ADDRESS BY MR MEVLÜT ÇAVUŞOĞLU,
PRESIDENT OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY,
AT THE MOSCOW STATE INSTITUTE
OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
(Moscow, Wednesday 13 October 2010)
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a real pleasure for me to take the floor as President of the Parliamantary Assembly of the Council of Europe at this prestigious academic institution before a distinguished audience of students, professors, present and future politicians and diplomats. I find it very enriching and stimulating to meet younger generations, in particular students.
I expect an interesting session of questions and answers at the end of my contribution.
As you know, the Council of Europe was founded in the wake of the Second World War, by political leaders who shared the firm will to prevent similar tragic conflicts from happening again. The headquarters of the Organization were placed in Strasbourg, historically one of the most disputed European borders, to underline that reconciliation is the "raison d’être” of the Council of Europe. The fundamental values that we support and promote - democracy, human rights and the rule of law - are not the aim in itself, but a means to ensure long-lasting peace and prosperity on our Continent.
The Council of Europe is a permanent forum for dialogue, the only truly pan-European one. Forty-seven member states - all European countries with the exception of Belarus – are now under the same roof and the same flag within the Council of Europe.
Time has shown that besides “hard security”, based on national defense and collective defense organizations, “soft security” has an important role to play in building long lasting peace. And soft security is largely based on sharing common standards of human rights, the rule of law and democracy, which we promote in the Council of Europe.
After 1989 and the fall of the Berlin wall, our Organization played a major role in European affairs, supporting the countries in Central and Eastern Europe in building their democratic institutions.
The Council of Europe is a standard-setting body which contributed substantially to creating a corpus of common values and principles now shared by virtually all European countries. The foundations of this process were laid 60 years ago, with the signing of the European Convention on Human Rights, enshrining the basic principles which we defend. Since then, the Council has developed a wealth of legal instruments, standards, monitoring mechanisms, good practices and means of international cooperation. Up to now, more than 200 European treaties in all areas of the Council of Europe’s competence have been concluded, thus creating a unique pan-European legal area.
In this connection, I would also like to underline the role of the European Commission of Democracy through Law, also known as the Venice Commission, a partial agreement which is part of the institutional framework of the Council of Europe. The Venice Commission has provided legal advice and assistance to countries, notably in Central and Eastern Europe, to help them rebuild and reshape their democratic institutions.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe covers a broad spectrum of political ideologies and hosts an immense variety and diversity of languages, cultures, traditions and religions represented on the European continent.
The Assembly contributes to the goals of the Council of Europe with its specific instruments and mechanisms. One of the most efficient is the so-called monitoring procedure. The Monitoring Committee of the Assembly is responsible for verifying the fulfillment of the obligations assumed by the member states under the terms of the Council of Europe Statute, the European Convention on Human Rights and all other conventions to which they are parties, as well as the honouring of the commitments entered into by the authorities of member states upon their accession to our organization. Currently the Assembly is assisting ten countries under monitoring procedure (Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Russian Federation, Serbia and Ukraine) and four countries engaged in the post-monitoring dialogue (Bulgaria, Monaco, the “former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” and Turkey) in the process of consolidating their democratic institutions with a view to ensuring full respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
As a permanent forum for dialogue, the Parliamentary Assembly has also been very active in developing parliamentary diplomacy. This does not replace “traditional” diplomacy and Parliamentarians do not aim at “stealing the job” of career diplomats, but they can give a remarkable contribution, particularly in the field of conflict prevention and conflict peaceful solution.
Dear Russian friends,
Russia is by far the biggest member of the Council of Europe, both by its size and its population. It is clear that its influence in the organisation is substantial and that the relations with it have a particular importance to us.
The decision of Russia to join the Council of Europe 14 years ago was, and still is, a clear choice to share our common values.
When Russia joined the Council of Europe, it meant endorsing the values of the rule of law, democracy and human rights. The values I believe to be the umbrella for our partnership and the coordinating part of our roadmap. I know however that there are voices in your country claiming that these values are so-called Western values, not suitable for Russia because they might destabilize your society.
Let me tell you, there is no such thing as “Western values”: there are only universal human values.
The challenges confronting our societies in today’s fast developing and interdependent world – such as terrorism, trafficking in human beings, organised crime and corruption, poverty, social exclusion and lack of perspectives – can only be dealt with if we reinforce our commitment to these universal values. With that, we can build a stronger civil society that will grow yet stronger with free media, free and fair elections, an open debate and intercultural and inter-religious dialogue.
I made an official visit to Russia back in July and I felt that the current climate in the Council of Europe - Russia relations was really positive. In this respect, ratification by Russia of Protocol 14 to the European Convention on Human Rights was a very important step, which confirmed the willingness of Russia to build a common European legal area and helped for the negotiations of the accession of the EU to the ECHR.
We certainly have questions on which our opinions differ and there are demands on the part of the Assembly which Russia still has to fulfill. However, I am convinced that, if we work together as partners with mutual respect and without double standards, progress would be achieved even on these difficult issues. The recent Assembly resolution on the situation in the North Caucasus, adopted during the June part-session of the Assembly with the full support of the Russian delegation and in presence of the President of Ingushetia, was a very good example of our cooperation.
