15.04.2008

Address by Angela MERKEL

Federal Chancellor of Germany

on the occasion of the second part of the 2008 Ordinary Session of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly

(Strasbourg, 14-18 April 2008)

President, Members, colleagues,

Thank you very much for your invitation to Strasbourg. I again have a feeling that it is not by chance that Strasbourg is described as Europe's capital city. For there are two parliaments at once here, continuing to make the same decisive contribution to the shaping of Europe as they have done in the past.

I am delighted at this first opportunity to address the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg. The Parliamentary Assembly is a special place. It was the first assembly of its kind in the history of Europe. Today it contains representatives of 47 national parliaments, providing a demonstration of our variety. This makes it a quite particular pleasure for me to be with you here today.

The mere fact that MPs from 47 countries deliberate together here makes this Assembly a place of political exchange across Europe's borders, a place for political exchange that is vital precisely because the individual nations are growing ever closer together as globalisation increases. This is something that we can feel. But during many discussions, we can of course also feel that differences and varying points of view need to be reconciled.

Political decisions by individual countries have ever greater effects on what goes on in other countries. Increasingly, we face the same challenges. We have the same problems to solve. This is why we are finding that foreign policy is turning more and more into domestic policy, and vice versa. The classic dividing line that we used to have can certainly no longer be drawn.

From this stems an awareness of joint responsibility for thriving coexistence in Europe. And this awareness is quite particularly developed within the Parliamentary Assembly, enabling you, as the years have gone by since its foundation, to make a priceless contribution to the process which has brought Europe closer together, united it and created a common understanding.

The Council of Europe has existed for almost 60 years. Throughout that period, it has stood for democracy and the rule of law, for freedom and peace, for variety and tolerance, for justice and solidarity. I believe that it is precisely these values that knit Europe so tightly together.

Europe is of course founded on common historical experience and on a desire to shape a better future. Thus, as the years have gone by, a large number of common projects have been developed, such as the Single European Market, the Schengen area and the euro. But it is only on the basis of recognised common values that it has been possible to bring larger and smaller states together in Europe as never before, their togetherness characterised by mutual trust and respect. As we know, the result has been a period of history which has seen far fewer conflicts.

We also know that it is only in the Council of Europe that almost every European state is represented. All of you are united by the drive for shared values. We shall do our best to get those countries which are not yet members into the Council of Europe.

Germany joined the Council of Europe in 1951, when Konrad Adenauer, the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, addressing the then Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe, said: "It is of great significance for the political development of Europe that here, in the organs of the Council of Europe, we have a platform on which the representatives of Europe meet regularly, discuss their worries and anxieties, their desires and their hopes, a platform where they try to establish common criteria for evaluating their requirements, and where, in general, they co-operate with one another in a spirit of fairness and of good neighbourliness. In other words, here we find an expression of the European conscience.".

For almost 60 years, the Council of Europe has been the "European conscience" watching over our common values, values based ultimately on the dignity of every single human being. The Council of Europe has thus helped to bring governments' action within the ambit of the protection of human rights. The ongoing requirement to protect these rights is the basis on which people live together, as well as being the basis for relations between individuals and the state.

It is correct to say that human dignity is indivisible. Its significance is the same in every country of Europe. But it is also right to say that the protection of human rights takes different forms and involves different practices. This, of course, it also attributable to differing historical experience and traditions. This is probably one of the reasons why Pope John Paul II, when he addressed the Parliamentary Assembly in 1988, described European identity as "not easy to pin down".

Since 1988, when Pope John Paul II addressed the Parliamentary Assembly, Europe has changed decisively, however. It is possible today to recognise a European identity which is far clearer than it was 20 years ago. The removal of the Iron Curtain and the end of the Cold War put an end to the unnatural division of Europe. For the first time, early signs of a common European identity have emerged on the basis of the European Convention on Human Rights.

I spent the first 35 years of my life in the former GDR, and it was impossible under the SED regime to complain to the European Court of Human Rights about discriminatory and unfair treatment by state agencies. All of this changed abruptly when the Berlin Wall came down, Germany was reunited, and freedom arrived in many parts of Europe.

Thus, after 1990, many countries of central and eastern Europe gradually left behind the years of party dictatorship and developed into democracies. They created a free and democratically stable society, in most cases with a multi-party system, an opposition capable of taking action, an independent justice system, a division of government powers and free media. As everyone knows, this was, and is, not self-evident anywhere, and the fight has to continue to ensure that all of this is not called into question.

