Print
See related documents
Report | Doc. 11477 | 03 January 2008
Protection of the environment in the Arctic Region
(Former) Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs
Summary
The Arctic region is an area with extreme environmental and geographic conditions and a great wealth of natural resources.
Its environment is extremely vulnerable and requires special protection to preserve its biological diversity and unique surface and marine ecosystems. Traditional environmental management patterns developed by indigenous peoples have helped maintain the environmental balance and also the productivity of the region’s natural assets.
Intensive economic exploitation of the Arctic territories for the benefit of the countries bordering the Arctic Ocean, as well as countries planning to develop their economies using the Arctic’s natural resources, calls for the design and implementation of a single strategy and programmes to ensure the preservation of a congenial environment for human activity and for the numerous unique plant and animal species.
The Assembly firmly believes that only through joint efforts and co-ordinated action can we hope to achieve the desired result, namely mutually beneficial economic development of the Arctic region while at the same time preserving its environment.
In this context, the Assembly calls on the member states to find ways of implementing joint and bilateral activities and co-operation to protect the Arctic environment.
A. Draft resolution
(open)1. The Arctic region is unique
by reason of its geographical location and the entire range of extreme environmental
conditions encountered there. It plays a key role in the global
physical, chemical and biological equilibrium. It is also highly
sensitive to climatic variations, and the reactions triggered in
the Arctic have such far-ranging consequences for the global state
of the environment that researchers regard this region as the first to
show the signs of future climate change. It is also a region with
a great wealth of natural resources (minerals, natural gas, oil
and fish stocks).
2. As a result of climate change there is a high risk of warming
of the Arctic region, which could predictably lead to gradual melting
of the polar ice cap over the course of this century with serious
ecological consequences such as the disappearance of summer ice,
rising sea levels, a decrease in seawater salinity, modification
of ocean currents (not least the Gulf Stream) and lower temperatures
in Western Europe.
3. In the far north, especially the Barents Sea, there are significant
hydrocarbon resources, currently estimated at 25% of world reserves.
Technological progress has made it possible to begin exploiting
these deposits, which are essential to Europe’s energy supply.
4. The Parliamentary Assembly nonetheless underlines that exploitation
of the region’s particularly rich mineral resources especially in
the Russian Federation (coal, copper, nickel, cobalt, etc.), involves
highly polluting activities.
5. The Assembly is aware of the serious threat that pollution
and climate change represent for the region’s existing biological
resources (fish, marine mammals, reindeer, bears, birds, etc.).
6. Intensive economic exploitation of the Arctic for the benefit
of the countries bordering the Arctic Ocean, as well as those planning
to develop their economies using the Arctic’s natural resources,
necessitates the formulation and implementation of a strategy and
specific programmes to guarantee the preservation of a congenial
environment for human beings and for the many plant and animal species
unique to the region.
7. The Arctic region is exposed to a particularly serious radiological
risk from European and Russian nuclear waste owing to liquid radioactive
waste carried along by the marine currents (in particular the Gulf Stream),
the presence of decommissioned nuclear power stations, nuclear submarines
and other vessels in a state of disrepair, nuclear-powered lighthouses
and nuclear waste dumped at sea or on unsafe storage sites.
8. The Assembly points out that co-operation in the Arctic region
has recently made good progress. Norway and the Russian Federation
have for many years been implementing very active bilateral co-operation measures,
and some areas of the two countries already enjoy special protected
status. The co-operation must now be extended to the entire region,
so as to foster peace and stability through sustainable development.
9. The Assembly underlines that the highly vulnerable environment
of the Arctic region requires special protection to safeguard its
biodiversity and unique terrestrial and marine ecosystems. Traditional
ways of husbanding natural resources developed by indigenous peoples
play a significant role in maintaining the environmental equilibrium
and have a favourable impact on natural productivity.
10. The long-standing co-operation between Norway and the Russian
Federation could serve as a model for bilateral co-operation activities
to foster the environmental protection and sustainable development
of the Arctic. The implementation of the Kyoto Protocol to the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, aimed at combating
global warming, itself constitutes a positive example of multilateral
co-operation.
11. The Assembly is convinced that international cooperation,
along with the investment of large sums of money, is the only means
of solving many of these problems and promoting a form of economic
development beneficial for all states in the region, while preserving
the environment.
