AS (2013) CR 01
2013 ORDINARY SESSION
________________________
(First part)
REPORT
First sitting
Monday 21 January 2013 at 11.30 a.m.
In this report:
1. Speeches in English are reported in full.
2. Speeches in other languages are reported using the interpretation and are marked with an asterisk.
3. Speeches in German and Italian are reproduced in full in a separate document.
4. Corrections should be handed in at Room 1059A not later than 24 hours after the report has been circulated.
The contents page for this sitting is given at the end of the report.
(Mr Iwiński, the doyen of the Assembly, took the Chair at 11.35 a.m.)
1. Opening of the 2013 ordinary session
The PRESIDENT* – I declare open the 2013 ordinary session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
2. Address by the doyen of the Assembly
The PRESIDENT* – For the second time, under the new rules, it is the honour of the doyen of the Parliamentary Assembly to fulfil this task. This is what our founding fathers required and it is in tune with the principles of the Organisation. The Council of Europe, the oldest organisation on our continent, will soon celebrate its 6th birthday. Unfortunately, it does not have a high enough profile throughout the continent.
I welcome you all on this Monday morning and wish you all a very happy new year. I welcome in particular the new members, as well as the observers and partners for democracy who represent those countries that work together with the Council of Europe. I also wish the Secretariat a happy new year.
Over the last few months, there have been parliamentary elections in various places: Armenia, France, Greece, Georgia, Lithuania, Latvia, Ukraine, Romania, Serbia, Netherlands and Slovak Republic. That means, among other things, that there are changes to the delegations from those countries. As Max Weber said, the art of politics is not to be elected; it is to be re-elected. There are other important elections in Italy and Germany that are worthy of our attention.
(The speaker continued in English.)
On 12 December last year, Lluís Maria de Puig from Spain died at the age of only 67. He was one of the most outstanding figures in the history of the Council of Europe: a member of our Assembly for more than a quarter of a century, the Chairman of the Committee on Culture, Science and Education and president of the Socialist Group. The author of several books, he served as President of this Assembly between 2008 and 2010. He was an exceptional individual – a top-notch character, as the Spanish would say. I ask members to observe a minute’s silence.
(The Assembly observed a minute’s silence.)
European societies and institutions face different challenges today. We should respond to them in close co-operation with the European Union and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe. One of the most dangerous attitudes in many member countries is rising nationalism resulting from the decline of democracy and the economic crisis. That could, perhaps, be overcome by the elaboration of a real European constitution, an idea that lies at the origins of the Council of Europe. In times of destabilisation and uncertainty, there is a particular need to defend and propagate fundamental values with all our might, to paraphrase Erich Fromm; for instance, trying to confront terrorism as well as xenophobia without violating human rights, which are the hallmark of our organisations.
3. Examination of credentials
THE PRESIDENT – The first item of business is the examination of members’ credentials. The names of the members and substitutes are in Document 13096. If no credentials are contested, the credentials will be ratified.
Are any credentials challenged?
Before calling a member to speak at this point, I remind the Assembly that the rules on challenges to credentials require the member challenging the credentials to state which credentials are being challenged; whether the challenge is under Rule 7 (procedural grounds) or Rule 8 (substantive grounds); and the reasons for the challenge in each case.
I call Ms Nirenstein.
Ms NIRENSTEIN (Italy) – I want to challenge the credentials of two members. One is the Hungarian, Mr Tamás Gaudi Nagy, belonging to the Jobbik party, and the other is Ms Eleni Zaroulia, of the Greek delegation, from the Golden Dawn party. According to Rule 7 of the Rules of Procedure, if 10 members stand up with me, they will bring this problem forward. I think that their political parties are racist and anti-Semitic, and this clashes with Article 3 of our Statute, according to which every member of the Council of Europe must accept the principle of the rule of law and the enjoyment by all persons within its jurisdiction of human rights and fundamental freedom. Looking at the record, whether personal or political, of these two members of our Council of Europe, we see that what they say is not compatible with that.
Ms Zaroulia said in her Parliament that immigrants are sub-humans who invade the fatherland, bringing diseases. Mr Gaudi Nagy asked in his Parliament for a list of the Jews who pose a national security threat and said that there is a Holocaust industry that helped the Jews dominate the world. I do not think that these two people, given their record in this regard and the records of their political parties, which I will not quote for the sake of brevity, can sit in an Assembly that is all for human rights and for the equality of its members.
We have many signatures to our document, which we will present. Not all of our people could be here because of time and the weather.
THE PRESIDENT – Ms Nirenstein, I am sorry but you are abusing our patience and the rules. Please finish your statement.
Ms NIRENSTEIN (Italy) – I ask members who are against racism to stand up with us.
THE PRESIDENT – Thank you, Ms Nirenstein, even if you abused the rules on times for speeches.
The challenge is made under Rule 7. Each challenge must be dealt with individually. We will first consider the challenge against Ms Eleni Zaroulia, from Greece, from Chrysi Avgi – Golden Dawn.
A challenge under Rule 7 must be supported by at least 10 members, from at least five national delegations, present in the Chamber. Would those members supporting this challenge please rise in their places and remain standing while we check whether the requirement is met?
The challenge has the support required under the rules of procedure. Accordingly the credentials of Ms Eleni Zaroulia of the Greek delegation are referred without debate to the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs.
Now we will consider the challenge against Mr Tamás Gaudi Nagy of Hungary, from Jobbik –Movement for a Better Hungary. Would those members supporting this challenge please rise in their places and remain standing while we check whether the requirement is met?
The challenge has the support required under the rules of procedure. Accordingly the credentials of Mr Tamás Gaudi Nagy, of the Hungarian delegation, are referred without debate to the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs.
Are there any other challenges?
There are no other challenges.
I draw your attention to Rule 7 under which the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs may conclude that the credentials should be ratified, in which case it may submit an opinion to the President of the Assembly who shall read it out to the Assembly without debate.
If the committee concludes otherwise, its report shall be placed on the agenda for debate.
Members or substitutes whose credentials are contested are entitled to take their seats provisionally until the Assembly has reached a decision in their case; however, they may not vote in any proceedings relating to the examination of their own credentials.
The other credentials set out in Document 13096 are ratified. I welcome our new colleagues.
4. Election of and address by the President of the Assembly
THE PRESIDENT – The next item of business is the election of the President of the Assembly.
I have received only one candidature: that of Mr Jean-Claude Mignon, France, of the Group of the European People’s Party.
Therefore, in accordance with Rule 14, I declare Mr Mignon elected President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe for this ordinary session.
Mr Mignon, I congratulate you on your re-election.
(Mr Mignon, President of the Assembly, took the Chair in place of Mr Iwiński)
THE PRESIDENT* – My dear colleagues, thank you, first and foremost, for the confidence you have shown in me and for renewing that confidence.
I am moved, as I am sure you all are, at the death of our friend, Lluís Maria de Puig, one of my predecessors in the Chair of the President of the Parliamentary Assembly. I very much join in the comments of our doyen, Mr Iwiński.
Perhaps I can recall one or two of the milestones that characterise Lluís Maria de Puig’s period in the Parliamentary Assembly. He sat in our Parliamentary Assembly for 29 years. He prepared 30 reports and opinions on various issues including European history; the teaching of history; regional and minority languages; the State, religion and democracy, and human rights; inter-religious dialogue; culture and co-operation in the region of the Mediterranean; the situation in the Middle East; and regionalisation in Europe.