I lived through this change in my own country. I therefore say with complete conviction that, even if change seems scarcely possible, it is nevertheless possible. All of us here today have lived through many changes which we would have considered still impossible 20 years ago. This is why I am absolutely sure that the success story of European unification can send out a signal to other parts of the world, regions where we are certain that, while stability hardly seems conceivable at the moment, it is by no means destined to remain a vision, as our experience has shown.

As we in Europe consider the facts, it is clear that we have not yet reached the end of our success story. In my view, Europe can be described as an ongoing challenge. There is always something in the European home that can still be improved, and the more closely we all identify with the European project, the more successful we are.

The European identity is still regarded as evolving. Strengthening it was one of the focal points of last year's German EU Presidency. Hence the declaration adopted at the time of the celebrations in Berlin of the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaties of Rome, re-emphasising that what binds us together in Europe is our values, on which we base our political action to shape our future.

Our political action shows whether we manage to assert these values. Whether we succeed in giving globalisation a human face depends on our values. Whether we manage to counteract climate change resolutely depends on our values. Whether we give trade policy priority over human rights and whether we reach agreement that economic and human rights issues cannot be opposite poles depends on our values. This is why fundamental rules must also be obeyed in respect of trade issues.

In short, asserting our values is not an abstract matter for fine speeches. The challenge of living our values arises afresh in our everyday political activities, whether at home or on the European stage. Notwithstanding all its successes, the Council of Europe will have to remain the guardian of Europe's values.

I should like to illustrate my point through two examples, one relating to the combating of terrorism and the other to the protection of minorities.

Firstly, where international terrorism is concerned, we realised at the very latest when the Madrid and London bombings were carried out that the fight against terrorism is also taking place in Europe. We need to make sure that people's legitimate security needs are reconciled with the protection of the fundamental rights of individuals. Security interests and the protection of our legal concepts must always be carefully balanced. We all know how difficult this can be in individual cases, and it may not be possible in every case without some doubt. This makes it all the more important for our democracies to be based on a division of powers, a balancing of interests and participation, so that we always find the right way when we venture onto new territory.

In this context, I should like to draw specific attention to the role of the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights. Thomas Hammarberg made a visit to Germany in the autumn of 2006, a country aware of the significance of constructive critical observation from the outside. In order to keep an open mind, it is helpful to look beyond one’s own nose. Some defects were identified, and encouragement was given to rectify these. I should like to add that it is not always easy to have to live with such criticism. Everyone surely feels the same, but it is one aspect of democracy.

That is why it is a good thing, as I wish to state expressly at this point, that there is a duty in Europe to intervene in each other's affairs, where human rights are concerned. In the human rights sphere, a country can have no internal affairs, to be used as a defence against assessments by, for instance, the Human Rights Commissioner.

Thus an institution like the Council of Europe has a particular role to play. It is my belief that you play this role in a very self-assured way. With its system of mutual supervision of government action, the Council of Europe is not afraid, when necessary, to fan the flames repeatedly. It offers a guarantee that citizens can apply to an independent court to obtain their fundamental rights. Thus it helps politicians endeavouring to combat terrorism to take appropriate decisions and avoid excessive restrictions on freedoms.

To ensure that the Council of Europe can succeed in this task, all of its instruments and organs, the Parliamentary Assembly, Committee of Ministers and Court of Human Rights, must do one thing in particular: bearing in mind the common effort to uphold Europe's values, they must work together as closely and as smoothly as is necessary until the job is done.

Exactly the same applies where minorities are concerned, a subject which throws up a great challenge to Europe and to European foreign policy. All over the world, as well as in Europe, we have to deal with unresolved minority conflicts. On the one hand, individual population groups desire cultural and political self-determination, while states, on the other, wish to preserve their territorial integrity. Here, too, there are areas of tension which we need to try to resolve in each specific case.

How are we to walk the tightrope between independence campaigns and national cohesion? There is no panacea. One thing is certain, and that is that violence must in no circumstances be the response to disputes. Violence is irreconcilable with our fundamental values.

The key to the prevention of cultural disputes is dialogue. Social integration and participation can be brought about only through dialogue. I know that this is easier said than done. For what are we to do about the growing numbers of migrants in Europe? How far is their wish to retain their cultural identity fulfilled? How does this go with their claim for integration? We all know that our societies can only become more varied through migration. The preservation of social peace requires our new fellow citizens to be integrated into our society. And of course this also applies to those whose faith is not the same as that of the majority.

