marie-Christine [Mme]

D’AMBROSIO, Vanessa [Ms]

DAMYANOVA, Milena [Mme]

DAVIES, Geraint [Mr]

DE TEMMERMAN, Jennifer [Mme]

DİŞLİ, Şaban [Mr]

DIVINA, Sergio [Mr]

DONALDSON, Jeffrey [Sir]

DUNDEE, Alexander [The Earl of] [ ]

DURANTON, Nicole [Mme]

EBERLE-STRUB, Susanne [Ms]

ESSL, Franz Leonhard [Mr]

EVANS, Nigel [Mr]

FABRITIUS, Bernd [Mr] (OBERMEIER, Julia [Ms])

FAZZONE, Claudio [Mr] (BERNINI, Anna Maria [Ms])

FILIPOVSKI, Dubravka [Ms] (ZZ...)

FINCKH-KRÄMER, Ute [Ms]

FISCHER, Axel [Mr]

FOURNIER, Bernard [M.]

FRESKO-ROLFO, Béatrice [Mme]

FRIDEZ, Pierre-Alain [M.]

FUCHS, Bruno [M.] (BECHT, Olivier [M.])

GAFAROVA, Sahiba [Ms]

GAILLOT, Albane [Mme]

GAMBARO, Adele [Ms]

GARCÍA HERNÁNDEZ, José Ramón [Mr]

GATTI, Marco [M.]

GERASHCHENKO, Iryna [Mme]

GHILETCHI, Valeriu [Mr]

GIRO, Francesco Maria [Mr]

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

GONÇALVES, Carlos Alberto [M.]

GONCHARENKO, Oleksii [Mr]

GORGHIU, Alina Ștefania [Ms]

GOY-CHAVENT, Sylvie [Mme]

GRECH, Etienne [Mr] (CUTAJAR, Rosianne [Ms])

GRIN, Jean-Pierre [M.] (MÜLLER, Thomas [Mr])

GROTH, Annette [Ms] (WERNER, Katrin [Ms])

GROZDANOVA, Dzhema [Ms]

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

HAJDUKOVIĆ, Domagoj [Mr]

HAJIYEV, Sabir [Mr]

HEER, Alfred [Mr]

HIGGINS, Alice-Mary [Ms] (CROWE, Seán [Mr])

HOFFMANN, Rózsa [Mme] (VEJKEY, Imre [Mr])

HOLÍK, Pavel [Mr] (BENEŠIK, Ondřej [Mr])

HOLLIK, István [Mr] (GULYÁS, Gergely [Mr])

HONKONEN, Petri [Mr] (GUZENINA, Maria [Ms])

HOPKINS, Maura [Ms]

HOWELL, John [Mr]

HUNKO, Andrej [Mr]

HUSEYNOV, Rafael [Mr]

JABLIANOV, Valeri [Mr]

JENIŠTA, Luděk [Mr]

JENSEN, Michael Aastrup [Mr]

JOHNSSON FORNARVE, Lotta [Ms] (KARLSSON, Niklas [Mr])

KALMARI, Anne [Ms]

KERESTECİOĞLU DEMİR, Filiz [Ms]

KESİCİ, İlhan [Mr]

KOÇ, Haluk [M.]

KÖCK, Eduard [Mr] (AMON, Werner [Mr])

KORODI, Attila [Mr]

KOVÁCS, Elvira [Ms]

KOX, Tiny [Mr]

KÜÇÜKCAN, Talip [Mr]

KÜRKÇÜ, Ertuğrul [Mr]

L OVOCHKINA, Yuliya [Ms]

LANGBALLE, Christian [Mr] (HENRIKSEN, Martin [Mr])

LEITE RAMOS, Luís [M.]

LĪBIŅA-EGNERE, Inese [Ms]

LIDDELL-GRAINGER, Ian [Mr]

LOGVYNSKYI, Georgii [Mr]

LOMBARDI, Filippo [M.]

LOUCAIDES, George [Mr]

LOUIS, Alexandra [Mme]

LUCHERINI, Carlo [Mr] (BERTUZZI, Maria Teresa [Ms])

MAELEN, Dirk Van der [Mr] (DUMERY, Daphné [Ms])

MAHOUX, Philippe [M.]