Mr Iwiński has said all that needed to be said. I just want to read to you the last speech which Lluís Maria de Puig delivered in this Chamber. You will recall that he sat at place 322. Lluís Maria said that things were clear and that the facts were established. The persecution of certain Christian communities in the Middle East was proven and scandalous. As colleagues will know, Lluís Maria made those comments during our urgent debate on violence against Christians in the Near and Middle East. He said that articles and images in the newspapers were truly appalling and that the Council of Europe should take a stand, as it ran counter to its ethics, values and principles and violated the European Convention on Human Rights. He said that, like the European Parliament, the Assembly should react robustly and relevantly to such excesses and that religious minorities had encountered obstacles throughout their history, but that recently we had witnessed a dangerous slippage. He said there was reason to fear that there might be disproportionate conflicts and new wars of religion, that the Council of Europe had to take a stand and that all European politicians who believed in our principles had to act forcefully to alert public opinion and prevent the trend from worsening.
Those comments are as valid today as when Lluís Maria extended his support for Luca Volontè’s report. He pointed out that he was not just referring to Christian minorities, but to all religious minorities, given the universal scope of the Council of Europe and its stand on freedom of religion and conscience. As members will recall – several of you are in the same seats as you were then – his conclusion was especially moving, and I speak today with great emotion. He said that it was his last statement before a plenary sitting of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and he was leaving the institution after 29 years. He conveyed his warmest thanks to everyone for their generosity, co-operation and friendship. We gave him a standing ovation and thanked him for everything he had contributed to the Council of Europe to carry forward our values. On behalf of all members, I can say that we will never forget him. I convey our heartfelt condolences and grief to his family.
My dear colleagues, I thank you for the trust you have placed in me by re-electing me to the presidency of the Assembly. I appreciate your support immensely and regard it as an encouragement to continue our action here. Like General de Gaulle, I am convinced that politics must be action on behalf of a strong and simple idea. As far as I am concerned, this idea is that of an Assembly that loudly and clearly proclaims the values of the Council of Europe. With this in mind, I would like to begin by giving you a brief account of my first year in the presidency before setting out my plans for 2013.
First, I shall give an initial overall assessment. As I pointed out on 23 January 2012, I have based all my action on the fact that we must change if we are to match up to our predecessors and remain relevant, and if we are to avoid the fate of other institutions. It was clear to me from the outset that parliamentarians should be fully involved in the reform, and this Assembly should become even more their Assembly. I therefore concluded that the life of this Assembly should be more participative and more democratic – in short, that we should implement our values.
This is why I have introduced a new conference of committee chairs, which will meet on pre-session Sundays – yesterday, in other words – before and then with the Presidential Committee, so that we can all discuss the agenda for the forthcoming part-session. Concurrently, since most questions relating to the agenda will have been settled the previous day, the time thus freed will enable us, as I had hoped, to deal at greater length during the Bureau meeting with policy issues, which is obviously our main mission.
I have accordingly decided to hold meetings of national delegation chairs during each part-session. They are the heart and soul of our Assembly, which is an emanation of our member States’ 47 parliaments. What could be more normal and legitimate than organising dialogue between them and the President of the Assembly? In fact I have always fallen into line with their views – for instance on the organisation of the standing committees – even when they have contradicted my initial proposals.
My first year as President has also been marked by the implementation of the Assembly reform that I initiated as Rapporteur of the Ad hoc Committee, which was established by my predecessor, Mr Çavuşoğlu, to whom I pay tribute. I am proud of this. I am thinking, for example, of the introduction of new procedures such as free debates. This procedure clearly still requires improvement, but it already fits with the search for an overall framework that will enable Assembly members to express themselves.
No innovation is without its teething problems. We currently suffer from a real deficit in terms of recognition and visibility of the substantive work that we do to promote the rule of law and human rights. This is an enormous challenge, and although we are obviously not here to replace our national parliaments, it is our duty to ensure that these parliaments can relay our work – that they act as our mouthpieces, so to speak. This is why I attach so much importance to the national parliaments. From this angle, I can only welcome the success of the Conference of Speakers of Parliament last September and of my exchanges with various national parliaments, such as the Bundestag in Berlin. I thank Joachim Hörster for having made that meeting possible, together with the Speaker of the Bundestag. It was a particularly interesting exchange.
I also requested – and I am glad to see that this is now the case – that new members be presented with a welcome file providing the main information that they will need to integrate into an institution such as this, which obviously differs from their national parliaments. Lastly, I have endeavoured, and will continue to endeavour, as far as possible to regularly attend committee meetings and to chair the Assembly in order to maintain close, strong and direct contact with the core of our work. It is also a pleasure for me to sit alongside my parliamentary colleagues, to hear what they have to say and to take on board their suggestions and criticism so that we can further improve. That, in a nutshell, is the work I have been conducting over the past year at the internal level, in accordance with the commitments I made last January in this Chamber.
Before moving on to another strand of my work so far, let me outline my vision of the President’s role. As we are among friends, let us be frank. Pierre Mendès France always argued that politicians were duty-bound to explain to their constituents the actual problems and the measures they planned to remedy them. He argued that if integrity and fundamental respect for truth were not there, there could be no democracy. I share that view.
I do not think that the President’s role should be confined to deciding on debates, validating interpretations of obscure points in our regulations and symbolically chairing meetings and official ceremonies. On the contrary, I am convinced that the role and duty of the President of this Assembly is to provide the Assembly with political impetus and to represent it as far as possible in the outside world, or in other words to give it as much political relevance as possible. I know that this vision is not to everyone’s taste, and that some people may challenge various initiatives that I have taken, as is their right. That is how democracy works, but in an Assembly that only holds four plenary sessions per year and which suffers from an obvious lack of visibility and sometimes, to be frank, from a lack of clarity as to its aims, who is better placed than the President to play such a role?
At the risk of hurting certain sensibilities, or treading on toes, I think a strong, determined presidency is required, but, as I have just explained and hopefully demonstrated, such a presidency is neither a solitary nor a dictatorial presidency. On the contrary, I hope that it is participatory and collegial. Quite simply, my main concern is not and cannot be desperately to seek arrangements that allow everyone to be happy at the cost of producing tentatively worded texts or vague and unspecific instruments that ruffle no one. Above and beyond the President’s role, the worst thing that our Assembly could do would be to neutralise itself by not daring to adopt necessary positions for fear of coming up against artificial alliances. That would spell the end for this institution.
I have also endeavoured to place relations between the Committee of Ministers and the President of the Parliamentary Assembly on a more regular and relaxed footing, which is why I have decided to go present the outcome of each part-session to the Committee of Ministers.
I say to the ambassadors present in the Chamber that our encounters are important. They are frank and cordial. You listen to what I say and put questions that I answer. I enjoy our exchanges, and I have been led to believe that the sentiment is mutual. I welcome the initiative; it is important for our Assembly. In the past, we have suffered too much from a lack of understanding between our two institutions.
I am convinced of the need for the bodies of the Council of Europe to work together to achieve our objectives. I am glad to have been able to visit Tunisia with the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, the Albanian Foreign Minister and the Chairman of the Venice Commission. I am not trying to promote any partisan agenda. My sole ambition is proudly to bear the banner of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and of our values – democracy, equality between men and women, freedom, human rights and the rule of law – and to fly it high. Effort at co-ordination and coherency within the Parliamentary Assembly is also needed.
Another priority I have announced for my presidency is strengthening relations with the European Union. I began by attempting to remedy the mutual ignorance which separates us more effectively than any other obstacle. Accordingly, I have paid regular visits to the European Parliament to attend meetings of committees, various groups and other informal bodies. For instance, I attended the debate on Romania, and I met President Martin Schulz twice in Brussels. I also made contact with the European Commission, in particular with Mr Štefan Füle, with whom we decided on the principle of a meeting every two months. The first meeting took place here in Strasbourg on 12 December. I am delighted that Commissioner Füle has accepted an invitation to come speak to us this week. It is a recognition of the work of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
In order to facilitate such exchanges, I try to be present regularly in Strasbourg during European Parliament sessions. More broadly, I have been trying to reinforce synergies with all the other European organisations. I thank the Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly for paying tribute to those efforts when configuring the General Assembly of the Secretariat as a whole. I have also been trying to reinforce synergies with the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe in the field of election observation.
