Print
See related documents
A. Draft resolution
(open)
B. Draft recommendation
(open)
Report | Doc. 14396 | 15 September 2017
Call for a Council of Europe Summit to reaffirm European unity and to defend and promote democratic security in Europe
Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy
Summary
The Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy expresses its concern about the challenges currently threatening the European continent and its unity. Against this background, the committee believes that the Council of Europe is today more necessary than ever.
To preserve and further strengthen the pan-European project in a Europe which has profoundly changed since the last Summit held in Warsaw 12 years ago, the committee calls for a Fourth Summit of Heads of State and Government of Council of Europe member States. The Summit should be well-focused and provide political impetus for a number of specific actions suggested in the report. It should also offer a fresh and timely opportunity to define, at the highest political level, the role to be played by the Council of Europe in the overall European political architecture and address outstanding challenges in its relations with the European Union, in the interest of European citizens.
The report suggests that, as part of the preparatory work for the Summit, the two statutory organs of the Council of Europe, while fully preserving their autonomy, engage in a procedure aimed at harmonising jointly their rules governing participation and representation of member States in their midst. The Parliamentary Assembly should continue its own reflection on its role and mission as a statutory organ of the Council of Europe and a pan-European forum for inter-parliamentary dialogue which aims at having an impact in all Council of Europe member States.
A. Draft resolution 
(open)1. The Parliamentary Assembly
is concerned that, at present, momentous political challenges, both
within and outside Europe’s borders, are threatening the continent
and its unity: the daily risk of terrorist attacks, the rise of
Euroscepticism, nationalism, populism and xenophobia, the persistence
of frozen and open conflicts, the annexation or occupation of a
neighbour’s territories, the prolongation of state of emergency
measures and the re-emergence of divisions. Wars at the doors of
Europe threaten the security of the continent and have caused massive
refugee and migratory flows.
2. The efficiency and authority of the unique human rights protection
system, based on the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No.
5), are threatened by various attempts to undermine the authority
of the European Court of Human Rights, by the lack of political
will on the part of certain States Parties to implement its judgments,
despite their legally binding force, or by delays in their implementation.
3. Recent developments within the European Union, including ongoing
infringement and rule of law procedures against some of its member
States, the lack of solidarity in the handling of the refugee and migratory
crisis, as well as the decision by the United Kingdom to leave the
European Union, also present challenges for the Council of Europe,
as it offers a unique forum of co-operation between European States which
are members of the European Union and those which are not.
4. Against this background, the Assembly believes that the Council
of Europe and the values it upholds are today more necessary than
ever: at the origin of the European construction, bringing together
almost all the European States on the basis of common values and
principles and thus natural guardian of “unity within diversity”,
offering a common legal space to 835 million Europeans, guaranteeing
protection of their human rights, promoting social rights and democracy
and contributing to the development of a European civil society, the
Council of Europe is today best placed to help meet the challenges
raised by growing nationalism and avoid the building of new walls.
5. Alongside the European Union, whose far-reaching integration
project will never cover the whole continent, and the Organization
for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), which also covers
non-European States, the Council of Europe, composed of 47 European
States, remains the only pan-European organisation capable of promoting
and guaranteeing democratic security throughout the continent.
6. In order to preserve and further strengthen this unique pan-European
project, currently threatened by divisions and a weakening of member
States’ commitment, the Assembly calls for a Fourth Summit of Heads of
State and Government of Council of Europe member States.
7. In a Europe which has profoundly changed since the last Summit,
held in Warsaw in 2005, and at a time when the whole world seems
to be changing, a Summit will offer member States a unique opportunity
to reaffirm, in the strongest possible terms and at the highest
political level, their commitment to the ideal of European unity
and the values and principles of democracy, human rights and the
rule of law upheld by the Council of Europe. Member States should
clearly express their willingness to continue to be part of a single community,
sharing common values, a common legal order and a common jurisdiction,
and capable of capitalising on internal differences.
8. The Fourth Summit should be well-focused and could, inter alia, offer political impetus
to:
8.1. enhance the efficiency
and authority of the human rights protection system, based on the European
Convention on Human Rights, reverse current tendencies undermining
the authority of the European Court of Human Rights and improve
the record of implementation of its judgments by member States;
8.2. strengthen the treaty system of the European Social Charter,
including its collective complaint system, reaffirming the fact
that only the enjoyment of socio-economic rights and social inclusion
allow people to fully enjoy their political and civil rights;
8.3. encourage member States to adopt effective measures against
growing poverty and modern slavery thus reassuring European citizens
that the European institutions are not indifferent to their problems
and the concrete conditions of their everyday life;
8.4. recognise the valuable contribution of the Council of
Europe Commissioner for Human Rights to the development of sustainable
human rights-centred policies at national and local level throughout
the continent, as well as the role played by the Organisation’s
standard-setting and monitoring bodies;
8.5. enhance the Council of Europe’s mission both as guardian
and innovator of democracy, including by strengthening the role
of the Parliamentary Assembly as a strong pillar of European parliamentarism, bringing
together representatives of the citizens from almost all European
States, and consolidating the role of the European Commission for
Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) as a constitutional law
expert body promoting democracy within and outside Europe’s borders.
9. The Summit should also aim at consolidating citizens’ trust
in democratic institutions and democratic values and propose ways
to increase citizens’ participation and consultation with civil
society in search of common solutions to common problems. It could
thus bring the Organisation closer to the people it serves and contribute
to the emergence of a European civil society.