MAIRE, Jacques [M.]

MALLIA, Emanuel [Mr]

MAURY PASQUIER, Liliane [Mme]

MEALE, Alan [Sir]

MEIMARAKIS, Evangelos [Mr]

MIKKO, Marianne [Ms]

MULARCZYK, Arkadiusz [Mr]

MUNYAMA, Killion [Mr] (HALICKI, Andrzej [Mr])

NAGHDALYAN, Hermine [Ms] (FARMANYAN, Samvel [Mr])

NÉMETH, Zsolt [Mr]

NENUTIL, Miroslav [Mr]

OBRADOVIĆ, Marija [Ms]

OBRADOVIĆ, Žarko [Mr]

OBREMSKI, Jarosław [Mr] (BUDNER, Margareta [Ms])

OHLSSON, Carina [Ms]

ÖNAL, Suat [Mr]

OOMEN-RUIJTEN, Ria [Ms]

ORELLANA, Luis Alberto [Mr] (SANTERINI, Milena [Mme])

PALLARÉS, Judith [Ms]

PASHAYEVA, Ganira [Ms]

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

POCIEJ, Aleksander [M.] (KLICH, Bogdan [Mr])

POMASKA, Agnieszka [Ms]

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

PRESCOTT, John [Mr]

PSYCHOGIOS, Georgios [Mr] (KAVVADIA, Ioanneta [Ms])

REICHARDT, André [M.] (GROSDIDIER, François [M.])

RIGONI, Andrea [Mr]

ROCA, Jordi [Mr] (BARREIRO, José Manuel [Mr])

RODRÍGUEZ RAMOS, Soraya [Mme]

ROJHAN GUSTAFSSON, Azadeh [Ms] (GUNNARSSON, Jonas [Mr])

RUSTAMYAN, Armen [M.]

ŞAHİN USTA, Leyla [Ms]

SALMOND, Alex [Mr]

SANTA ANA, María Concepción de [Ms]

SCHENNACH, Stefan [Mr]

SCHOU, Ingjerd [Ms]

SCHWABE, Frank [Mr]

SCULLY, Paul [Mr] (PRITCHARD, Mark [Mr])

SEYIDOV, Samad [Mr]

SHALSI, Eduard [Mr]

SHEHU, Tritan [Mr]

SILVA, Adão [M.]

SOBOLEV, Serhiy [Mr]

SØNDERGAARD, Søren [Mr]

SORRE, Bertrand [M.]

SOTNYK, Olena [Ms]

STELLINI, David [Mr]

STRIK, Tineke [Ms]

STROE, Ionuț-Marian [Mr]

THIÉRY, Damien [M.]

TOPCU, Zühal [Ms]

TORUN, Cemalettin Kani [Mr]

TRISSE, Nicole [Mme]

TRUSKOLASKI, Krzysztof [Mr]

TZAVARAS, Konstantinos [M.]

UYSAL, Burhanettin [Mr] (BABAOĞLU, Mehmet [Mr])

VÁHALOVÁ, Dana [Ms]

VARVITSIOTIS, Miltiadis [Mr] (BAKOYANNIS, Theodora [Ms])

VEN, Mart van de [Mr]

VENIZELOS, Evangelos [M.] (CHRISTODOULOPOULOU, Anastasia [Ms])

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

WALLINHEIMO, Sinuhe [Mr] (PELKONEN, Jaana Maarit [Ms])

WENAWESER, Christoph [Mr]

WILK, Jacek [Mr]

WOJTYŁA, Andrzej [Mr]

WURM, Gisela [Ms]

YAŞAR, Serap [Mme]

YEMETS, Leonid [Mr]

Also signed the register / Ont également signé le registre

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

ANGLADE, Pieyre-Alexandre [M.]

ARIEV, Volodymyr [Mr]

BALFE, Richard [Lord]

BOUYX, Bertrand [M.]

BUDNER, Margareta [Ms]

CORREIA, Telmo [M.]