Another priority is frozen conflicts. Although we cannot replace intergovernmental diplomacy, we can – this is the essence of parliamentary diplomacy – facilitate dialogue by encouraging discussions between the elected representatives of European States involved in conflict, without the preconditions that are often used as a pretext for refusing dialogue. Jean Monnet once said that persuading people to talk to each other is the most we can do for peace. That is the spirit in which I have established these contacts. I pay special tribute to the Moldovan authorities for their willingness to engage in dialogue, and I thank them for the hospitality that they have extended to me twice and the opportunity that they afforded me to speak to the Parliament of the Moldovan Republic.
I underline the importance of taking action to support our member States and help them find solutions to situations of tension and internal conflict. In that context, I can only encourage the Turkish authorities’ efforts to enter new negotiations with Abdullah Öcalan. I believe I speak on colleagues’ behalf when I express once more my consternation at the assassination of Sakine Cansiz, Fidan Doğan and Leyla Söylemez in Paris. I immediately spoke out in condemnation of those assassinations in a communiqué. They must not endanger negotiations. I encourage the Turkish authorities to proceed with the discussions.
Broadly speaking, I consider it unacceptable – indeed, inconceivable – that wars and refugee camps persist on our continent, given that the Council of Europe was set up to defend peace and human rights in Europe. I welcome the fact that we will hold a debate on that subject under urgent procedure in a couple of days’ time, with a vote on a resolution and recommendation. That was the wish expressed by the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons in a proposal made by Chairman Santini. An ad hoc committee has been set up under the auspices of that committee with a view to embracing the issue of migration fully. Migrants today find themselves in a situation that is more than precarious; indeed, any visitor to the various detention centres will find it dramatic.
Naturally, I shall endeavour to continue into 2013 the action we initiated in 2012. I shall strive in particular to ensure that co-operation with the European Union is as pragmatic as possible. We will have to move forward, for example, on links between our committees and those of the European Parliament, and between the conferences of committee chairs of both Parliaments. This is an historic opportunity we cannot miss.
I would also like to advance along the road to improving the problem of parliamentarian attendance at sessions, debates and voting. It is important that you are motivated, and for that to happen, we must have interesting agendas. You must also be able to attend. It is the old problem of compatibility between the work of the national parliaments and the Parliamentary Assembly. With 47 national parliaments, we will never be able to dovetail agendas perfectly. On the other hand, an initial approach might be explored, involving delegating voting in both national parliaments and the Parliamentary Assembly. I realise that that might require changing principles that are firmly anchored in some of our countries, yet given that parliamentarians are mandated by their national parliaments, it is legitimate for the latter to allow their members to fulfil this mission. Another solution might be to allow the delegation of votes at the Parliamentary Assembly, albeit at the risk of encouraging absenteeism. Perhaps you could give this some thought; it is just one avenue we might like to explore. If we were to go down that path, we would need to bring the rules into line. I just wanted to suggest some ideas.
Similarly, a number of you have suggested grouping votes together on fixed dates. We might also consider this option. My intuition is that if we chose this proposal, we would have to confine the procedure in question to a select number of subjects of prime political importance, in order to ensure that the meaning of the vote is clear to all and that we do not encourage absenteeism during plenary debates. There is also the risk of contradiction between debates and votes. As you can see, the problem is not straightforward, but it is our duty to reflect calmly and collectedly on all these issues and take on board the opinions of all, respecting the views of the various national parliaments. I reaffirm that I am and will continue to be enormously interested in your suggestions and observations. Our Assembly is a collective project which can only function with the commitment of all, so help me – I need your support and your assistance, and I need to know your opinions.
In conclusion, I thank the Secretary General of our Assembly, and through him, all who work within the general Secretariat of the Parliamentary Assembly. I thank you for the quality of the work done and the excellence of the reports put to us. On my behalf and that of the Parliamentary Assembly, I thank and congratulate your staff. As President, I also thank our interpreter friends. We often put extra work their way and speak so quickly that it is rather difficult to communicate. I put myself in the position of those who are not speaking in their mother tongue, but those of us who speak English and French make things easier for them.
I thank all members for their attention and for their renewed confidence in me, and I hope to be able to show that I am worthy of that confidence in the year ahead.
5. Register of attendance, voting cards and written declarations
THE PRESIDENT* – May I remind all members, including substitutes and observers and partners for democracy, to sign the attendance lists outside the doors of the Chamber at the beginning of every sitting?
May I also remind all members and duly designated substitutes to place their voting cards in the slot in front of them to ensure that the electronic system works properly?
I remind members that a number of written declarations tabled in the previous part-session remain open for signature until the end of this part-session; they are listed in today’s “Organisation of Debates”. Members who wish to add their names to a written declaration should go to the Table Office, Room 1083.
Members who wish to sign the book of messages to the family of our much-missed friend, Mr Lluís Maria de Puig, will find it in the Berlin room. Their messages will, of course, be transmitted to the family.
6. Election of Vice-Presidents of the Assembly
THE PRESIDENT* – The next item of business is the election of Vice-Presidents of the Assembly. Nominations have been received for 19 Vice-Presidents; they are listed in an Assembly document that is available at AS/Inf (2013)01. If there is no request for a vote, they will be declared elected. As there has been no request for a vote, I declare these candidates elected as Vice-Presidents of the Assembly, in accordance with Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure. They will take precedence by age.
I would like the Vice-Presidents to play a more important part in our work than just presiding here when I am not present. We should discuss what further role they might play.
7. Appointment of committees
THE PRESIDENT* – The next item of business is the appointment of members of committees. The candidatures for committee members have been published in the document Commissions (2013) 1 and Addenda 1 and 2.
Ms GROSSKOST (France)* – Like my colleague who spoke earlier, I oppose the presence on the Committee on Equality Non-Discrimination of Ms Zaroulia of the Golden Dawn party in Greece and of Mr Gaudi Nagy of the Jobbik party in Hungary on the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, because their comments contradict the fundamental principles of our institution.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Ms Grosskost. You are contesting Ms Zaroulia’s and Mr Gaudi Nagy’s appointment to committees. I call Sir Roger Gale.
Sir Roger GALE (United Kingdom.) – I understand why this is being moved, but the fact of the matter is that the membership question has been referred to the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs. We cannot make a decision until the committee has given its view.
THE PRESIDENT* – I do not think that is the case. If there is a challenge, the member whose credentials are challenged cannot be a member of the committee concerned. An objection has been made to the nomination of Ms Zaroulia and Mr Gaudi Nagy in respect of membership of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination and the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. Under Rule 42, I refer the disputed nominations back to the national delegations concerned. The remaining nominations are approved.
8. Proposals for debate under urgent procedure and for debate on current affairs
THE PRESIDENT* – Before we examine the draft agenda, the Assembly needs to consider requests for debates under urgent procedure and on current affairs. The Bureau received the following requests for urgent debates: on “migration and asylum: mounting tensions in the eastern Mediterranean” from the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons, and on “recent developments in Mali and Algeria and the threat to security and human rights in the Mediterranean region” from the European Democrat Group.
The Bureau has also considered a request for a current affairs debate on “the deteriorating situation in Georgia” from the Group of the European People’s Party, but decided not to propose such a debate in view of other opportunities to discuss this matter.
At its meeting this morning the Bureau agreed to propose to the Assembly that it hold urgent debates on migration and Mali, as set out in the draft agenda before you, with the additional result that the debate on Bulgaria, planned for Thursday afternoon, will now be held on Tuesday afternoon, possibly with an extended finish time for that sitting of 8.30 p.m. if necessary.