10. At a time when the European Union is facing numerous challenges
and is also reflecting on the future of Europe, the Summit would
offer a fresh and timely opportunity to define, at the highest political
level, the role to be played by the Council of Europe in the overall
European political architecture. In a Europe of concentric circles,
the Heads of State and Government from the 47 member States of the
Council of Europe, representing the widest circle, should rethink,
in an innovative and creative way, how to avoid unnecessary overlapping, ensure
coherence of standards and how best to harmonise the various levels
of their co-operation, in the interest first and foremost of European
citizens.
11. The Assembly notes that an efficient preparation of the Summit
requires the development of synergies between all sectors of the
Organisation, co-ordinated by its Secretary General, and more significantly
between its two statutory organs. Although the primary responsibility
lies with the Committee of Ministers, the Assembly, enhanced by
recent reforms, should expect to play an important role in the preparation
of the Summit, especially as it has been promoting this idea for
several years.
12. In this respect, there is currently an inconsistency in the
composition of the two statutory organs: following the illegal annexation
of Crimea by the Russian Federation and the application, on these
grounds, by the Assembly of sanctions to the Russian parliamentary
delegation, for three consecutive years one of the Council of Europe
member States, the Russian Federation, has participated in the activities
and been represented in the bodies of only one of the two statutory
organs of the Organisation, namely the Committee of Ministers, but
not of the Assembly. The Assembly regrets that, as a reaction to
this situation, the Russian Federation announced, on 30 June 2017,
its decision to suspend payment of its contribution to the budget
of the Council of Europe for 2017 until full and unconditional restoration
of the credentials of the delegation of its Federal Assembly in
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
13. The Assembly considers that the overall situation in the Organisation
is today counterproductive, particularly as it adversely affects
its overall impact as a guardian of human rights and democracy throughout the
continent, and therefore it is not in the interest of the citizens
of the 47 member States.
14. The Assembly notes that the Statute of the Council of Europe
(ETS No. 1), as supplemented by Statutory Resolution (51) 30, provides
for synergy between the two statutory organs as regards membership
of the Organisation.
15. However, over the years, and in particular after the Organisation’s
enlargement during the 90s, the Assembly has developed rules governing
the participation and representation rights of members of national delegations
in its own activities and bodies which do not provide for any kind
of synergy or coherence with the Committee of Ministers.
16. Therefore the Assembly, as part of the preparatory work for
the Summit, resolves to initiate a procedure aimed at harmonising,
jointly with the Committee of Ministers, the rules governing participation
and representation of member States in both statutory organs, while
fully respecting the latters’ autonomy. This coherence should strengthen
the sense of being part of a community and the obligations incumbent
upon every member State.
17. This common reflection could be carried out jointly by the
Assembly and the Committee of Ministers within an ad hoc working
group set up by the Joint Committee. For this process to be credible
and fruitful, the whole Assembly and every single member State should
do their utmost to ensure that all member States of the Organisation
will be fully represented in the process on both the parliamentary
and intergovernmental sides.
18. In the meantime, and as part of the preparatory work for the
Summit, the Assembly resolves to continue its own reflection on
its identity, role and mission as a statutory organ of the Council
of Europe and a pan-European forum for inter-parliamentary dialogue
which aims at having an impact in all Council of Europe member States.
This reflection would also enable the Assembly to provide its own
vision of the future of the Organisation.
B. Draft recommendation
(open)1. The Parliamentary Assembly
refers to its Resolution … (2017) on the call for a Council of Europe
Summit to reaffirm European unity and to defend and promote democratic
security in Europe, in which it expresses its concern about the
numerous challenges currently threatening the European continent
and its unity. Against this background, and for the reasons given
in its resolution, the Assembly believes that the Council of Europe,
and the values it upholds, is today more necessary than ever.
2. In order to preserve and further strengthen the pan-European
project in a Europe which has profoundly changed since the last
Summit held in Warsaw 12 years ago, the Assembly calls on the Committee
of Ministers to convene a Fourth Summit of Heads of State and Government
of Council of Europe member States. This will offer a unique opportunity
for member States to reaffirm, in the strongest possible terms and
at the highest political level, their commitment to the ideal of
European unity and the common values and principles of democracy,
human rights, and the rule of law upheld by the Organisation.
3. The Assembly recommends that the Fourth Summit be well-focused
and provide political impetus for a number of specific actions suggested
in a non-exhaustive manner in its resolution. It should also offer
a fresh and timely opportunity to define, at the highest political
level, the role to be played by the Council of Europe in the overall
European political architecture and address outstanding challenges
in its relations with the European Union, in the interest of European
citizens.
4. Although the primary responsibility for the organisation of
a Summit lies with the Committee of Ministers, the Assembly underlines
that an efficient preparation of the Summit requires the development
of synergies between all sectors of the Organisation, co-ordinated
by its Secretary General, and more significantly between its two
statutory organs. The Assembly therefore asks the Committee of Ministers
to:
4.1. closely associate the Assembly
in the preparation of the draft agenda and draft declaration of
the Fourth Summit;
4.2. consider its proposal, as part of the preparatory work
for the Summit and for the reasons and according to the modalities
described in its resolution, to engage in a procedure aimed at harmonising jointly
the rules governing participation and representation of member States
in both statutory organs, while fully respecting the latters’ autonomy.
C. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Michele Nicoletti, rapporteur
(open)1. Introduction: origin, methodology and purpose of the report
1. The idea of a Fourth Summit
of Heads of State and Government of Council of Europe member States was
launched by the Parliamentary Assembly in 2009 and then again in 2011, but no
follow-up was given by the Committee of Ministers. It was taken
up by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in his 2014
report on the State of Democracy, Human Rights and the Rule of Law
in Europe and again by the Assembly in Sofia, on 27 November 2015.
and then again in 2011, but no
follow-up was given by the Committee of Ministers. It was taken
up by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in his 2014
report on the State of Democracy, Human Rights and the Rule of Law
in Europe and again by the Assembly in Sofia, on 27 November 2015.2. Adopted only a couple of weeks after the horror of the November
2015 terrorist attacks in Paris, the Sofia Declaration listed the numerous political challenges
Europe is facing today, both within and outside its borders, and
underlined that these called for a common response on the basis
of shared principles and values, dialogue and solidarity. The Declaration
called on the 47 member States of the Council of Europe to avoid building
new walls and drawing dividing lines.
listed the numerous political challenges
Europe is facing today, both within and outside its borders, and
underlined that these called for a common response on the basis
of shared principles and values, dialogue and solidarity. The Declaration
called on the 47 member States of the Council of Europe to avoid building
new walls and drawing dividing lines.3. For this purpose and recognising the key role the Council
of Europe can play in defending and promoting democratic security,
the Assembly, in its Sofia Declaration, called for a Summit of Heads
of State and Government in order for member States to reaffirm,
at the highest political level, their commitment to the common values
and principles of democracy, human rights and the rule of law upheld
by the Organisation.
4. The Assembly entrusted the Committee on Political Affairs
and Democracy with the task of preparing a report on this subject,
and I was appointed rapporteur in March 2016. I have since embarked
upon a wider consultation process in order to establish whether
the idea of a Fourth Summit, as such, is appropriate, and to exchange
ideas on the possible topics and timing.
5. I wrote to the Chairpersons of all national delegations and
political groups in the Assembly on 25 May 2016, as well as to four
international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) with which the
Assembly has established working relations, namely Amnesty International,
the International Federation of Human Rights, the International
Commission of Jurists, and Human Rights Watch. I received 31 replies
which are reproduced in extenso in
an information document of the committee. They are not only helpful to the
preparation of my report but also constitute a useful input to the
preparation of the future Summit.
They are not only helpful to the
preparation of my report but also constitute a useful input to the
preparation of the future Summit.6. I have also held several meetings with the Secretary General
of the Organisation, Mr Thorbjørn Jagland, and have discussed the
idea in Rome with my own country’s authorities; in Berlin with the
then Minister of Foreign Affairs of Germany, Mr Frank-Walter Steinmeier;
in Paris with the then Secretary of State for European Affairs of
France, Mr Harlem Désir, and, in Strasbourg, with the Minister of
Foreign Affairs of Turkey, Mr Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu. I have also discussed
the idea with several Ambassadors from Council of Europe member
States and met the Director of the Multilateral Policy Directorate
at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Mr Paul Williams, in London.
On 5 July 2017, I met in Strasbourg Ms Federica Mogherini, High
Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security
Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission, and discussed
with her the topic of my report and the overall role of the Council
of Europe in the European architecture.
7. On 12 September 2016, I presented the proposal for a Fourth
Summit at the colloquium which the French delegation to the Assembly,
led by our colleague Mr René Rouquet, organised in Paris, at the
French National Assembly, on “Is the idea of the defence of human
rights in Europe outdated? The Council of Europe is more necessary
than ever before”. Several
participants, including representatives of the Assembly and the Secretary
General of the Council of Europe, spoke in favour of a Fourth Summit.
The colloquium offered extremely interesting food for thought as
regards both the need and the possible themes for a Fourth Summit and
I consider its proceedings a valuable contribution to the preparatory
work of a possible Fourth Summit.
Several
participants, including representatives of the Assembly and the Secretary
General of the Council of Europe, spoke in favour of a Fourth Summit.
The colloquium offered extremely interesting food for thought as
regards both the need and the possible themes for a Fourth Summit and
I consider its proceedings a valuable contribution to the preparatory
work of a possible Fourth Summit.8. It may be no coincidence that only a few weeks after the Paris
colloquium, on 11 October 2016, the then President of France, Mr
François Hollande, concluded his address to our Assembly announcing
that France would be organising in 2019, during its chairmanship
of the Organisation and on the occasion of its 70th anniversary,
the Fourth Summit to “chart out the future of the Organisation”.
9. In May 2017, Ms Dzhema Grozdanova, Chairperson of the Bulgarian
delegation to the Assembly, tabled a motion for a recommendation
on “The Council of Europe in the European political architecture” which, following referral by the
Assembly, I have also taken into consideration in the context of
my report.
which, following referral by the
Assembly, I have also taken into consideration in the context of
my report.10. The purpose of my report is to contribute to the reflection
about the opportuneness and the agenda of a possible Fourth Summit.
I have also made some proposals regarding the preparatory work which
the Organisation will have to engage in ahead of the Summit. For
the purpose of better reflecting the main message of my report also
in its title I suggested slightly rewording it to read as follows:
“Call for a Council of Europe Summit to reaffirm European unity
and to defend and promote democratic security in Europe” (instead
of “Call for a Council of Europe Summit to defend and promote democratic
security in Europe”).
11. The decision to convene a Summit of Heads of State and Government,
at a specific point in time, will be taken by the Committee of Ministers,
and the Secretary General of the Organisation will have an important
co-ordinating role to play. Ways must also be found to keep the
Assembly closely associated to the process of the preparation of
a possible Summit. I hope that this report, including the input
I have received from various sources, will constitute a first step
in the Assembly’s contribution to this process. In my capacity as
rapporteur, I will continue to follow it personally and closely.
2. A brief overview of previous Council of Europe Summits
12. Before discussing any further
the idea of a possible Fourth Summit, I think it is useful to briefly
recall the three Summits of Heads of State and Government of Council
of Europe member States organised since the Organisation’s establishment. Each of them has resulted in concrete
advances, including the establishment of new bodies and mechanisms.