CSÖBÖR, Katalin [Mme]

EFSTATHIOU, Constantinos [M.]

KIRAL, Serhii [Mr]

LEŚNIAK, Józef [M.]

POPA, Ion [M.]

REISS, Frédéric [M.]

RIBERAYGUA, Patrícia [Mme]

SCHNEIDER-SCHNEITER, Elisabeth [Mme]

SMITH, Angela [Ms]

VERDIER-JOUCLAS, Marie-Christine [Mme]

XUCLÀ, Jordi [Mr]

Observers / Observateurs

ELALOUF, Elie [M.]

LARIOS CÓRDOVA, Héctor [Mr]

RAMÍREZ NÚÑEZ, Ulises [Mr]

SANTANA GARCÍA, José de Jesús [Mr]

SIMMS, Scott [Mr]

TILSON, David [Mr]

WHALEN, Nick [Mr]

Partners for democracy / Partenaires pour la démocratie

ALQAWASMI, Sahar [Ms]

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

Appendix II

Representatives or Substitutes who took part in the ballot for the election of the President of the Assembly / Liste des représentants ou suppléants qui ont participé au vote pour l’élection du/de la Président(e) de l’Assemblée

ÅBERG, Boriana [Ms] 

AHMED-SHEIKH, Tasmina [Ms] 

ALLAVENA, Jean-Charles [M.] 

AMON, Werner [Mr] /KÖCK, Eduard [Mr]

ANDERSON, Donald [Lord] 

ANTTILA, Sirkka-Liisa [Ms] 

ARIEV, Volodymyr [Mr] / USOV, Kostiantyn [Mr]

ARNAUT, Damir [Mr] 

BABAOĞLU, Mehmet [Mr] /UYSAL, Burhanettin [Mr]

BAKOYANNIS, Theodora [Ms] / VARVITSIOTIS, Miltiadis [Mr]

BAKRADZE, David [Mr] / KANDELAKI, Giorgi [Mr]

BALIĆ, Marijana [Ms] / 

BALLESTER, Ángela [Ms] / BUSTINDUY, Pablo [Mr]

BARNETT, Doris [Ms] 

BARREIRO, José Manuel [Mr] / ROCA, Jordi [Mr]

BATRINCEA, Vlad [Mr]

BEREZA, Boryslav [Mr]

BERNACKI, Włodzimierz [Mr] 

BERNINI, Anna Maria [Ms] / FAZZONE, Claudio [Mr]

BERTUZZI, Maria Teresa [Ms] / LUCHERINI, Carlo [Mr]

BEUS RICHEMBERGH, Goran [Mr]

BİLGEHAN, Gülsün [Mme] 

BLONDIN, Maryvonne [Mme] 

BOSIĆ, Mladen [Mr] 

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

BRASSEUR, Anne [Mme] 

BRUYN, Piet De [Mr] 

BUDNER, Margareta [Ms]OBREMSKI, Jarosław [Mr]

BUSHATI, Ervin [Mr] 

BUSHKA, Klotilda [Ms]

BUTKEVIČIUS, Algirdas [Mr] 

CENTEMERO, Elena [Ms]

CHITI, Vannino [Mr] /VERDUCCI, Francesco [Mr]

CHRISTODOULOPOULOU, Anastasia [Ms] /VENIZELOS, Evangelos [M.]

CHRISTOFFERSEN, Lise [Ms] 

CORLĂŢEAN, Titus [Mr] 

CORSINI, Paolo [Mr] 

CRAUSBY, David [Mr] /FOULKES, George [Lord]

CROWE, Seán [Mr] /HIGGINS, Alice-Mary [Ms]

CUTAJAR, Rosianne [Ms] /GRECH, Etienne [Mr]

DALLOZ, Marie-Christine [Mme] 

D’AMBROSIO, Vanessa [Ms] 

DAMYANOVA, Milena [Mme] 

DAVIES, Geraint [Mr] 

DE TEMMERMAN, Jennifer [Mme] 

DİŞLİ, Şaban [Mr] 

DIVINA, Sergio [Mr] 