12. The Assembly considers that, in response to the environmental
protection issues facing the Arctic region, all states in the region
must pool their efforts in the framework of the Arctic Council.
13. It welcomes the initiative taken by the Russian Federation
during its chairmanship of the Arctic Council (2004-06) to declare
2007-08 “International Polar Year”. This has made international
co-operation and scientific research in the region a key focus for
the countries concerned in association with other organisations seeking
to develop co-operation in the region, notably for environmental
protection purposes.
14. In this connection, the Assembly draws attention to the importance
of the National Plan of Action for the Protection of the Arctic
Marine Environment implemented in Russia by the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP), including from man-made sources of pollution, as a model
regional scheme for joint action in the light of the positive experiences
and the progress made in Russia.
15. In this context the Assembly calls on member and observers
states of the Council of Europe in the Arctic region:
15.1. to make preservation of the
sustainability of the Arctic ecosystems, as a vital element of the
global ecological equilibrium, a key principle of all national and
regional economic development programmes;
15.2. to develop international co-operation, with a view to
the implementation of joint and bilateral measures for the protection
of the Arctic environment, particularly within the framework of
the Barents Euro-Arctic Council and the existing bilateral agreements;
15.3. to continue the discussions and consultations on economic,
environmental, scientific and technological cooperation so as to
enhance the effectiveness of the environmental protection measures in
view of the foreseeable more intense exploitation of the Arctic’s
natural resources;
15.4. to take into account the Arctic region’s particularities
and the need for specific environmental management schemes when
devising and implementing national policies for the protection and management
of the natural environment;
15.5. to develop sustainable natural resource management strategies
by taking measures aimed at:
15.5.1. safeguarding
the Arctic region from any form of uncontrolled development and
non-sustainable exploitation of its natural resources;
15.5.2. eventing the increased risks of pollution arising from
the economic exploitation of the region and its natural resources;
15.5.3. managing growth in regional tourism in a sustainable,
environmentally friendly manner.
16. Lastly, the Assembly encourages in particular the Arctic Council
to adjust the existing environmental protection strategies and programmes,
devise new ones and implement them bearing in mind the plans for intensive
exploitation of the Arctic’s natural resources.
B. Explanatory memorandum, by Mr Vladimir Grachev
(open)1. Introduction
1. At a time when the natural
resources of the shelf zone of the Arctic Ocean and the adjacent
coastal territories are being intensively exploited for the benefit
of European countries, environmental protection in the Arctic is
an important task not only for the Russian Federation but for all
European countries. The environmental security of the countries
situated within the geographic zone influenced by the Arctic region
must be ensured based on the principles of economic equivalence
of costs, such costs being scientifically justified and necessary
to accomplish the task. Alternative production methods, alternative
technologies for developing natural deposits and territories and
environmental protection measures should be agreed upon and approved in
advance. With a view to achieving the optimum cost/benefit balance,
the development of the Arctic region should be based on systems-analysis
methods and a targeted planning approach.
2. The aim of this report is to identify appropriate ways of
co-ordinating joint activities in environmental protection in the
Arctic region, including co-operation with the UN agencies and other
international organisations.
2. Identification and consideration of the unique geographical features of the Arctic region in a context of intensive economic development
3. The Arctic region embraces
the north polar zone including the Arctic Ocean and the coastal
zones of the adjacent continents of Eurasia and North America. In
terms of physical geography, its border is defined by the 10ºC mean
July isotherm. The Arctic region encompasses the territories, continental
shelf and special economic zones of eight Arctic states.
4. Unlike other regions, the Arctic is characterised by:
- extreme natural and climatic conditions for human survival and economic activity;
- human survival and economy completely dependent on supplies (fuel and food) involving complicated transport arrangements (by air and by sea);
- the extreme vulnerability of the environment, and its low self-purification and self-recovery capacity;
- unique natural systems which provide living environments for the numerically small indigenous peoples of the north.
5. The Arctic Ocean and the adjacent seas are unique marine ecosystems.
Some of them are among the most productive in the world and, as
well as supplying many species of migrating birds with food, are
a source of income for the major fishing fleets of the countries
of the Arctic region.
6. The Arctic region is where the major atmospheric flows, sea
and river currents converge. These flows and currents are a crucial
factor in the long-range transport of pollutants and their possible
accumulation in the region, due to the natural ability of the marine
environment to absorb pollutants from air, ocean currents, coastal
rivers and sea ice.