Does the Assembly agree to these proposals from the Bureau? They are agreed.
Under Rule 25, the Bureau proposes that the topics of the debates we have just agreed be referred for reports, as follows: “migration and asylum: mounting tensions in the eastern Mediterranean” to the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons; and “recent developments in Mali and Algeria and the threat to security and human rights in the Mediterranean region” to the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy.
Is this agreed?
The reference is agreed.
9. Adoption of the agenda
The PRESIDENT* – The next item of business is the adoption of the agenda for the first part of the 2013 ordinary session. The draft agenda was adopted this morning by the Bureau unanimously and it has been sent for distribution. Is the draft agenda agreed to?
I call Lord Tomlinson.
Lord TOMLINSON (United Kingdom) – I am not opposed to the agenda but I hope that today of all days, the inauguration day of President Obama, you can find the time to send him a message of congratulation from this Assembly on his election for a second term and to point out to him that in view of the importance of having connections with Europe—as he emphasised in a recent conversation with David Cameron, the British Prime Minister—in his second term of office he could perhaps encourage the Americans to send observers to the Council of Europe so that they can maintain that strongest of connections. I hope that you will find time, in today’s agenda, to send such a message.
The PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Lord Tomlinson, for that reminder. Of course it is not relevant to the agenda that we are adopting, so we will come back to that point. First, let us approve the agenda for this part-session. Is the agenda agreed?
The agenda is agreed.
Now I will reply to Lord Tomlinson. I fully concur with your request and it will be done. In fact, I did it last week when we welcomed the consul-general of the United States here; I will do it through the ambassador in Paris next week as well. I have also transmitted our desire to invite a high-placed official from the United States to speak to the Assembly, because our American friends have a particular status in the eyes of the Assembly. I fully concur with what you say. I, too, wish Mr Barack Obama all the best on his re-election.
10. Adoption of the minutes of proceedings of the Standing Committee
The PRESIDENT* – The minutes of the meeting of the Standing Committee in Andorra la Vella on 30 November have been distributed, Document AS/PER (2012) PV03. I hope that you will take note of the draft minutes.
(Mr Rouquet, Vice-President of the Assembly, took the Chair in place of Mr Mignon.)
11. Time limits on speeches
The PRESIDENT* – Distinguished colleagues, given the large number of amendments that have been handed in for so many texts, the Bureau this morning proposed that, in order to allow the maximum number of speakers to take the floor, we should limit the time given to each speaker to three minutes for all debates this week, except for Friday morning.
Is this agreed?
It is agreed.
New proposals on the time to be given to every speaker will be resubmitted for the Assembly’s consideration, depending on the number of members who sign up for a debate.
12. Progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee
The PRESIDENT* – The next item is the progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee, Document 13094 Parts 1 and 2 and Document 13095. Mr Tiny Kox will present the progress report. As you remember, we need to end the sitting at 1.10 p.m. We have limited to three minutes the time given to each speaker. Mr Kox, you have 13 minutes, which you can share between presenting your report and responding to what the speakers say. Mr Kox, you have the floor.
Mr KOX (Netherlands) – I am most honoured to present to the Assembly the progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee. It shows that in between our part-sessions we continue our work and that this Assembly is a working organisation. For the details, I refer to the text of the written document. If there are any questions, I will of course be glad to answer them.
I would like to concentrate in my introductory remarks on a few items. First, I recall that the five political groups agreed to support the re-election of our President, Jean-Claude Mignon. I congratulate him on his re-election. It is our highest position but also our toughest job, so I wish our President strength, wisdom and support, which he will surely need and which I am confident he will get.
We have commemorated the death of our former Assembly President, Lluís Maria de Puig, who served the Assembly for an incredible number of years. For good reasons, the Spanish Parliament called Lluís Maria a gran compañero and surely he was, not only for those in Spain but for those of us who had the privilege to work with him for all those years.
Today is 21 January. On this very day 220 years ago, French Citizen Capet, better known as King Louis XVI, was executed by guillotine, having been convicted by the National Convention, the acting parliament, at the beginning of the French Revolution. Today, King Louis XVI would have been entitled, like any other European citizen, to appeal to the Court of Human Rights of the Council of Europe. Surely the Court would have objected to the combination of legislative and judicial powers in the National Convention and therefore the verdict. Surely it would have said that capital punishment is not acceptable in Europe. Thanks to the European Convention on Human Rights of the Council of Europe, the death penalty is now banned almost throughout our continent. We should cherish that every day, because it is a unique achievement of this Organisation. It shows that progress in civilisation is possible, although it is never guaranteed.
The progress report informs us about the Bureau’s approval of the recent reports of our election observation missions in Georgia, Montenegro and Ukraine. Later this week, the chairpersons of the election observation missions will meet to examine how to improve this very important part of our work. I thank all colleagues who have participated in the recent past in this activity for their good work and I wish bonne chance to those who will participate in the upcoming observations in Monaco and Armenia.
I remind members that the code of conduct for Assembly members and the guidelines on election observations have recently been updated and modified by the Bureau and will come into force when this progress report is adopted. That means, among other things, that from now on a new public register on gifts will be available for Assembly members to announce received gifts that exceed €200 in value. The modified rules are there to oblige us to live up to the highest standards when representing the Assembly and measuring political developments elsewhere.
Dear colleagues, if you did not receive gifts that exceeded this amount or if you did not receive any gifts at all when participating in election observations and other missions, do not worry—on the contrary. We are all paid by our national parliaments, so we need no gifts at all. In my opinion, the only thing that we always should ask for when working for this Assembly somewhere in Europe is respect and a guarantee that we can do our work properly, without unnecessary restrictions. We should bear it in mind that the register will now come into practice. From now on, the protection mechanisms against attacks on members’ honour and reputation will also apply to the meetings of the Bureau and its committees and not only to the Assembly. That should be borne in mind.
Many of the reports that we now draw up deal with various aspects of the financial, economic and social crisis, which puts pressure on all States and all European organisations. Ever more members of this Assembly meet problems in doing their jobs here due to budgetary restraints at home and I think that we should all oppose that, as the ability to do their work here is part of their parliamentary work. The budget of the Council of Europe is under continuous pressure; the Secretary General of the Council of Europe will surely tell us something about it when he addresses the Assembly tomorrow.
When pressure on European institutions grows, co-operation between them is ever more needed. The progress report informs the Assembly about co-operation between the European Parliament and this Parliamentary Assembly. In November, the Presidential Committee of our Assembly met the European Parliament’s President, Mr Schulz, and its political group leaders to discuss how to improve co-ordination between us in respect of human rights in Europe. It is a pleasure that European Commissioner Füle will address our Assembly and answer our questions later this week.
Perhaps even more in times of crisis, for many outside this continent, Europe is the place where shelter is thought to be found. The Bureau authorised our Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons to visit the Greek-Turkish border to monitor developments. The visit took place last week, and later this week we will hold an urgent debate on its findings and proposals.
The progress report mentions the Bureau’s decision to participate in the ad hoc working party of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe with regard to the European Centre for Global Independence and Solidarity, which is better known as the North-South Centre of the Council of Europe. Our colleagues, Ms Blondin and Sir Roger Gale will represent our Assembly in the ad hoc working party.
The crisis creates or enlarges many problems about social cohesion, unemployment, poverty and democracy, which are the contents of many of the reports we have drawn up in the past and will draw up in the future. In times of crisis, there are always opportunities for those who favour values other than ours – authoritarian rule, narrow nationalism, xenophobia and fascism present alternatives and gain ground when democracy fails to deliver. We should all therefore agree that democracy is too big to fail. We must protect and uphold our core values, especially in these times of crisis. It is true that internationalism and more democracy are the best medicines to overcome this crisis in a civilised way. This Assembly defines promotion of democracy, the rule of law and human rights as our core business, and therefore again has a lot of work to do this year.