DONALDSON, Jeffrey [Sir] 

DUMERY, Daphné [Ms] / MAELEN, Dirk Van der [Mr]

DUNDEE, Alexander [The Earl of] [ ] 

DURANTON, Nicole [Mme]

DURRIEU, Josette [Mme]

DZHEMILIEV, Mustafa [Mr] /LOPUSHANSKYI, Andrii [Mr]

EBERLE-STRUB, Susanne [Ms] 

ECCLES, Diana [Lady] 

ESSL, Franz Leonhard [Mr] 

EVANS, Nigel [Mr] 

FARMANYAN, Samvel [Mr] /NAGHDALYAN, Hermine [Ms]

FINCKH-KRÄMER, Ute [Ms] 

FISCHER, Axel [Mr] 

FOURNIER, Bernard [M.]

FRESKO-ROLFO, Béatrice [Mme] 

FRIDEZ, Pierre-Alain [M.] 

GAFAROVA, Sahiba [Ms] 

GAMBARO, Adele [Ms] 

GARCÍA HERNÁNDEZ, José Ramón [Mr] 

GATTI, Marco [M.] 

GERASHCHENKO, Iryna [Mme] 

GHILETCHI, Valeriu [Mr] 

GILLAN, Cheryl [Ms] 

GIRO, Francesco Maria [Mr] 

GONÇALVES, Carlos Alberto [M.] 

GONCHARENKO, Oleksii [Mr] 

GOUTTEFARDE, Fabien [M.] 

GOY-CHAVENT, Sylvie [Mme] 

GROSDIDIER, François [M.] / REICHARDT, André [M.]

GROZDANOVA, Dzhema [Ms] 

GULYÁS, Gergely [Mr] / HOLLIK, István [Mr]

GUNNARSSON, Jonas [Mr] / ROJHAN GUSTAFSSON, Azadeh [Ms]

GUZENINA, Maria [Ms] / HONKONEN, Petri [Mr]

HAJDUKOVIĆ, Domagoj [Mr] 

HAJIYEV, Sabir [Mr] 

HALICKI, Andrzej [Mr] / MUNYAMA, Killion [Mr]

HAMID, Hamid [Mr]

HEINRICH, Gabriela [Ms] 

HENRIKSEN, Martin [Mr] / LANGBALLE, Christian [Mr]

HOPKINS, Maura [Ms] 

HOVHANNISYAN, Arpine [Ms] 

HOWELL, John [Mr] 

HUNKO, Andrej [Mr] 

JABLIANOV, Valeri [Mr]

JENIŠTA, Luděk [Mr] 

JENSEN, Michael Aastrup [Mr]

JENSEN, Mogens [Mr] / SANDBÆK, Ulla [Ms]

JORDANA, Carles [M.]

KARLSSON, Niklas [Mr] / JOHNSSON FORNARVE, Lotta [Ms]

KATSARAVA, Sofio [Ms] 

KAVVADIA, Ioanneta [Ms] / PSYCHOGIOS, Georgios [Mr]

KERESTECİOĞLU DEMİR, Filiz [Ms]

KORODI, Attila [Mr] 

KOSTŘICA, Rom [Mr]/ PECKOVÁ, Gabriela [Ms]

KOVÁCS, Elvira [Ms] 

KOX, Tiny [Mr] 

KROSS, Eerik-Niiles [Mr] 

KÜÇÜKCAN, Talip [Mr]

KÜRKÇÜ, Ertuğrul [Mr] 

KVATCHANTIRADZE, Zviad [Mr]

KYRIAKIDES, Stella [Ms] 

L OVOCHKINA, Yuliya [Ms] 

LAIZĀNE, Inese [Ms]/ CILEVIČS, Boriss [Mr]

LEITE RAMOS, Luís [M.] 

LIASHKO, Oleh [Mr] / VOVK, Viktor [Mr]

LĪBIŅA-EGNERE, Inese [Ms] 

LIDDELL-GRAINGER, Ian [Mr] 

LOGVYNSKYI, Georgii [Mr] 

LOMBARDI, Filippo [M.] 