Each of them has resulted in concrete
advances, including the establishment of new bodies and mechanisms.13. The first Summit was organised in 1993, in Vienna, a few years
after the fall of the Berlin Wall, when the Organisation was confronted
with the unique challenge of embracing emerging democracies. It
thus, inter alia, spelt out
the criteria for the accession of the new member States; set the
basis for establishing procedures for monitoring respect of accession
commitments; led to the founding of the European Commission against Racism
and Intolerance (ECRI), and proposed the drafting of a framework
convention for the protection of national minorities.
14. In 1997, the Strasbourg Summit endorsed the establishment
of the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) and welcomed the
establishment of a single Court of Human Rights and of the Office
of the Commissioner for Human Rights.
15. In 2005, the Warsaw Summit defined a roadmap for the Organisation
following its unprecedented enlargement and led to a report on the
relations between the European Union and the Council of Europe,
which Mr Jean Claude Juncker, then Prime Minister of Luxembourg,
presented to the Assembly one year later, in 2006.
16. The Warsaw Summit also called for a greater synergy with the
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE); for
enhanced effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights
(ETS No. 5, “the Convention”); the further promotion of human rights
through greater support to the European Committee for the Prevention
of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT),
the Commissioner for Human Rights and ECRI, and for increased participation
by NGOs in the work of the Organisation.
17. Among other priorities, the 2005 Summit also enhanced the
role of the Council of Europe in the fight against terrorism, launched
a new mechanism to combat trafficking in human beings and proposed
measures to combat violence against women.
3. The current challenges
18. Today, 12 years after the Organisation’s
last Summit, Europe is facing unprecedented political challenges,
both within and outside its borders: the daily threat of terrorist
attacks, migratory pressure, the rise of Euroscepticism, nationalism,
populism and xenophobia, the persistence of frozen and open conflicts
and the re-emergence of divisions between Council of Europe member
States. The ongoing wars in Syria and Libya, at the doors of Europe,
threaten security and stability on the continent and have caused
massive refugee and migratory flows, whereas, at global level, the
geopolitical weight of Europe seems to be receding.
19. Numerous terrorist attacks have killed hundreds of innocent
people over the last couple of years in several member States –
Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Spain, Sweden, Turkey,
United Kingdom – and also in the Council of Europe neighbourhood.
Terrorism is per se a direct
attack on the very values of democracy and freedom our Organisation
defends. The daily threat of terrorist attacks in our member States
has given rise to a number of challenges such as: the need to strike
a fair balance between enhanced security arrangements and respect
for fundamental rights and freedoms (the latter being in effect
an indispensable requirement for an effective long-term fight against
terrorism and its causes rather than an antagonistic concept as
some tend to argue); the need for enhanced international co-operation
and adoption of common strategies focusing not only on repression
but also on prevention; the issue of foreign terrorist fighters;
the funding of terrorism; and, of course, the protection of victims
of terrorism.
20. An attempted coup d’état in Turkey, in July last year, led
to hundreds of victims and shocked us all. One year later, the response
by the government raises very serious human rights and rule of law
challenges, not only for the country itself but also for the Council
of Europe, of which Turkey is one of the oldest member States.
21. The annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation in 2014
has added to the list of challenges as both Ukraine and Russia are
members of the Organisation. The violations of the cease-fire in
Donbas continue and regrettably there has been no progress in the
implementation of the political aspects of the Minsk process either.
Following sanctions decided by our Assembly vis-à-vis the Russian
parliamentary delegation in 2014 and in 2015, this delegation decided
to stop participating in the work of the Assembly. The Russian Federation did
not submit credentials for any parliamentary delegation in 2016
or in 2017. Thus, although a full member of the Organisation, the
Russian Federation has not been represented in the bodies nor has
it participated in the activities of the Assembly for three consecutive
years. At the end of June 2017, it announced its decision to suspend
the payment of its contribution to the budget of the Council of
Europe for 2017 until the full and unconditional restoration of
the credentials of the delegation of its Federal Assembly within
our Assembly.
22. Moreover, the efficiency and authority of the unique human
rights protection system, based on the European Convention on Human
Rights, is threatened by various attempts to undermine the authority
of the European Court of Human Rights, the lack of political will
to implement its judgments on the part of certain States Parties,
despite their binding force on all State authorities, or delays
in their implementation. Some 10 000 cases remain today non implemented
while the number of leading cases – concerning specific structural
problems – awaiting execution for more than five years has recently
increased.
23. For its part, the European Union is undergoing a major “existential
crisis”, to quote the President of the European Commission: already
evident in the handling of the Greek debt crisis, the refugee and
migration crisis brought to light unprecedented divisions and lack
of solidarity. The European Union has recently launched a formal
infringement procedure against three of its member States, the Czech
Republic, Hungary and Poland, for refusing to take in their share
of refugees under an EU solidarity plan, marking a further escalation
in the disagreement over how to handle the migration crisis in the
European Union. In the course of July and in the context of a procedure
initiated by the European Commission in January 2016, a Rule of
Law Recommendation was addressed to Poland expressing grave concerns
about the planned reform of the judiciary in the country, whereas
an infringement procedure was launched against Hungary for its law
on foreign-funded NGOs. The European Commission also sent Hungary
a reasoned opinion, the second step in an infringement procedure, as
regards the compatibility of its Higher Education Law with EU law.
24. The June 2016 referendum in which people of the United Kingdom
voted to leave the European Union weakened even more the European
Union and sent shock waves beyond the country and even the European Union.