7. Something that poses a serious threat to Arctic ecosystems
is global warming, which in polar regions is occurring ten times
faster than the global average. Symptoms of global climate change
include unstable weather, catastrophic floods, avalanches and mudslides.
8. The reduction in sea ice observed in the Arctic Ocean in the
20th century occurred against a backdrop of significant annual and
multi-annual atmospheric variability. In 2005, when temperatures
in the Arctic region north of the 65th parallel were the highest
since record keeping began in the mid-19th century, the area of
the sea ice in the northern hemisphere in September decreased to
its lowest level since satellite, and hence more accurate, observation
began.
9. The layer of Atlantic water in the Arctic Ocean has increased
and become warmer. Over the past decade, land snow cover in the
northern hemisphere has been reduced. There are some indications
that precipitation in the Arctic region increased in the 20th century.
Also, the mass balance of ice in the northern hemisphere was negative,
and warming was observed in numerous permafrost areas.
10. There has been an increase in the annual flow of rivers entering
the Arctic Ocean, and its seasonal redistribution. In particular,
over the past twenty to twenty-five years, the main change in the
seasonal flow of rivers in the Arctic Ocean basin has been the marked
increase in their water levels in winter. The total annual flow
of the six largest rivers in Russia (Pechera, Ob, Yenisei, Lena,
Yana, and Indigirka) from 1936, when records began, until 1999 has
increased by 7%, and is still rising.
11. Whereas over the entire 20th century the temperature worldwide
rose by 0.6ºC, in the Arctic region, it rose by 5ºC. According to
scientists, this trend is set to continue, bringing with it the
threat of more natural disasters.
12. Due to the low temperatures, the process of self-purification
of waters in the Arctic territories is very slow, while permafrost
and poor soil inhibit the growth of tundra vegetation.
3. Inventory of sources of negative impact on the Arctic environment
13. Major sources of pollution
include the global and regional transport of substances. Global
pollution is primarily caused by the transport of pollutants by
the Gulf Stream, Siberian rivers and the atmosphere. Regional sources
have emerged as a result of industrial activity in the countries
of the Arctic region.
14. Heavy metals (mercury, cadmium and lead) make their way into
the marine environment via precipitation, river water and local
industrial facilities.
15. Recent studies have shown that the content of pollutants (petroleum
hydrocarbons, synthetic surfactants, phenols, chlorine organic compounds,
polyaromatic hydrocarbons, heavy metals, artificial radionuclides)
in seawater, soil, plants and animal and bird tissues remains very
low and rarely exceeds the natural regional level or maximum concentration
limits.
3.1. Stable organic compounds
16. Virtually all stable organic
compounds have been found in the Arctic, although in significantly
lower concentrations than in temperate zones. Some substances, however,
occur in quantities that could potentially have an adverse effect
on certain animal species and humans in the future.
17. The presence of stable organic compounds in the Arctic is
accounted for by local industrial activities and long-range transport
by air currents.
18. The most severe heavy metal impact on Arctic ecosystems is
made by local sources of pollution. Nickel and copper deposition
combined with acidification causes serious damage to the soil and
ground vegetation.
19. Mercury and cadmium pollution studies have produced some very
alarming findings. Despite the fact that their concentrations in
all environments are within established maximum limits, according
to some estimates, they could soon impact on the health of certain
animal species and the humans who consume them.
20. The amount of mercury is on the rise both in lake and seabed
sediments. Its concentration has apparently also been increasing
in the tissues and organs of some sea mammals over the past twenty
to thirty years. This is thought to be due to the increasing global
flow of mercury which settles and accumulates in the Arctic owing
to the cold climate.
21. In some regions of the Arctic, in particular Greenland and
western Canada, the increase in mercury concentration has been aggravated
by high natural levels, due to local geological conditions.
3.2. Acidification
22. Acidification of the Arctic
ecosystems is, at present, a sub-regional problem. The main source
of acidification is precipitation containing sulphur and nitrogen
oxides. Most of the waste is deposited in the vicinity of industrial
facilities, but the air pollution can travel tens of kilometres
from the emission source. Average annual excess concentrations have
been observed for six substances: sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, nitrogen
oxide, phenols, suspensions and formaldehyde.
