ADDRESS BY MR MEVLÜT ÇAVUŞOĞLU,

PRESIDENT OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE,

TO THE COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS

OF THE FRENCH NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

(Paris, 28 September 2010)

Dear Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, friends,

Thank you for this opportunity to share with you the experience and the challenges of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which I have the honour to chair. As you know, our Assembly is the biggest parliamentary assembly in Europe, uniting parliamentarians from 47 member states, including France, one of the founders of our organisation. Therefore, the work of our Assembly is made possible only thanks to the collective energy and ideas stemming from the national parliaments. In this connection, I wish to pay tribute to Mr Mignon, who as a chairman of the French delegation has been very active in ensuring this vital link between Strasbourg and the French parliament.

One of the greatest achievement of the Council of Europe, in my view, is in that it has managed to overcome the distinction between two different perceptions of Europe: a sort of a compact Europe committed to integration (in other words, Europe of the European Union) and a wider geographical Europe sharing a series of common values.

Of course we have our differences and sometimes even bitter disagreements. But as a whole, this diversity of histories, cultures, languages, religions, political ideologies, has been a source of incredible personal and collective enrichment. It has given us the force to tackle even the most difficult problems of our modern times together. And at the same time it has taught us some humility. Nobody possesses a universal truth or a ready-made recipe; that the great art of building a united Europe consists in talking and listening to each other, in appreciating different realities and trying, on that basis, to find the most appropriate and mutually acceptable solution.

And I can assure you, we have more than enough on the plate. I have witnessed this during my visits to member states presenting delicate political and institutional situations and I consider that the Assembly has done a great deal of work in the last months.

- in Albania, we have been working hard to encourage the opposition to return to Parliament. Our work is far from over.

- in Bosnia and Herzegovina, despite all our efforts, as well as in violation of a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, the authorities failed to amend the State Constitution before the elections on 3 October. Much more energy will be needed after the elections in order to find a viable solution.

- regarding the situation in Kosovo, our focus has been to make sure that irrespective of its status, Kosovo should be a safe place for all those who live in it and a place where democratic standards are of an equivalent level to that upheld by the Council of Europe. While taking into account the legitimate interests and concerns of Serbia and the UN Security Council Resolution 1244, the Assembly has resolved “to initiate a dialogue with representatives of the political forces elected to the Kosovo Assembly on issues of common interest”.

During my visit to Russia in July, I felt that the current climate with the Council of Europe is positive. There remain questions on which our opinions differ, and there are demands which Russia, as member of our organization, has to fulfill. But if we work as partners, with mutual respect and without double standards, I am sure that progress can be achieved even on these difficult issues.

- This brings us to a difficult subject, the war between Georgia and Russia. Our Assembly fully supports the territorial integrity of Georgia. The political negotiations between the parties concerned being held in Geneva, I am of the opinion that the Council of Europe must concentrate on the humanitarian issues to improve the life of ordinary citizens in the region.

- I have just come back from an official visit to Ukraine. The country now has a unique chance to carry out urgently needed reforms after years of political instability. But, to succeed in this task, the new President and governing coalition need to associate different political forces in the country with the reform process and to resist the temptation of excessive concentration of power.

- The Council of Europe has done every effort to help resolve the present political and constitutional deadlock in Moldova. It is unfortunate that the referendum on the revision of Article 78 of the Constitution failed and that the country is facing yet another parliamentary election. We shall have to pursue our mediating efforts between the different political forces to help them to find a solution to the current deadlock.

- In the South-Caucasus region, we have also been encouraging positive moves aiming at bringing solution to the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. Here again, we do not interfere with the OSCE Minsk Group where the negotiations regarding the settlement of the conflict are going on. We try to encourage trust and confidence-building measures, in particular, among the parliamentary delegations of Armenia and Azerbaijan.

- Both in Armenia and Azerbaijan we still need to do a lot of work to improve public confidence and consolidate the democratic process: in Armenia, in an effort to overcome the trauma caused by the violence and death after the elections in spring 2008; and in Azerbaijan, ahead of the parliamentary elections in November 2010.

- Belarus is the only European country which parliament has no official status with the Assembly. There is one non-negotiable condition for us to start discussion on de-freezing our relation – the death penalty. Following two more executions last spring, the Assembly decided to put on hold its activities involving high-level contacts with Belarus, but we are trying not to cut all contacts.

- A word regarding my own country, Turkey. The positive result of the referendum on constitutional change, as well as the high turnout, showed how strongly the Turkish people are attached to their democratic rights and freedoms, and to a future in Europe. This is a powerful signal on the eve of Turkey’s chairmanship of the Council of Europe. Hopefully further reforms will follow soon, including a new civilian Constitution.