Our new partners for democracy, the Parliaments of Morocco and Palestine, are becoming ever more acquainted with our work, in which they have participated since being granted that new status. This year, both we and they will have to deliver even more, because partnerships are not for free. They will be evaluated during this year. The progress report notes that the Bureau allowed our Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy to meet in March in Rabat, in Morocco, and the Sub-Committee on the Middle East was allowed to visit the area this spring. The Bureau has decided to use the name Palestine from now on, following the United Nations General Assembly decision on the international status of Palestine.
Finally, the progress report informs us about the gender imbalance in the Assembly. The bad news is that women are still by far the under-represented sex in this Assembly and its committees. That is bad for the Assembly, which speaks for equal rights and equal opportunities. The good news is that there are some improvements. More than 30% of most delegations are now female, and some are even more than 50%. Under-representation in this Assembly is often caused by the under-representation of women in our national parliaments. If we could solve the problem at home, it would be far easier to reach our gender balance targets here.
The very nature of this interparliamentary Assembly is the continuous coming and going of members. We all depend on the results of elections at home, and there is nothing wrong with that. In January, we always see the most changes in membership. I therefore sincerely thank all those who now leave the Assembly for the work they have done in the past, and I invite all new members to continue the good work of their predecessors – and even, if possible, to perform better.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Mr Kox. You have about three minutes left. I call Mr Kandelaki, who will speak on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party.
MR KANDELAKI (Georgia) – I thank the rapporteur for this comprehensive report, which is one of the documents that all members should follow with eager interest. My political group has entrusted me with this opportunity to raise a particular issue now, which is about Georgia. Of course, President Saakashvili will speak and offer his views on recent developments later today, but I want to say a couple of words in the context of what is happening in Georgia and why it is relevant to the core business and core values of this Organisation.
It is said that people who aim to build democracy should expect to lose one day. That is exactly what happened to my party, the United National Movement. The elections on 1 October last year marked the first ever electoral transition of power in the history of not only my country, but our region and were in a way a victory for the promises of the Rose Revolution. It was thanks to the very vigorous reforms carried out in this once-failed country that that electoral transfer of power was possible.
Today, however, Georgia finds itself at a crossroads: either, with the help of such a body as this, it will be able consolidate, build on its achievement, come closer to what is known as a democratic consolidation and more or less follow the path of east European transformations, or it will plunge back into the grey zone of hybrid regimes and fail. As a result of the reforms, Georgia has come very close to disproving the Kremlin view of the post-Soviet space according to which full-fledged freedom and democracy is impossible in the former Soviet Union. We should help Georgia by giving very clear signals so that it can navigate these shallow waters and emerge as a consolidated democracy rather than a failed one.
There are very worrying signs of backsliding, including the arrest of political opponents – according to Freedom House, there have already been 38 – and attacks on the judiciary, the Georgian public broadcaster and local self-government. I stress that, by giving clear signals to Georgia in this early, sensitive period, our Assembly will really contribute to making Georgian reform a success and not allowing Georgia to slide back, which would be a disservice to not only the Georgian people but to democrats and democracies in our region.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you. I call Mr Gross, who will speak on behalf of the Socialist Group.
Mr GROSS (Switzerland)* – I thank the President for his kind words about Lluís Maria de Puig. I also thank him for the very committed way in which he conducts our business, which is much appreciated and does not go without saying.
We discussed one of the priorities referred to by Tiny Kox at the last sitting of the Bureau: the Presidential Committee and shoring up the North-South Centre. As a Swiss national, I am ashamed that Switzerland and other countries have let it go for the sake of about €50 000, at a time when we need better understanding between Europe and northern Africa. A lot of Europeans do not really understand the revolution that is taking place in Africa: they fall prey to emotional headlines and front pages, and cannot see the development that is taking place and the need to support northern Africa. In promoting such an understanding, the North-South Centre played an important role. I appeal to all colleagues: it is important that we lobby our capitals so that we get the necessary majority and can throw our weight behind the North-South Centre. It is essential that we keep and strengthen it, because we need such a centre.
I also want to talk about Ms Nirenstein’s motion challenging the credentials of colleagues in the Assembly and to tie that in with what Mr Iwiński said about rising nationalism in all member States. As President Mitterrand told the European Parliament, nationalism leads to war, which is a way of contesting other people’s human rights. We have seen what happened to the Jews, the Roma, and migrants. The increase in nationalism is, therefore, unacceptable.
As the number of parties or movements that flout the values of the Council of Europe is increasing, we must deal with that not just by bringing our rules and procedure into line, but by strengthening democracy against decline and ensuring that it delivers prosperity. That is the only way to put an end to racism and nationalism.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Mr Gross. I call Ms Brasseur to speak on behalf of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe.
Ms BRASSEUR (Luxembourg)* – On behalf of ALDE, I endorse the President’s tribute to Mr Lluís Maria de Puig and convey heartfelt condolences to his family, first and foremost, and to the Spanish delegation and the Socialist Group to which he belonged.
I congratulate the President on his re-election and on his speech, and thank him for the collegial way in which he conducts the Assembly. Each and every one of us has some responsibility to shoulder in attaining the goals to which he referred. Our rapporteur has, as usual, focused on the key issues, and I will address how we tackle them.
I am concerned about the adversarial way in which some debates, such as those on ethical and social issues, are being conducted in this Assembly, which is not worthy of an Assembly that champions tolerance, the rule of law and democracy. That has also been true of debates on the shortcomings of certain countries vis-à-vis Council of Europe standards. We should listen respectfully to each other’s arguments and vote on the basis of conscience, but all too often people are guided by allegiance to their political or national family, rather than by the facts. The rule of law lies neither on the left, nor on the right nor on the centre, and neither does it have nationality, and we must all defend it irrespective of national, regional, ethnic or political considerations.
By sitting in this Assembly, its members pledge to underwrite the principles and objectives of the Council of Europe. We can champion the values of the Council of Europe only if we behave responsibly and respect each other.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Ms Brasseur. I call Mr Walter to speak on behalf of the European Democrat Group.
Mr WALTER (United Kingdom) – We will all miss Lluís Maria de Puig, who was such a committed supporter of this Assembly. As well as being a former President of the Assembly, he was one of my predecessors as President of the Assembly of the Western European Union.
I congratulate Tiny Kox on his report. He is the leader of the smallest of the political groups in our Assembly. He and I sometimes disagree, but he always speaks with great passion, tact and understanding of everyone’s point of view.
The work on this report straddled the end of the Albanian chairmanship, which we congratulate on its achievements, of the Committee of Ministers, and the start of Andorra’s chairmanship. The meeting of the Bureau and Standing Committee, which the report mentions, gave me the opportunity to visit Andorra for the first time at the end of November. It is a small democracy whose entire electorate is smaller than that of my constituency, but in its chairmanship it is punching above its weight in deliberations of the Council of Europe.
The report mentions a number of issues, and I shall mention one that Tiny Kox touched on: gender balance. Unfortunately, the figures for my country, the United Kingdom, are not correctly quoted because we are reported to have only 23 members, rather than 36. In fact, our delegation has the largest proportion of women it has ever had, and my party’s component of that delegation is some 35% women – still not enough, but moving in the right direction.
The Bureau has proposed a tough programme for this week: the address from President Saakashvili; the continuing Russia-Georgia situation; and Azerbaijan and the Monitoring Committee’s report on it. There are also two important urgent debates: on migration and on the threats in the eastern Mediterranean, which can only get worse as the conflict in Syria continues. I have also proposed that we debate developments in Algeria and Mali, particularly in the context of security and human rights. Reuters reports this morning that as many as 48 of the hostages, who were mainly Europeans, are dead. We would not be treating our electorates or the people of Europe correctly if we did not find time this week to debate that very serious situation and the threat posed by al-Qaeda and other groups to the security of the whole continent of Europe.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Mr Walter. I call Mr Hunko to speak on behalf of the Group of the Unified European Left.