LOUCAIDES, George [Mr] 

LOUIS, Alexandra [Mme] 

MAHOUX, Philippe [M.] 

MALLIA, Emanuel [Mr] 

MAURY PASQUIER, Liliane [Mme] 

MEALE, Alan [Sir] 

MEIMARAKIS, Evangelos [Mr] 

MIKKO, Marianne [Ms] 

MULARCZYK, Arkadiusz [Mr]

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

MÜLLER, Thomas [Mr] / GRIN, Jean-Pierre [M.]

NÉMETH, Zsolt [Mr]

NENUTIL, Miroslav [Mr] 

NICOLETTI, Michele [Mr]

NOVIKOV, Andrei [Mr] / HERKEL, Andres [Mr]

OBERMEIER, Julia [Ms]/ FABRITIUS, Bernd [Mr]

OBRADOVIĆ, Marija [Ms] 

OBRADOVIĆ, Žarko [Mr] 

OHLSSON, Carina [Ms] 

ÖNAL, Suat [Mr] 

OOMEN-RUIJTEN, Ria [Ms] 

PALLARÉS, Judith [Ms] 

PASHAYEVA, Ganira [Ms] 

PLEȘOIANU, Liviu Ioan Adrian [Mr]/ COZMANCIUC, Corneliu Mugurel [Mr]

POMASKA, Agnieszka [Ms] 

PREDA, Cezar Florin [M.] 

PRESCOTT, John [Mr] 

PRITCHARD, Mark [Mr] / SCULLY, Paul [Mr]

PRUIDZE, Irina [Ms] 

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

RIGONI, Andrea [Mr] 

ROSETA, Helena [Mme] / ESTRELA, Edite [Mme]

RUSTAMYAN, Armen [M.] 

ŞAHİN USTA, Leyla [Ms] 

ŠAKALIENĖ, Dovilė [Ms] / TAMAŠUNIENĖ, Rita [Ms]

SALMOND, Alex [Mr] 

SANTA ANA, María Concepción de [Ms] 

SANTERINI, Milena [Mme] /ORELLANA, Luis Alberto [Mr]

SCHENNACH, Stefan [Mr] 

SCHOU, Ingjerd [Ms] 

SCHWABE, Frank [Mr] 

SEYIDOV, Samad [Mr] 

SHALSI, Eduard [Mr] 

SHARMA, Virendra [Mr] 

SHEHU, Tritan [Mr] 

SILVA, Adão [M.] 

SOBOLEV, Serhiy [Mr] 

SØNDERGAARD, Søren [Mr] 

SORRE, Bertrand [M.] 

SOTNYK, Olena [Ms] 

STELLINI, David [Mr] 

STIENEN, Petra [Ms] 

STRIK, Tineke [Ms] 

STROE, Ionuț-Marian [Mr] 

TARCZYŃSKI, Dominik [Mr] 

THIÉRY, Damien [M.] 

TOPCU, Zühal [Ms] 

TORUN, Cemalettin Kani [Mr] 

TRUSKOLASKI, Krzysztof [Mr] 

TZAVARAS, Konstantinos [M.] 

VALEN, Snorre Serigstad [Mr] / HAGEBAKKEN, Tore [Mr]

VAREIKIS, Egidijus [Mr] / MASIULIS, Kęstutis [Mr]

VEJKEY, Imre [Mr] / HOFFMANN, Rózsa [Mme]

VEN, Mart van de [Mr] 

VORONIN, Vladimir [M.]/POSTOICO, Maria [Mme]

WENAWESER, Christoph [Mr] 

WERNER, Katrin [Ms] / GROTH, Annette [Ms]

WINTERTON, Rosie [Dame] /MASSEY, Doreen [Baroness]

WOLD, Morten [Mr] /GODSKESEN, Ingebjørg [Ms]

WURM, Gisela [Ms] 

YAŞAR, Serap [Mme]

YEMETS, Leonid [Mr] 

ZINGERIS, Emanuelis [Mr] 

ZOHRABYAN, Naira [Mme] 

Vacant Seat, Serbia / Serbie FILIPOVSKI, Dubravka [Ms]