Finally, we have also pursued our strategy of bringing non-member states closer to the Council of Europe and to our standards, particularly through the adoption of a new special status, called “Partnership for Democracy”, for the Parliaments of neighboring non-member states. We received official requests for this status from the Parliaments of Morocco and Palestine and the Parliament of Kazakhstan is currently considering to make a request.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Over the 61 years of its existence, the Council of Europe has developed a wealth of legal instruments, standards, monitoring mechanisms, good practices and means of international cooperation. This is a very solid ground supporting its three main pillars: democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Under the impulse of the new Secretary General of the Organisation, Mr Thorbjørn Jagland, and the full supporty of our Parliamentary Assembly, the Council of Europe has now initiated a major process of reform. We are not changing our main objectives, but aiming at becoming more pro-active, and enhancing the political relevance, impact and effectiveness of the Organisation. The input of member countries is of vital importance and I very much hope that you, as parliamentarians from the country hosting the Council of Europe, will be one of the driving forces of this process.

The European Court of Human Rights is also undergoing a reform process, after the entry into force of Protocol 14, to ensure its viability and effectiveness in the future.

Dear colleagues,

One of the most important challenges that lie ahead of us is the accession of the European Union to the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 6 of the Lisbon Treaty, coupled with Article 59 of the European Convention on Human Rights (as amended by Protocol No.14) provide a clear legal mandate to cater for rapid accession.

Why is this a major development both for the Court and the European Union and why give it top priority now, bearing in mind that this is an issue that has been discussed for well over 30 years?

First of all the Pan-European system for the protection of fundamental rights will be enhanced by the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into its primary law.

Secondly, the EU will be placed on the same footing as its Member States with regard to the system of fundamental rights protection supervised by the European Court of Human Rights. As the Union’s powers have and are likely to continue to extend to fields which traditionally belong to the 27 member states of the EU, hence the need for individuals - aggrieved by acts adopted by the EU – to have access to the Strasbourg Court.

Moreover, with accession, the EU would become the 48th signatory of the ECHR and will have its own judge in Strasbourg who, as all the other judges, will be elected by the Parliamentary Assembly.

Official talks started on 7 July between the Council of Europe and the European Commission and will be pursued by negotiators from both sides. Last meeting took place from 20 to 22 September in Strasbourg. At the end of the process, the agreement on accession shall be concluded by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and by the Council of the EU, and submitted to the 47 contracting parties to the ECHR for ratification, in accordance with their respective national requirements.

It is the duty of us all to ensure that this process is smooth and quick.

The discussions between our Assembly and the European parliament are well under way. The PACE Presidential Committee which includes the leaders of our political groups and the Conference of Presidents of the European Parliament met recently in Brussels and agreed to create an informal body in order to coordinate information sharing. One of the issues under discussion will be the modalities under which the European Parliament will participate in the process of electing judges to the European Court of Human Rights.

In the process of creating a common European legal space, it would be important that EU accedes to other relevant key CoE conventions, in particular, those on the Prevention of Terrorism; on the Prevention of Torture; on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings; on the Protection of Children against Sexual Abuse, as well as to the revised Social Charter. Accession to CoE conventions would ensure that common minimum standards would apply at pan-European level. This does not prevent the EU to go further and ensure higher standards for its members, as actually any CoE member state, in its domestic legislation, can provide for higher standards than those guaranteed by CoE conventions. But both duplication and lowering of standards should clearly be avoided.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Since the creation of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights in 2007, there has been concern within the Council of Europe about unnecessary duplication by the Agency of the Council’s work.

I know that your Committee will soon examine this issue and this is why I would like to inform you that at the forthcoming part-session of our Assembly, we will take stock of co-operation undertaken between the Agency and Council of Europe. In the opinion of the Legal Affairs Committee, which presents the report, the Agency and the Council of Europe have established appropriate forms of co-operation and consult each other in their daily work. Although both institutions may sometimes work on the same or similar issues, they use different tools in carrying out their respective activities. I hope that the Assembly will overwhelmingly support one of the main conclusions of the report: that the Agency to retain in its work the Council of Europe’s acquis in the human rights field as its main point of reference.

Finally, a few words on the European parliament’s decision to establish a parliamentary dimension of the Eastern Partnership – Euro-NEST Parliamentary Assembly. Bearing in mind the participants and issues that would be involved in this initiative, it is very important, here again, to make sure that we act in complementary, rather than overlapping way. This is why I have stressed to the President of the European parliament that PACE should be able to participate in the work of the Euro-NEST Assembly from the very beginning and with a formal status. In fact, this is already the case with the Council of Europe participation in the Eastern Partnership activities at inter-governmental and expert levels.

It is not only a matter of taxpayers’ money. But over and above all, of the political message that we send to the countries outside the EU that will be participating and of the coherence and efficiency of our work.

Dear friends, I hope that I have made a short, but comprehensive overview of the activities of the Parliamentary Assembly which concern us all. Thank you for your attention and I would be happy to exchange views and ideas with you.