Of course, these issues are also of concern to my government. I specifically appointed a government adviser on migration and integration in the Federal Chancellery itself because these issues are one of the most challenging tasks facing us. We have established a dialogue with representatives of fellow citizens with migration backgrounds in Germany through a forum known as the integration summit. This enables us to learn how to voice mutual expectations and to express wishes and criticism openly.

In Germany as elsewhere, there are no easy answers to the issues of integration and migration. What is most important of all, however, is to begin by talking with one another, getting to know one another, understanding one another better and then move on to solving problems. I therefore explicitly welcome the process of intercultural dialogue you have launched at the Council of Europe. I believe that sends out a very important signal, including for our national activities.

Combating terrorism and integrating communities are only two examples among many which demand value-based policies. The values of the countries represented in the Council of Europe are expressed primarily in the Convention on Human Rights. It is the platform on which all of our efforts are based, so to speak.

Its aim is to offer the 800 million people in Europe protection against arbitrary action by the state. They are accordingly able to lodge complaints about violations of their fundamental rights with the European Court of Human Rights. In my view, we can say that it is a human rights protection system which is unique worldwide. Indeed, over 50 000 individuals avail themselves of the opportunity of lodging applications every year. That bears impressive testimony to the level of trust people all over Europe have in the Court.

This morning, I was able to see for myself how the Court works. Mr Costa, the Court President, gave me details of the outstanding work which the judges do. I was also in the registry office where the applications are received. I could see that the Court has reached the limits of its capacity.

I believe that we all agree that the Court needs appropriate reform. That is vital for the credibility of the entire system of human rights protection in Europe. Because if people are able to lodge applications but their applications are never dealt with, the system based on the rule of law is, naturally, not very convincing. I would therefore like to say quite clearly: we must not hold up the reform of the Court. Anyone who does so is ultimately calling our shared values into question.

During the German EU Presidency, I spoke to President Putin about how necessary it is for Additional Protocol 14 to the Convention on Human Rights to be ratified promptly by Russia. I also discussed the matter with the President of the Duma. The German Government has raised it very frequently.

I believe that the additional protocol should enable the Court to operate more efficiently and more quickly. As I know that members of the Duma are here today, I should like to thank them for their efforts to have the protocol ratified in the Duma. I hope that in the new Duma the time has now come to look at Additional Protocol 14 again from a different perspective and secure ratification by Russia. I would welcome that very much, as it would be in everyone’s interest.

The European Convention on Human Rights existed long before we began discussing a Charter of Fundamental Rights in the European Union. That is also a historical fact, and the European Union in its current form would be inconceivable if the Council of Europe had not paved the way. All EU member states were also members of the Council of Europe beforehand. The Council of Europe and the European Union are different, but they complement one another.

During the German EU Presidency we fortunately succeeded in concluding a Memorandum of Understanding between the European Union and the Council of Europe. In my view, we need closer exchanges between the European Union and the Council of Europe. The fact that the Chair of the Committee of Ministers is also a member of the EU Foreign Ministers’ Council and is here today shows how it is possible to improve this co-operation.

A further key step in the co-operation between the two organisations will be the accession by the European Union to the European Convention on Human Rights. That is provided for in the Lisbon Treaty. For that reason, we worked hard to achieve legal personality for the European Union. It was not a very easy task. I hope that all states will ratify the treaty so that we will have the possibility of acceding to the European Convention on Human Rights. That will underline our joint platform for our work.

The citizens of the European Union will then be able to appeal directly to the European Court of Human Rights against legislative measures from Brussels if they believe their fundamental rights have been violated. That, too, is a new level of protection which does not yet exist. At present, legislation adopted in Brussels cannot as such be challenged before the European Court of Human Rights. Of course, we hope that this possibility will not have to be taken up constantly, but it will then exist.

The Council of Europe is a huge European success story. It has made a historic contribution to democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Europe. However, that is something which every generation must do anew.

I say that because there is sometimes a risk of the whole process somehow just becoming mechanical. Every new generation must therefore be made familiar with the forms our co-operation takes. They must experience it anew, expand it and develop it further. I therefore believe that the achievements also involve an obligation to keep on building a Europe whose mission is to ensure the well-being of its citizens.

I therefore urge you to keep on intervening where necessary and to keep on shaping European debate through what you have to say. In that way, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe will continue as a key player in providing impetus for a Europe united in peace, freedom and democracy and perhaps also as a worldwide example of how it is possible to find hope and solutions even in situations where there is apparently no way forward. There are many places in the world where that still has to be done, which means that we Europeans with our relatively straightforward problems compared with those elsewhere can set the world a good example.

Thank you very much for allowing me to join you here today.