Mr HUNKO (Germany)* – I echo the congratulations to the rapporteur, Tiny Kox, as well as many of the points made by the President at the beginning of the debate.
I want to highlight the tragic situation of refugees in Greece. I welcome the fact that a delegation went to Greece with the President. I also visited a refugee camp near Athens a few weeks ago. With the Greek Government’s austerity measures, which are enforced on the whole population, and the even greater hardship experienced by refugees, there is a dual humanitarian crisis in that country. It is good that the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe is raising this matter.
However, the Assembly has not addressed sufficiently the brutal executions in the middle of Paris 10 days ago of three Kurdish women activists. I cannot remember a similar politically motivated execution in Europe over the past few decades. All three were representatives, at various levels, of the Kurdish movement. It is not useful to speculate about who is behind this crime.
The context is that peace negotiations in Turkey between Öcalan and the Turkish Government had resumed in the past few weeks. It is not speculation to say that. It is important for the credibility of the Council of Europe to promote the peace dialogue. The French authorities are promoting it and are keen to shed light on this crime. We should all ensure that the representatives who are seeking a peaceful way out of this decades-long conflict are protected in our own countries.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Mr Hunko. Mr Kox will answer at the end. I call Mr Pozzo di Borgo.
Mr POZZO di BORGO (France)* – As a member of the ad hoc committee for the observation of elections in Georgia and Ukraine, I was struck during the missions by the close co-operation between our teams and those of the ODIHR of OSCE. As a member of the French delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE, I know the weight of the influence of the ODIHR and the Americans. The remarks of the ODIHR in Armenia and of OSCE in Russia during previous elections responded to American observations.
There has been tension between the Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE and the ODIHR. There have been many clashes between them. On a recent visit to the USA, the ODIHR organised its own press conference alongside that of the Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE. It managed to get OSCE to withdraw its statement on the elections. That is why in Dublin on 5 December, the Office of the Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE decided to renege on the 1997 agreement between the ODIHR, which has great influence on our observation of elections, and the Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE. In his speech in Dublin, the President of the Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE, Riccardo Migliori, confirmed that he would no longer uphold the agreement and stated that he was supported by the whole Parliamentary Assembly.
I would like our Assembly to think carefully about what system we can set up to ensure that parliamentary assemblies have independence in election observation missions. I am well aware that there are practical considerations that lead us to consult other organisations, and such exchanges can be useful to qualify or correct this or that impression. I recommend that the Bureau contact the Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE to ensure that we co-operate with it, rather than being governed by practical considerations. The guiding principles of our work, such as being dispassionate and not promoting the geostrategic interests of others, should take precedence over political considerations.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Mr Pozzo di Borgo. I call Ms Durrieu.
Ms DURRIEU (France)* – I want to add to what our President and others have said about Turkey. I am the rapporteur for the monitoring committee and the problems with Turkey are of great concern to us. I also add my voice to what has been said about the massacre or assassination of the young women in Paris. I hope that light will be shed on that, and that there will be a political solution to the problem of the Kurds and Turkey. There must be appropriate interlocutors in the negotiations. We look forward to the reforms to the justice system and so forth, which are moving forward.
To say something in support of Turkey, I welcome its efforts for the many Syrian refugees who have arrived in the country. There are about 157 000 refugees in camps in Turkey, and that is not counting the people outside the camps. I went to the eastern province with Ms Memecan, the head of the Turkish delegation, and visited the camps at Altinözü and Yayladagi. I say as loudly as possible how surprised I was at the way in which the refugees were welcomed. They were welcomed with dignity. That needs to be said, because we are quick to criticise Turkey. If we want to be objective and sincere, we have to thank Turkey for what it is doing in support of the Syrian refugees, whom it calls “our guests”. They are under the provisional protection of Turkey. Thank you to the nation of Turkey, which has shown itself capable of doing that. Many people think that there is more behind what it is doing, but it needs to be said that it is a member country of the Council of Europe and it is behaving as a member country should.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you, Ms Durrieu. I call Mr Toshev.
Mr TOSHEV (Bulgaria) – I will speak about the part of the progress report on the Georgian elections, which was presented by Mr Volontè. Those elections were proof of the development of democratic standards in Georgia, as was stated in the report of the Assembly’s election observation delegation. I was not a member of the delegation, but I visited Georgia shortly before the elections in another capacity.
There was an expectation in Georgian society that the constitutional amendments adopted by parliament were aimed at making the incumbent president the prime minister in future. However, after several declarations that the model employed by Mr Putin and Mr Medvedev in Russia will not be repeated in Georgia, the president has said that he will appoint as prime minister a strong figure in the winning party. There were allegations that the success of the opposition would not be permitted in one way or another. However, the election day was estimated to be fair because the opposition won. The president was the first to admit to the opposition’s victory, even before the final results.
After the elections, power in Georgia transferred peacefully. The president declared that he would not use his constitutional prerogatives to form a cabinet, and he has not. He has appointed the cabinet that was presented to him by the new majority party. He acted in the same way in the appointment of the chief prosecutor.
There are several areas of concern. First, we have received indications from Georgia since the elections that selective justice is being used for political retribution and to destroy today’s opposition. There are also allegations that attempts are being made to force the resignation of the local authorities elected in 2010 and to take hold of those municipalities through demonstrations and judicial prosecutions. It is widely known that there was an attempt to force the president to resign before the end of his term of office using similar means or by shortening his term. Even one of our colleagues here in this Assembly has predicted that the winners will take that step immediately as a sign of political revenge. Knowing the situation in Georgia, one does not have to be a prophet to make such a prediction. There are also signs that the government will take full control of all electronic media by merging the public broadcaster with the private TV Channel 9, which is owned by the prime minister’s wife, and by legally attacking the last remaining pro-opposition channel, Rustavi 2.
I dare to believe that our Assembly will watch the situation in Georgia closely and react when necessary to sustain democracy in this beautiful State, which is a member of the family of the Council of Europe.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you. The next speaker is Mr Iordache.
Mr IORDACHE (Romania)* – As far as the Bureau’s decision on the functioning of democratic institutions in Romania is concerned, I wish to stress on behalf of the whole Romanian delegation that on 9 November 2012, general elections were held in Romania, as confirmed by the electoral observation mission of the Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE, and Romania displayed a pluralistic political culture and a stable democratic process. The elections unfolded in keeping with widely accepted norms and democratic principles, and all political players recognised the results. There were no difficulties with the political process.
In keeping with the existing political rules, the President appointed the Prime Minister and Parliament inaugurated the Cabinet. Taking into account the international interest in the matter following last summer’s political confrontation, including the message from our Parliamentary Assembly, the President and Prime Minister of Romania agreed on a joint document governing institutional co-operation to facilitate political cohabitation. It is particularly important to note that in response to the request of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission, an assessment was made of the compatibility and constitutionality of some of the Romanian authorities’ decisions. That opinion, which recommended institutional and legislative changes, was adopted in December. The Prime Minister responded immediately, indicating his full readiness to co-operate with the Venice Commission and its recommendations.
In the light of the major political developments I have highlighted, we believe that what Mr Gross has said is no longer relevant. On the contrary, the deferral of the report is likely to trigger new polemics, which may have a negative impact on dialogue and co-operation between the Romanian authorities and the Council of Europe, especially the Venice Commission. We regret that the motion has been referred to the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy, and we reserve the possibility of having a substantive debate on the issue in the committee.