25. These developments within the European Union also raise new
challenges regarding the Greater Europe, that of the Council of
Europe, and make the need for further reflection on the complementarity
of the two institutions and mutual reinforcement, in the interest
of 835 million Europeans, more urgent than ever.
26. The rise of populism and the fact that more and more populists
come to power or that those in power adopt a more and more populist
discourse and attitude should not simply lead us to easy and abstract condemnations
of populism but also to a reflection as to why populists increasingly
enjoy broad support. The answer seems to lie in the ever growing
distance between people and the institutions which are meant to represent
them, be it national institutions or international organisations.
27. Increasing unemployment, deepening inequalities due to globalisation,
austerity measures which seem to lead nowhere, have made people
lose trust in their institutions. As the Secretary General of the
Council of Europe put it when addressing us during the January 2017
part-session of the Assembly: “It is true that many national democratic
institutions and that Europe’s international organisations, including
the Council of Europe, must do more to speak to ordinary people’s
concerns … The answer is getting our own houses in order, renewing
our institutions so that they better represent and serve all our
citizens.”
4. The Council of Europe more necessary than ever
28. Against such a background,
we need today the Council of Europe and the values it upholds “more
than ever”, as the French President also told us last October when
announcing the organisation of a Summit by France in 2019. Why?
29. Because the Council of Europe is the guardian of the ideal
of European unity. It is today the oldest European organisation
born in the aftermath of the Second World War: on the one hand,
it is the fruit of the European unification dream of the earlier
generations; on the other, it is the seed of any subsequent unification project
at economic, legal, political and cultural levels. It has been ahead
of and has opened the way for other European organisations or institutions
which embody a project of unity, such as the European Union, not
only from an institutional point of view but also from a symbolic
one.
30. Not everybody knows it, but the twelve-star European flag,
which symbolises European unity world-wide and is also used as the
European Union’s emblem, was designed at the Council of Europe,
upon the Assembly’s proposal, and introduced following a vote by
the Assembly and a decision by the Committee of Ministers in 1955.
The same is true for the European anthem: the Ode
to Joy from the fourth movement of Beethoven’s ninth
symphony was proposed as “an anthem for the Europe we are building”
by the Assembly in its Resolution
492 (1971) and formally adopted by the Committee of Ministers in
1972. Meeting in Milan in 1985, the (then) European Communities
leaders adopted both the Council of Europe’s flag and anthem as
their own too. This is why the Council of Europe has a specific
responsibility to safeguard European unity, especially in times
of crisis.
31. Founded with a view to achieving “greater unity among its
members for the purpose of safeguarding and realising the ideals
and principles which are their common heritage”, the Council of
Europe is the only European Organisation which brings together almost
all the European States (with the notable exception of Belarus).
It is thus best placed to provide a forum where the European ideal
of “unity within diversity” can be realised. This ideal does not
imply a process of homogenisation, in the sense that some States
must adopt a model imposed by others, but a process of seeking what
unites them all while respecting what is different among them: from
western to eastern Europe, from northern to Mediterranean Europe.
32. At the basis of European unity, as safeguarded by the Council
of Europe, lies the idea of respect for the human being and for
his or her infinite dignity. If this pan-European Organisation is
the depositary of more than 200 conventions, drawn up over the 68
years of its existence, the “common heritage” among its members
is most significantly embodied in the European Convention on Human
Rights and the norms and values it enshrines. What makes this Convention
so special, in comparison to any other international convention
or treaty, is the unique mechanism of protection of individual rights
it provides for, that is the European Court of Human Rights, whose
judgments have a binding force. The Convention, a brainchild of
our Assembly, is the most obvious proof that the Council of Europe
is here to defend, more than anything else, the rights of the people.
Through this mechanism, member States have recognised the fact that
they cannot dispose of their common heritage as they see fit, but
that they accept, together, to place it under the protection of
a supra-national court.
33. Next to the European Convention on Human Rights lies the treaty
system of the European Social Charter, the other fundamental legal
instrument elaborated by the Council of Europe which aims at improving the
implementation of social and economic rights at the continental
level, in parallel to civil and political rights granted by the
Convention. The unity of these two legal instruments represents
the unity and the indivisibility of human rights. Promoting implementation
of and enhancing the mechanism of the European Social Charter, which
guarantees day-to-day human needs such as work, health, housing,
education, social security and protection or welfare services, means
ensuring dignity, bringing people together, contributing to their
individual and collective well-being, as well as leading to social
cohesion, peace and economic development.
34. Thus, the Council of Europe not only promotes political unity
among its member States but also offers a common legal space to
835 million Europeans. Of the 221 conventions defining this common
legal space today, more than two thirds (some 161) are open for
signature and ratification by non-member States and have an important
impact worldwide such as those governing extradition, transfer of
sentenced persons, the 1985 Data Protection Convention (ETS No.
108) or the 2001 Cybercrime Convention (ETS No. 185). The latter convention
(known also as the “Budapest Convention”) is the first international
legal instrument governing crimes committed via the internet, including
computer-related fraud, child pornography and violations of network
security, and has been ratified by many non-European States, such
as the United States and Japan. The Cybercrime Convention can also
be helpful nowadays to address the so-called “fake news”, another
recent phenomenon added to the list of current challenges.
35. The Council of Europe continues to prove its ability to quickly
draft conventions or other legal instruments to react to current
societal challenges. For instance, on terrorism, the Organisation
has recently filled a major gap in international law, criminalising,
for the first time, early acts of preparation of terrorism to help
its member States address the surge in foreign terrorist fighters
through an Additional Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention
on Terrorism (CETS No. 217).