3.3. Hydrocarbons
23. One major threat to the Arctic
environment, related to hydrocarbons pollution, comes from oil and
natural gas extraction and transportation. Local damage to the marine
environment is caused by the dumping of oily water from ships. The
main oil and gas fields are located in the Norwegian shelf, south
and north of Alaska (United States of America), the Mackenzie region
(Canada), and the Russian Arctic. In the near future, the development
of discovered oil fields may begin in the Barents Sea, on the western
coast of Greenland, and in northern Alaska. Drilling sludge/mud
also poses a threat to the marine environment during oil extraction.
24. One major hazard when developing oil fields is oil spills
in the case of tanker and pipeline accidents.
25. Oil and other man-made pollution changes the structure of
ecological communities throughout the entire basin. Shifts in environmental
parameters have led to a reduction in the reproduction of biological
material at every stage of the food chain, and to a decrease in
commercial fish stocks and catch levels.
3.4. Radioactivity
26. Potential hazards in terms
of radioactive pollution in the Arctic by man-made radionuclides
include nuclear power plants, nuclear-powered fleet bases and maintenance
sites and radioactive waste handling, storage and temporary burial
facilities.
27. Careful study of radioactive environmental pollution has shown
that the highest concentrations of radionuclides in the Arctic region
occurred in the 1960s, mostly as a result of above-ground nuclear
weapon tests, underground atomic explosions, tests for civilian
purposes, spent nuclear fuel storage and radioactive waste burial.
28. Today, the main sources of man-made radioactive pollution
in the Arctic are global fallout from above-ground nuclear weapon
tests and emissions from European nuclear fuel processing plants.
29. Overall, the findings show that the situation with regard
to radioactive pollution in the Arctic remains stable.
3.5. Pollutants carried by sea currents
30. It is generally acknowledged
that in addition to the large amounts of pollutants from land-based
sources, situated within the territories of the sub-Arctic states,
polluted waters carried by sea currents, primarily the Gulf Stream,
are having an ever more noticeable impact on the Arctic seas.
4. Environmental protection activities in the current context of intensive economic development of the Arctic region
31. The Arctic is becoming the
scene of intensive economic development, with oil and gas fields
being explored and developed on the shelf and oil terminals being
constructed.
32. Given the extremely low self-purification and self-recovery
capacity of Arctic ecosystems, a special approach is needed when
planning future economic activities, and in particular when developing
new oil and gas fields both on land and on the continental shelf
of the Arctic seas, all of which requires an environmental impact
assessment and environmental protection feasibility study.
33. At the same time, a number of specific outstanding issues
need to be addressed, most notably past leaks of radioactive substances,
the disposal of nuclear submarines and arrangements for handling
nuclear waste and spent nuclear fuel.
34. The most common challenges facing the northern territories
include building sewage treatment plants, improving water supplies
for settlements and establishing a toxic non-radioactive waste processing
system.
35. Something that could have a major positive impact on the environment
is the introduction of state-of-the-art energy efficiency and energy
saving technologies.
36. In 2006 the Russian Federation embarked on a project devised
by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the UN Environment
Programme (UNEP) to support the National Plan of Action for the
Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (NPA-Arctic), as a model
regional programme of action to prevent land-based sources of man-made
pollution from having a negative impact on the marine environment.
It is worth noting that the NPA-Arctic project is the largest UNEP
project under way in Russia today.
37. The first step under the UNEP/GEF project has been to frame
a Strategic Action Programme (SAP), which provides for specific
measures to tackle the most pressing environmental protection issues
in the Russian Arctic, with deadlines for their implementation and
an estimate of the cost of the work. The SAP is expected to be approved
by the relevant federal executive authorities and executive authorities
of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The SAP has
now entered the final development stage and will be presented shortly
at national level.
38. In the course of preparing the SAP, the first strand of the
project was implemented, namely a comprehensive diagnostic analysis
of the state of the Russian Arctic environment. Pre-investment studies, which
are the second strand, have also been carried out, providing a detailed
justification for an optimum set of environmental protection measures
requiring significant investments. It is planned to develop environmental recovery
measures, which could be implemented by the Russian Federation and
the funding partners, in particular those from the Arctic countries.
39. An improvement in the Environmental Protection System (EPS)
for the Russian Arctic is expected to follow from the SAP and will
constitute the first stage of its implementation. The EPS will include
changes and improvements in the legal, administrative, institutional
and industrial sectors, which will be implemented within the SAP.