THE PRESIDENT* – Thank you. I must now interrupt the list of speakers. The rapporteur has three minutes to respond. I know it is not much time, but I am sure that you can condense your replies.
Mr KOX (Netherlands) – Mr President, let me be humble and brief, because the opinions in the progress report are those of colleagues. I have only a few remarks. First, I thank the Secretariat for helping to draft the report, as always, and I thank the former Albanian and current Andorran chairmanships of the Committee of Ministers. With regard to what Mr Gross said, I think the North-South Centre is perhaps even more important than in the past. The Bureau’s declaration about the centre is contained in Appendix 1. I agree that in times of rising nationalism we must ensure that political responses are clear and convincing, and we must show that democracy is too big to fail. Mr Walter, if we have wrong figures about the gender balance in the United Kingdom and the United Kingdom performs better than stated, we will surely change that. It is great that the United Kingdom, in European and other aspects, delivers better than we portray, so we should change that.
I thank Ms Durrieu and Mr Hunko for their wise words on the brutal assassination of the Kurdish activists in Paris, and on the need to continue the current negotiations between the Turkish Government and Mr Öcalan and the Kurdish representatives. That is very important. I remind those who spoke about election observation that this week there will be a meeting of the chairpersons of the ad hoc election observation committees to discuss how we can improve our work further. I agree with Mr Walter that we need an urgent debate on what is happening in northern Africa, especially in Algeria and Mali. People are being killed and the situation threatens us all.
Finally, in response to Ms Brasseur, we have the right in the Assembly to say whatever we think. That is great, and we should never counter that right. In my humble opinion, however, if you want the right to say what you think, you must first think before you speak. The quality of our debate might be better if we all did that. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong or old-fashioned about good manners. Without good manners, the Assembly becomes only a manifestation of opinions; its real essence should be good debate. Let us say what we think, but let us first think what we want to say.
The PRESIDENT* - Thank you, Mr Kox. The debate is closed.
The Bureau has proposed references to committees. They are set out in the progress report. Are there any objections?
There are no objections.
The references to committees are agreed.
I invite the Assembly to approve the remainder of the progress report, Document 13094 Parts I and II and Document 13095.
The progress report is approved.
13. Date, time and agenda of the next sitting
The PRESIDENT* - The Assembly will hold its next public sitting this afternoon at 3 p.m. with the Agenda which was amended and approved this morning.
The sitting is closed.
(The sitting was closed at 1.10 p.m.)
CONTENTS
1. Opening of the 2013 ordinary session
2. Address by the doyen of the Assembly
3. Examination of credentials
Speaker:
Ms Nirenstein (Italy)
4. Election of and Address by the President of the Assembly
5. Register of attendance, voting cards and written declarations
6. Election of Vice-Presidents of the Assembly
7. Appointment of Committees
Speakers:
Ms Grosskost (France)
Sir Roger Gale (United Kingdom)
8. Proposals for debate under urgent procedure and for debate on current affairs
9. Adoption of the agenda
10. Adoption of the minutes of proceedings of the Standing Committee
11. Time limits on speeches
12. Progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee
Presentation of report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee by Mr Kox in Doc. 13094 Parts I and II and Doc. 13095
Speakers:
Mr Kandelaki (Georgia)
Mr Gross (Switzerland)
Ms Brasseur (Luxembourg)
Mr Walter (United Kingdom)
Mr Hunko (Germany)
Mr Pozzo di Borgo (France)
Ms Durrieu (France)
Mr Toshev (Bulgaria)
Mr Iordache (Romania)
Reply:
Mr Kox (Netherlands)
13. Date, time and agenda of the next sitting
Appendix
Representatives or Substitutes who signed the Attendance Register in accordance with Rule 11.2 of the Rules of Procedure. The names of Substitutes who replaced absent Representatives are printed in small letters. The names of those who were absent or apologised for absence are followed by an asterisk.
Francis AGIUS*
Pedro AGRAMUNT*
Arben AHMETAJ*
Miloš ALIGRUDIĆ/Vesna Marjanović
Karin ANDERSEN/ Ingjerd Schou
Lord Donald ANDERSON
Paride ANDREOLI/Alessandro Rossi
Khadija ARIB
Volodymyr ARIEV
Mörður ÁRNASON
Francisco ASSIS*
Danielle AUROI*
Þuriður BACKMAN
Daniel BACQUELAINE/Dirk Van Der Maelen
Viorel Riceard BADEA*
Theodora BAKOYANNIS
David BAKRADZE/Giorgi Kandelaki
Gérard BAPT*
Gerard BARCIA DUEDRA/Sílvia Eloïsa Bonet Perot
Doris BARNETT
José Manuel BARREIRO/Ángel Pintado
Deniz BAYKAL
Marieluise BECK*
José María BENEYTO*
Levan BERDZENISHVILI
Deborah BERGAMINI*
Robert BIEDROŃ
Gülsün BİLGEHAN
Brian BINLEY*
Ľuboš BLAHA/Darina Gabániová
Delia BLANCO*
Jean-Marie BOCKEL
Eric BOCQUET/Jean-Pierre Michel
Olga BORZOVA
Mladen BOSIĆ/Mladen Ivanić
António BRAGA*
Anne BRASSEUR
Márton BRAUN*
Federico BRICOLO*
Ankie BROEKERS-KNOL
Piet DE BRUYN*
Patrizia BUGNANO*
André BUGNON
Natalia BURYKINA*
Sylvia CANEL*
Mevlüt ÇAVUŞOĞLU
Mikael CEDERBRATT*
Otto CHALOUPKA
Irakli CHIKOVANI
Vannino CHITI*
Christopher CHOPE
Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN
Desislav CHUKOLOV*
Lolita ČIGĀNE*
Boriss CILEVIČS*
Henryk CIOCH / Grzegorz Czelej
James CLAPPISON
Deirdre CLUNE*
Agustín CONDE
Igor CORMAN*
Telmo CORREIA*
Carlos COSTA NEVES*
Joseph DEBONO GRECH*
Giovanna DEBONO*
Armand De DECKER*
Arcadio DÍAZ TEJERA/Carmen Quintanilla
Peter van DIJK
Klaas DIJKHOFF*
Şaban DİŞLİ
Jim DOBBIN
Karl DONABAUER
Ioannis DRAGASAKIS
Daphné DUMERY*
Alexander [The Earl of] DUNDEE*
Josette DURRIEU
Mikuláš DZURINDA
Baroness Diana ECCLES*
Tülin ERKAL KARA
Gianni FARINA*
Relu FENECHIU/Ionuţ-Marian Stroe
Vyacheslav FETISOV
Doris FIALA*
Daniela FILIPIOVÁ
Axel E. FISCHER*
Jana FISCHEROVÁ/Rom Kostřica
Gvozden Srećko FLEGO
Hans FRANKEN
Jean-Claude FRÉCON
Erich Georg FRITZ
Sir Roger GALE
Jean-Charles GARDETTO*
Tamás GAUDI NAGY*
Nadezda GERASIMOVA
Valeriu GHILETCHI*
Paolo GIARETTA/Renato Farina
Jean GLAVANY/Philippe Bies
Michael GLOS*
Pavol GOGA
Jarosław GÓRCZYŃSKI
Svetlana GORYACHEVA*
Martin GRAF
Sylvi GRAHAM
Andreas GROSS
Arlette GROSSKOST
Dzhema GROZDANOVA
Attila GRUBER*
Gergely GULYÁS*
Pelin GÜNDEŞ BAKIR
Antonio GUTIÉRREZ
Ana GUŢU/Corina Fusu
Carina HÄGG*
Sabir HAJIYEV
Andrzej HALICKI/Marek Borowski
Mike HANCOCK
Margus HANSON
Davit HARUTYUNYAN*
Håkon HAUGLI
Norbert HAUPERT*
Alfred HEER
Martin HENRIKSEN
Andres HERKEL
Adam HOFMAN
Jim HOOD
Joachim HÖRSTER
Arpine HOVHANNISYAN
Anette HÜBINGER
Andrej HUNKO
Susanna HUOVINEN/Riitta Myller
Ali HUSEYNLI/Sahiba Gafarova
Rafael HUSEYNOV
Shpëtim IDRIZI*
Vladimir ILIČ
Igor IVANOVSKI
Tadeusz IWIŃSKI
Denis JACQUAT/André Schneider
Roman JAKIČ
Tedo JAPARIDZE
Ramón JÁUREGUI
Michael Aastrup JENSEN*
Mogens JENSEN
Mats JOHANSSON*
Jadranka JOKSIMOVIĆ/Aleksandra Djurović
Birkir Jón JÓNSSON*
Čedomir JOVANOVIĆ/Svetislava Bulajić
Antti KAIKKONEN*
Ferenc KALMÁR*
Božidar KALMETA*
Mariusz KAMIŃSKI
Marietta KARAMANLI/Bernard Fournier
Burhan KAYATÜRK*
Jan KAŹMIERCZAK*
Serhii KIVALOV
Bogdan KLICH/Zbigniew Girzyński
Serhiy KLYUEV/Volodymyr Pylypenko
Haluk KOÇ
Igor KOLMAN*
Alev KORUN*
Tiny KOX
Borjana KRIŠTO*
Dmitry KRYVITSKY
Václav KUBATA
Ertuğrul KÜRKÇÜ
Athina KYRIAKIDOU/Nicos Nicolaides
Jean-Yves LE DÉAUT/Yves Pozzo Di Borgo
Igor LEBEDEV/Sergey Kalashnikov
Harald LEIBRECHT*
Orinta LEIPUTĖ*
Terry LEYDEN
Inese LĪBIŅA-EGNERE*
Lone LOKLINDT*
François LONCLE
Jean-Louis LORRAIN*
George LOUKAIDES/Stella Kyriakides
Younal LOUTFI*
Yuliya L'OVOCHKINA
Saša MAGAZINOVIĆ
Philippe MAHOUX*
Gennaro MALGIERI*
Nicole MANZONE-SAQUET*
Pietro MARCENARO
Thierry MARIANI
Epameinondas MARIAS/Spyridon Taliadouros
Milica MARKOVIĆ*
Meritxell MATEU PI
Pirkko MATTILA*
Frano MATUŠIĆ*
Liliane MAURY PASQUIER*
Michael McNAMARA
Sir Alan MEALE*
Ermira MEHMETI DEVAJA*
Ivan MELNIKOV/Sergey Sobko
Nursuna MEMECAN
José MENDES BOTA
Jean-Claude MIGNON/Marie-Jo Zimmermann
Djordje MILIĆEVIĆ
Federica MOGHERINI REBESANI
Andrey MOLCHANOV*
Jerzy MONTAG
Rubén MORENO PALANQUES
Patrick MORIAU
João Bosco MOTA AMARAL*
Arkadiusz MULARCZYK/Marek Krząkała
Alejandro MUÑOZ-ALONSO
Lydia MUTSCH*
Lev MYRYMSKYI
Philippe NACHBAR*
Oľga NACHTMANNOVÁ
Gebhard NEGELE
Aleksandar NENKOV*
Pasquale NESSA*
Fritz NEUGEBAUER
Baroness Emma NICHOLSON*
Elena NIKOLAEVA*
Aleksandar NIKOLOSKI*
Mirosława NYKIEL/Iwona Guzowska
Carina OHLSSON*
Joseph O'REILLY
Lesia OROBETS
Sandra OSBORNE
Liliana PALIHOVICI*
Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS
Eva PARERA*
Ganira PASHAYEVA
Lajla PERNASKA*
Johannes PFLUG
Foteini PIPILI
Ivan POPESCU
Lisbeth Bech POULSEN*
Marietta de POURBAIX-LUNDIN/Kerstin Lundgren
Cezar Florin PREDA
John PRESCOTT
Jakob PRESEČNIK/Andreja Črnak Meglič
Radoslav PROCHÁZKA*
Gabino PUCHE
Alexey PUSHKOV*
Mailis REPS*
Eva RICHTROVÁ/Pavel Lebeda
Andrea RIGONI*
François ROCHEBLOINE/Marie-Louise Fort
Maria de Belém ROSEIRA*
René ROUQUET
Marlene RUPPRECHT*
Ilir RUSMALI*
Pavlo RYABIKIN
Rovshan RZAYEV
Giacomo SANTINI
Giuseppe SARO*
Kimmo SASI*
Stefan SCHENNACH
Marina SCHUSTER
Urs SCHWALLER/Maximilian Reimann
Damir ŠEHOVIĆ
Senad ŠEPIĆ
Samad SEYIDOV*
Jim SHERIDAN
Oleksandr SHEVCHENKO
Boris SHPIGEL/Yury Solonin
Arturas SKARDŽIUS*
Ladislav SKOPAL/Dana Váhalová
Leonid SLUTSKY
Serhiy SOBOLEV
Lorella STEFANELLI
Yanaki STOILOV
Christoph STRÄSSER
Karin STRENZ
Giacomo STUCCHI*
Valeriy SUDARENKOV
Björn von SYDOW
Petro SYMONENKO/Yevhen Marmazov
Vilmos SZABÓ*
Melinda SZÉKYNÉ SZTRÉMI*
Chiora TAKTAKISHVILI
Vyacheslav TIMCHENKO
Romana TOMC
Lord John E. TOMLINSON
Latchezar TOSHEV
Mihai TUDOSE/Florin Iordache
Ahmet Kutalmiş TÜRKEŞ
Tuğrul TÜRKEŞ*
Theodora TZAKRI/Konstantinos Triantafyllos
Tomáš ÚLEHLA*
Ilyas UMAKHANOV/Alexey Ivanovich Aleksandrov
Viktor USPASKICH*
Giuseppe VALENTINO*
Miltiadis VARVITSIOTIS/Liana Kanelli
Ljubica VASIĆ/Stefana Miladinović
Volodymyr VECHERKO/Larysa Melnychuk
Stefaan VERCAMER*
Anne-Mari VIROLAINEN*
Luigi VITALI*
Luca VOLONTÈ
Vladimir VORONIN*
Varujan VOSGANIAN*
Tanja VRBAT*
Klaas de VRIES*
Nataša VUČKOVIĆ
Zoran VUKČEVIĆ
Piotr WACH
Johann WADEPHUL/Frank Schwabe
Robert WALTER
Dame Angela WATKINSON
Katrin WERNER*
Renate WOHLWEND
Karin S. WOLDSETH/Øyvind Vaksdal
Gisela WURM
Karl ZELLER/Fiamma Nirenstein
Svetlana ZHUROVA
Emanuelis ZINGERIS*
Guennady ZIUGANOV/Leonid Kalashnikov
Naira ZOHRABYAN*
Levon ZOURABIAN
Vacant Seat, Cyprus*
Vacant Seat, Montenegro*
Vacant Seat, Romania*
Vacant Seat, Romania*
Vacant Seat, Romania*
Vacant Seat, Romania*
Vacant Seat, Romania*
ALSO PRESENT
Representatives and Substitutes not authorised to vote
Joris BACKER
Joe BENTON
Maria GIANNAKAKI
Elvira KOVÁCS
Egidijus VAREIKIS
Observers
Aleida ALAVES RUIZ
María Alejandra BARRALES MAGDALENO
Marjolaine BOUTIN-SWEET
Eloy CANTU SEGOVIA
Corneliu CHISU
Javier LOZANO ALARCÓN
Michel RIVARD
Nycole TURMEL
Partners for Democracy
Bernard SABELLA