36. The Organisation has also just elaborated a Convention on
Offences Relating to Cultural Property (CETS No. 221), open to non-member
States, which aims at preventing and combating the illicit trafficking
and destruction of cultural property in the framework of the Organisation’s
action to fight terrorism and organised crime. This convention,
which is the only international treaty dealing specifically with
the criminalisation of the illicit trafficking of cultural property,
was opened for signature in Nicosia on 5 May 2017.
37. To quote an example from another area, it is worth mentioning
the Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women
and Domestic Violence (CETS No. 210, “Istanbul Convention”), which was
drafted (within a period of only one year) with the active support
of the Assembly, as an urgent response to the problem of domestic
violence.
38. In addition to conventions, the Council of Europe contributes
to the elaboration of common policies among its member States through
the elaboration of non-binding legal instruments such as recommendations, guidelines
or resolutions adopted by its Committee of Ministers on the basis
of consensus. These may cover a variety of issues and offer common
responses to new societal challenges when the elaboration of a treaty
is not necessary. Thus, for instance, in the context of the fight
against terrorism and along with the drawing up of legally binding
instruments, the Organisation has recently revised its guidelines
for the protection of victims of terrorism.
39. It is also worth mentioning the possibility of variable-geometry
co-operation proposed by the Council of Europe, not only through
its convention-based system and the possibility of reservations,
but also through Partial Agreements: these enable some member States
to engage in additional co-operation in some specific areas while
at the same time allowing non-member States to join in. Some of
the most significant Council of Europe bodies, in the sense of membership
and impact, are partial agreements such as the European Commission
for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), the Group of States
against Corruption (GRECO) or Eurimages.
40. Through its system of conventions and other non-binding legal
instruments or partial agreements, the Council of Europe has largely
contributed to building a European civil society in which peoples
and persons recognise and respect each other as peers in dignity.
It is precisely this “peer relationship” which constitutes the cornerstone
of freedom and represents the “European” model of living in peace
and justice. Monitoring respect for human rights by the Council
of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, the Organisation’s monitoring
bodies and the Assembly rapporteurs is an essential element of this
“peer relationship”. Similarly, an intense and permanent dialogue
with non-governmental organisations, represented in the Council
of Europe through the International Conference of NGOs (INGOs),
is fundamental for the building of a common “European civil society”.
41. The convention system, sitting at the heart of the Organisation’s
work, as valuable as it may be, still requires effective political
democracy to function. Thus, the Council of Europe safeguards and
promotes the values and principles of democracy and the rule of
law through its various expert or steering committees as well as
its constitutional law expert body par excellence, the Venice Commission,
whose expertise in democracy is well-known not only in Europe but
also in other continents.
42. The Council of Europe also contributes to the development
of a citizens’ government in member States through: direct participation
mechanisms but also mechanisms of representation based on accountability; freedom
of expression, free sharing of information and exchange of opinions
leading to rational decisions emerging from the confrontation between
different positions and the respect of both the minorities and the majorities.
43. A special role in promoting democracy throughout the continent
is of course entrusted to our Parliamentary Assembly, the first
European forum of elected national members of parliament and the
matrix of other European parliamentary institutions which came after
it. The Assembly has been at the origin of and taken active part
in the elaboration of the key Council of Europe conventions, starting
from the European Convention on Human Rights; has played a decisive
role in the enlargement process of the Organisation, in the early
90s, and the development of procedures to follow up and facilitate
the integration of new member States within the Organisation and
has since provided a unique pan-European forum for political dialogue among
elected representatives of the citizens from the Greater Europe.
As a statutory organ of the Council of Europe, its mission is to
promote co-operation among parliamentarians to achieve the goals
of the Organisation and unite European democracies around common
values and on the basis of their common heritage. Election observation
by the Assembly is an essential element of this common democracy
building in the various member States or in those with whom the
Assembly has established special relations.
44. Democracy is not developed solely through mechanisms of assistance
and monitoring but also and more significantly through an intense
educational effort. Education is the most efficient way to face
the threats to democracy which originate from racism, xenophobia,
authoritarianism and violence. A stable democracy which respects
human rights is inconceivable without culture and education. Through
democratic education, the Council of Europe can also help reduce
the impact of populism, one of the ever-rising challenges of our democratic
societies, since well informed and educated citizens are less likely
to be attracted by populist arguments.
45. At the origin of the European construction, bringing together
almost all the European States on the basis of common values and
principles and thus natural guardian of “unity within diversity”,
offering a common legal space to 835 million Europeans, guaranteeing
protection of their human rights, promoting social rights and democracy
and contributing to the development of a European civil society,
the Council of Europe is today best placed to help overcome the
challenges raised by nationalism and prevent the building of new
walls.
46. Alongside the European Union, whose far-reaching integration
project will never cover the whole continent, and the OSCE, which
also covers non-European States not necessarily sharing the common European
values, the Council of Europe remains the only pan-European Organisation
capable of promoting and guaranteeing democratic security over
the continent and this unique role should be preserved and further strengthened.
over
the continent and this unique role should be preserved and further strengthened.5. Why a Fourth Summit?
47. If the above-mentioned analysis
proves why we need the Council of Europe today more than ever, does it
suffice to justify that we also need a new Summit of Heads of State
and Government? The answer to this question is closely dependent
on what we want to achieve with a new Summit.
48. All previous three Summits of the Organisation, and especially
the first one, as we have seen above, benefited from the dynamics
of European re-unification following the fall of the Berlin wall.
They served the clear purpose of defining a new role for the Council
of Europe as the “common house” of a united Greater Europe and provided
it with the necessary means and tools to deliver under the new reality.
49. The situation today is different. As mentioned above, many
risks and difficulties on various fronts are currently threatening
the European continent and its unity. They represent a major challenge
which puts to the test the solidity of the pan-European project.