40. The EPS is the third main strand and should pave the way for
the development of a comprehensive legal framework for environmental
protection, sustainable natural resource management and the judicious
and environmentally sound development of the non-renewable resources
of the north. This strand is particularly important as it will ensure
that the SAP is implemented at both federal and local levels.
41. The fourth and final strand includes three demonstration projects,
which are to serve as a basis for the wider application of environmental
recovery and damage prevention methods in the Russian Federation
and other states, both Arctic and non-Arctic. The first demonstration
project is aimed at creating the necessary conditions for joint
environmental protection management by executive authorities, extraction
companies and the indigenous peoples of the north. The second project
will demonstrate the opportunities for using seaweed to decontaminate
seawater while the third will deal with the ecological rehabilitation
of decommissioned military facilities with a view to converting
them to civilian use.
42. In addition, a whole series of smaller pilot projects has
been considered and approved within the framework the NPA-Arctic
project. These were proposed by local authorities in certain regions
and are aimed at improving the environmental situation in enterprises,
waters and communities situated within their territory.
43. The NPA-Arctic project is expected to have a positive impact
on the state of the environment in the Arctic at international level,
especially the Arctic Ocean basin and its shelf seas, and to contribute
to the implementation of two important international agreements:
the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS) and the Global
programme of action for the protection of the marine environment
from land-based activities.
44. As a member of the Arctic Council, Russia advocates forging
relations on an equitable basis, through implementation of the programme
for assessing each country’s contribution to the pollution and degradation
of Arctic ecosystems. Such contributions can effectively be determined
via statistical observation of total emissions of pollutants from
stationary sources, emissions from mobile pollution sources, marine
and land-based discharge of waste water, hazardous waste generation
and unsustainable land management.
5. Arctic sites requiring special protection
45. Much of the Arctic consists
of landscapes which have been virtually unchanged by human activity,
and where the traditional environmental management methods practised
by indigenous peoples have been preserved. Research into little-developed
regions of the Arctic has shown that all types of landscapes and
the individual components thereof (soil, vegetation, animal tissues)
are polluted with chlorine organic compounds, which typically build
up in food chains and, as a result of biological accumulation, reach
significant concentrations in animal tissues. The highest concentrations
of chlorine organic pesticides have been found in north-eastern
areas, that is, in places where they have never been used. This
confirms the important role played by tropospheric transport in
carrying pollutants from more southerly latitudes (Europe, South-East
Asia, North America) and the extent to which these enter land and
marine ecosystems through precipitation. Some transport of pollutants
occurs through migratory birds (which bring polyaromatic hydrocarbons
from western Europe and chlorine organic compounds from South-East
Asia).
46. One pressing question facing the Arctic today is how to combine
non-intensive traditional environmental management, as practised
by the numerically small indigenous peoples of the north, with modern
intensive forms of natural resource development. Some of the areas
inhabited by indigenous peoples are currently of major interest
to the extraction companies, whose activities have a destructive
effect on traditional environmental management systems. Yet as we
all know, not only are these more traditional systems not damaging,
but they also actively help preserve the quality of the environment
and the cultural values of the ethnic groups concerned.
47. Intensive industrial impact on the environment leads to depletion
of the resources on which traditional environmental management systems
rely. Thousands of square kilometres of reindeer pastures and fishing grounds
have been lost. This, combined with heavy metal emissions, has led
to serious disruption to or complete destruction of plant ecosystems
for tens of kilometres around iron and steel plants. The impact
of these factors, however, can scarcely be observed outside the
200-kilometre zone around such enterprises.
48. Conservation areas and other specially protected areas in
Russia are the most efficient way to protect Arctic biological diversity.
At present, Russia has 12 specially protected natural areas of federal
significance in the Arctic, including 11 conservation areas and
the Franz Josef Land Federal Nature Reserve. In addition, 23 regional
nature reserves and a number of other specially protected areas
of regional significance have been established in the Arctic zone.
49. In all, specially protected natural areas make up about 5%
of the total area of the Russian Arctic.
50. The functioning of Russia’s state conservation areas and national
parks depends, to a large extent, on pre-existing facilities and
staff and their enthusiasm. Today, without additional support, the
stable functioning of conservation areas as a key factor in sustainable
development and the preservation of biological diversity could be
seriously undermined.