Of course, the Assembly’s co-rapporteurs on the monitoring of the obligations and commitments of Russia are also doing their job and I am leaving it to them to assess progress, or the lack of it, since the last monitoring report adopted in 2005. However, during my visit, I pointed out that the recent legislative changes, including improved access for political parties to the state media, seemed to be a step in the right direction.
This brings us to an important subject, the war between Georgia and Russia. In the course of my official visits to Georgia in June and Russia in July, I reiterated our Assembly’s support for the territorial integrity of Georgia and called on all sides to fully implement the demands PACE has made, in particular in Resolution 1683 on humanitarian issues. While the political negotiations 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 particular as regards access and the presence of international monitors and organizations, the return of IDPs and the investigation of human rights violations.
When elected President of the Parliamentary Assembly last January, I sought to focus Assembly’s action and my first official visits on those member states presenting delicate political and institutional situations, several of them being situated near to you or in the Balkans. I would like to share with you, as future diplomats, a few impressions of these visits, which will give you a panoply of the complexity of issues and challenges that we have to face in Europe.
I would start with Ukraine. During my official visit on 20-24 September, I stressed that, after years of political instability, the holding of a democratic presidential election and the creation of the new governing coalition gave Ukraine a unique change to carry out the reforms, which the country urgently needs - in particular as regards judiciary, electoral legislation and the fight against corruption.
Last week, the Assembly held a debate on the functioning of the democratic institutions in Ukraine and set a roadmap of reforms that are urgently needed. The decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine of 1 October 2010 that declares as unconstitutional the law number 2222 amending the constitution in 2004 was in the centre of the debates. The Assembly considered that this decision should now prompt the Verkhovna Rada to initiate a comprehensive constitutional reform process with the view of bringing Ukraine’s Constitution fully in line with European standards.
I am now moving on to Moldova, which has been a subject of concern over the last year and a half. The Council of Europe has done every effort to help resolve the present political and constitutional deadlock in that country. As you certainly know, two consecutive parliaments have been unable to gather the necessary 3/5 majority in order to elect a President. 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. I shall be franc with you – despite our efforts, it has been extremely difficult to bring parliamentarians of the countries concerned to a meaningful dialogue. But we need to pursue our efforts.
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.
Moving now south-west, we come to the Western Balkans.
In Albania, we have been working hard to encourage the opposition to return to Parliament. Our work is far from over and tensions are rising again in view of the local elections to be held next year.
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 these 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”.
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.
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.
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,
The Council of Europe’s action and its practical and political impact must be enhanced by the necessary reform of the Organization as a whole. Today the need for reform is stronger than ever. 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 Council of Europe will have to “focus on what it can do best, in the areas where we can make a real impact'', as our Secretary General Thorbjorn Jagland said when addressing the Parliamentary Assembly. Within the Parliamentary Assembly we have started to discuss how to reform our own working methods, procedures and structures to increase the relevance of our work.
The Strasbourg Court itself is undergoing a reform process to ensure its viability and effectiveness in the future. We call it Interlaken process, after the Swiss town where a Conference organized by the Swiss Chairmanship of our Committee of Ministers on this matter took place early this year. A follow-up conference will be held in April next year in Izmir, in my home country, under the Turkish Chairmanship.
The Council of Europe works in close cooperation with other international organizations. Links with the European Union are, in particular, very close, with a wide range of joint programmes and other joint activities such as election observation missions.
Democracy, human rights and the rule of law being the pre-requisites for the accession to the European Union, the Council of Europe’s support and assistance helped many countries on their way to the EU. The same now applies to the countries, particularly in South Eastern Europe, which are currently candidates for membership in the EU. We encourage the European Union to make full use of the reports of our Assembly on the situation in these countries when preparing its opinion on the membership applications.
The relations with the European Union will become even closer when the EU will join the European Convention on Human Rights as provided for under article 6 of the Lisbon Treaty, coupled with Article 59 of the European Convention on Human Rights (as amended by Protocol No.14).
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.
Dear friends,
Before I finish, I must mention that among my top political priorities are intercultural and inter-religious dialogue, which I consider the most effective tool for mutual understanding and to fight against discrimination. Tolerance remains an important European goal which we cannot set aside. Creating new fault lines with the false image of the other and the disrespect towards difference must be fought with renewed urgency and vigor. We must eradicate racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and all kinds of similar phobia leading to discrimination and intolerance.
Therefore, the Assembly strongly reacted to the recent developments in several European countries, most recently evictions of Roma camps in France and expulsions of Roma from France and Germany. These are certainly not the right measures to improve the situation of this vulnerable minority. On the contrary, they are likely to lead to an increase in racist and xenophobic feelings in Europe.
Dear Friends,
Thank you once again for your invitation and the interest that you attach to the Council of Europe. We need your support and ideas to serve even better the European citizens.
Thank you for your attention.