Against this background, the fundamental question we need to answer
is the following: Are the emerging conflicts and divergences stronger
than the unity? Or what shall prevail is the realisation of the
need to preserve unity throughout the continent and the political
will to form not simply a grouping of States but a real community
sharing common values, a common legal order, a common jurisdiction
and increasingly integrated institutions?
50. In my opinion, a Fourth Summit should respond positively to
this challenge and mark with courage the starting point of the third
phase in the life and history of the Organisation: that of stabilisation
and internalisation of the Council of Europe in the conscience of
European citizens and in national institutions, following the first phase
of the foundation (1949-1989) and the second one of enlargement
(1989-).
51. The Fourth Summit should therefore be well focused and primarily
aimed at re-launching the Council of Europe’s core mission as described
above: that of a pan-European Organisation, composed of 47 European States,
offering a common legal space to 835 million Europeans and thus
capable of promoting “unity within diversity” and democratic security
throughout the continent
52. In a Europe which has profoundly changed since the last Summit,
held in Warsaw in 2005, and when the whole world order seems to
be changing, a Summit would offer a unique opportunity for member
States to reaffirm, in the strongest possible terms and at the highest
political level, their commitment to the common values and principles
of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, upheld by the Organisation,
as enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights. Member
States should clearly express their willingness to continue to be
part of a single community, capable of capitalising on internal
differences as an element of richness and variety and capable of
handling internal conflicts in a positive and non-destructive way.
53. If its agenda is carefully prepared and well-focused and the
proposal is supported throughout at the highest political level
by the host country, a Fourth Summit could slow down current negative
trends in some member States, increase pressure on hesitating or
defiant member States, protect the authority and credibility of
the Organisation and create opportunities for future efforts to
restore unity and cohesion.
54. I believe that in the difficult times we are going through,
it is our responsibility to fight nationalism and divisions, preserve
and enhance our “common house” and avoid building new walls. Having
inherited the political success of a pan-European organisation,
we owe it to the generations to come to do everything within our
power not to weaken, through fear or hesitation to act, what our
predecessors have built.
55. The consultations I have held with national delegations and
representatives of the executive branch of several member States
as well as with the Secretary General of the Organisation confirm
the choice of reaffirming the Council of Europe’s core mission as
the main aim of a Fourth Summit.
56. This necessarily means safeguarding the unique mechanism of
the protection of individual rights it provides for. Thus, a predominant
place in the agenda of a future Summit should be given to the need
to defend and protect the authority of the European Court of Human
Rights.
57. Defending the authority of the Court and its unique mechanism
of protection of the rights of the people requires more than anything
else ensuring prompt and full implementation of its judgments, on
which the efficiency and authority of the human rights protection
system based on the European Convention on Human Rights depend.
In fact, what is the value of the Court’s judgments for the citizens
and every person within the jurisdiction of member States if its
judgments remain unfulfilled?
58. As mentioned above, the record regarding the implementation
of the Court’s judgments, even though this is a legal obligation
for the States Parties emanating from the Convention itself (Article
46.1), is becoming increasingly worrying. As the main reason for
this situation is the lack of political will to implement judgments on
the part of certain States Parties’ governments, the Summit could
serve as an impetus for improvement of the record of implementation
and could reverse current tendencies to undermine the authority
of the Court.
59. Although primary responsibility for supervision of the implementation
of Court judgments lies with the Committee of Ministers, the Parliamentary
Assembly has been contributing to the process since its Resolution 1226 (2000), encouraging in particular proactive involvement on the
part of national parliaments. I therefore refer to the relevant
reports and the proposals contained therein and in particular to Resolution 2178 (2017) and Recommendation
2110 (2017), adopted by our Assembly in June 2017. A quite detailed
analysis of recent efforts to enhance effectiveness of the Convention
system is available in the report on “The effectiveness of the European
Convention on Human Rights: the Brighton Declaration and beyond”
(Doc. 13719) which led to Resolution
2055 (2015) and Recommendation
2070 (2015).
60. On the basis of the principles of indivisibility, interdependence
and interrelation of fundamental rights, a Fourth Summit could also
offer the necessary political impetus to strengthen the treaty system
of the European Social Charter, including its collective complaints
system, slow down current negative trends toward downgrading social
rights guarantees across Council of Europe member States and reaffirm
the fact that only the enjoyment of socio-economic rights, and social
inclusion allow people to fully enjoy their civil and political rights.
61. This is all the more important at a time when these fundamental
rights, corresponding to everyday human needs, are under pressure
or even at risk as a consequence of the economic and financial crisis
which started as of 2008 and has substantially eroded social structures
throughout the continent. The Summit could also help ensure coherence
between the Council of Europe and the EU legal systems in the field
of social rights. Interaction could be stepped up following the
recent adoption by the European Commission of the European Pillar
of Social Rights.
62. To sum up, a Fourth Summit could offer an additional opportunity
to bring forward, at the highest political level, the goals currently
promoted by the “Turin Process”. Launched by the Secretary General
of the Council of Europe in October 2014, this is a political process
aimed at reinforcing the normative system of the Charter and at
improving the implementation of social and economic rights. For
its part, the Assembly has always promoted the European Social Charter
as the most comprehensive social rights standard in Europe and actively
participates in the Turin Process. For a more detailed analysis
and proposals in this area, I refer to Resolution 2180 (2017) and Recommendation
2112 (2017) adopted on 30 June 2017 on “The ‘Turin process’: reinforcing
social rights in Europe”.