6. Conclusions
51. The environmental protection
issues facing the Arctic region can be successfully resolved only
through the joint efforts of all the Arctic states within the framework
of the Arctic Council. In our view, there is a need to adjust, further
develop and implement strategies and programmes to protect the environment,
taking into account plans for the intensive development of the Arctic’s
natural resources.
52. Another equally important task is to develop international
co-operation in the implementation of environmental protection activities
within the framework of the Barents Euro-Arctic Regional Council
and bilateral agreements.
53. The long-standing co-operation between Russia and Norway is
a successful example of bilateral co-operation on environmental
protection and sustainable development in the Arctic, while a good
example of multilateral co-operation would be the implementation
of the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change in tackling global warming.
54. When framing and implementing national environmental protection
and management policy, due consideration must be given to the unique
characteristics of the Arctic, as a region requiring the development and
introduction of special environmental management arrangements. A
primary consideration when devising economic development programmes,
therefore, must be the need to maintain the sustainability of Arctic ecosystems,
as the key element in the global environmental balance.
Reporting committee: Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs.
Reference to committee: Doc. 10769 and Reference No. 3222 of 29 May 2006.
Draft resolution adopted unanimously by the committee on 20 December 2007.
Members of the committee: Mr Walter Schmied (Chairperson), Mr Alan Meale (1st Vice-Chairperson), Mr Pasquale Nessa (2nd Vice-Chairperson), Mr Ruhi Açikgöz, Mr Milos Aligrudić, Mr Gerolf Annemans, Mr Ivo Banac, Mr Tommaso Barbato, Mr Rony Bargetze, Mr Paul Bradford (alternate: Mrs Cecilia Keaveney), Mr Ivan Brajović, Mr Mauro Chiaruzzi, Mrs Pikria Chikhradze, Mr Valeriu Cosarciuc, Mr Osman Coşkunoğlu, Mr Taulant Dedja, Mr Hubert Deittert, Mr Tomasz Dudziński, Mr József Ékes, Mr Savo Erić, Mr Bill Etherington, Mr Nigel Evans, Mr Iván Farkas, Mr Adolfo Fernández Aguilar, Mr György Frunda, Ms Eva Garcia Pastor, Mr Konstantinos Gioulekas, Mr Peter Götz, Mr Vladimir Grachev, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Mr Stanisław Huskowski, Mr Jean Huss, Mr Fazail İbrahimlı, Mr Ilie Ilaşcu, Mr Mustafa Ilicali, Mrs Fatme Ilyaz, Mr Ivan Ivanov, Mr Bjørn Jacobsen, Mr Gediminas Jakavonis, Mrs Danuta Jazłowiecka, Mr Victor Kolesnikov, Mr Juha Korkeaoja, Mr Gerhard Kurzmann, Mr Dominique Le Mèner, Mr François Loncle, Mr Aleksei Lotman, Ms Kerstin Lundgren, Mr Theo Maissen (alternate: Mr John Dupraz), Mrs Maria Manuela de Melo, Mr José Mendes Bota, Mr Vladimir Mokry, Mr Stefano Morselli, Mr Tomislav Nikolic, Mrs Carina Ohlsson, Mr Pieter Omtzigt, Mr Germinal Peiro, Mr Ivan Popescu, Mr Cezar Florin Preda, Mr Jakob Presečnik, Mr Lluís Maria de Puig, Mr Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, Mrs Adoración Quesada Bravo (alternate: Mr Gabino Puche), Mr Dario Rivolta, Mr René Rouquet, Mrs Anta Rugāte, Mr Fidias Sarikas, Mr Hermann Scheer, Mr Andreas Schieder, Mr Mher Shahgeldyan, Mr Steingrímur J. Sigfússon, Mr Hans Kristian Skibby, Mr Ladislav Skopal, Mr Christophe Spiliotis-Saquet, Mr Rainder Steenblock, Mr Vilmos Szabó, Mr Bruno Tobback, Mr Nikolay Tulaev, Mr Victor Tykhonov, Mr Tomáš Úlehla, Mr Rudolf Vis, Mr Harm Evert Waalkens, Mr Mykola Yankovskyi, Mrs Maryam Yazdanfar, Mr Blagoj Zašov, Ms Rodoula Zissi.
NB: The names of those members present at the meeting are printed in bold.
See 4th Sitting, 22 January 2008 (adoption of the draft resolution, as amended); and Resolution 1596.