63. More specifically, among the big social challenges which the
Fourth Summit could address are those of growing poverty and modern
slavery. A strong Council of Europe initiative on this front could
encourage member States to adopt more efficient measures for the
protection of those who are weaker and more vulnerable. European
citizens could also then realise that there are European institutions
which are not indifferent to their problems and the concrete conditions
of their everyday life
64. As mentioned above, the Council of Europe convention system,
aimed at safeguarding the fundamental rights (civil, political,
social and cultural) of the people of Europe, requires effective
political democracy to function. A Fourth Summit could reaffirm
and further enhance the Council of Europe’s role both as guardian and
as an innovator for democracy, also through further enhancement
of the role of the Venice Commission.
65. With the overall aim of reinforcing democratic security, the
Summit should contribute to consolidating citizens’ trust in democratic
institutions and democratic values. This is all the more essential
as Europe continues to face deep economic and social crises, which
in turn provide fertile ground for phenomena such as populism, racism,
xenophobia, violent extremism and radicalisation leading to terrorism.
In this respect, the Summit should also enhance the role of our
Assembly as a strong pillar of European parliamentarism, bringing together
the representatives of citizens from almost all the European States.
66. At the same time, the Summit could contribute to consolidating
the emergence of a European civil society and propose ways to increase
citizens’ participation and consultation with public and civil society
in search of common solutions to common problems. It would thus
bring the Organisation closer to the people it serves. The role
of the Conference of International NGOs could also be upgraded in
this context.
67. If the Fourth Summit is meant to reaffirm the mission of the
Council of Europe as guardian of the ideal of European unity, it
is essential that it addresses its role within the whole European
political architecture. It would, in particular, offer a fresh opportunity
to look at its relations and co-operation with the European Union recalling
that the Council of Europe is a unique forum where European Union
member States engage in dialogue and co-operation with non-European
Union member States on the basis of common values and principles.
68. Following the Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom, a founding
member of the Council of Europe will sooner or later withdraw from
the European Union. This and other recent developments have generated
an internal debate within the European Union regarding its own future
with different options put on the table. The European Commission President,
Mr Jean-Claude Juncker, will take these ideas forward in his State
of the Union speech in September 2017 before first conclusions can
be drawn at the December 2017 European Council. This will facilitate
a decision on a course of action to be rolled out in time for the
European Parliament elections in June 2019. It is therefore timelier
than ever to enlarge this reflection into an overall debate, at
the highest political level, on the future of Europe and upgrade
in this context the role to be played by the Council of Europe.
The European Commission President,
Mr Jean-Claude Juncker, will take these ideas forward in his State
of the Union speech in September 2017 before first conclusions can
be drawn at the December 2017 European Council. This will facilitate
a decision on a course of action to be rolled out in time for the
European Parliament elections in June 2019. It is therefore timelier
than ever to enlarge this reflection into an overall debate, at
the highest political level, on the future of Europe and upgrade
in this context the role to be played by the Council of Europe.69. The Council of Europe and the European Union have recently
celebrated the 10th anniversary of the Memorandum of Understanding
which governs their co-operation since 2007. This was the fruit
of a reflection by Mr Jean-Claude Juncker, then Prime Minister of
Luxembourg. Mr Juncker received the mandate to prepare a report
on the relations between the Council of Europe and the European
Union by the Organisation’s Heads of State and Government at the
Warsaw Summit in 2005 and presented his conclusions at the Assembly
one year later.
70. Since the signing of the 2007 Memorandum, new challenges have
emerged regarding the relations between the two European organisations,
especially following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in December
2009. The impact of the Lisbon Treaty on the Council of Europe was
extensively analysed by the Assembly already in 2011.
71. Back then, the Assembly saw the entry into force of the Lisbon
Treaty as a new opportunity for a reinforced partnership between
the Council of Europe and the European Union, based on each other’s acquis and comparative advantages.
Such a partnership should, in the Assembly’s view, aim to ensure
coherence between, on the one hand, the pan-European project promoted
by the Council of Europe and, on the other, the integration process
initiated by the European Union. EU accession to the European Convention
on Human Rights, which the Lisbon Treaty turned into a legal obligation,
as well as the EU accession to other Council of Europe conventions,
was expected to lead to a common space for human rights protection
across the continent in the interest of all people in Europe.
72. Not much has changed since 2011 in terms of outstanding challenges,
especially as EU accession to the Convention has been halted following
a critical opinion by the Court of Justice of the European Union.
73. To mention some other challenges: the increase of the European
Union’s role in the traditional areas of activity of the Council
of Europe (justice, freedom and democratic security) continues to
affect the interaction between the European Union and its member
States when participating in Council of Europe steering committees
and when negotiating new Council of Europe conventions on matters
falling within these areas. The risk of duplication between the
two organisations is still present and the need to avoid it by developing synergies
and ensuring coherence of standards is more urgent than ever against
the background of economic hardship.
74. A plethora of Assembly texts, older and more recent, offer
a good basis for reflection, including concrete proposals, which
can be taken up by the Fourth Summit. Let me simply conclude by
underlining, once more, a proposal already formulated in 2006 by
Mr Juncker in his report on relations between the Council of Europe and
the European Union :
:“It follows logically from the complementary relationship between the Council of Europe and the EU … and from the increased co-operation between the two bodies, which is necessary for the democratic security of people in our continent, that a further step in the relationship should be envisaged, once the EU has acquired legal personality – EU membership of the Council by 2010 … This will allow it to speak directly for itself in all the Council bodies, on all issues which affect its interests and which fall within its area of competence – all within the context of a pan-European dynamic which it will help to push ahead in the general interest of the continent.”
75. I wonder whether the Fourth Summit and the discussions on
the reshaping of the European architecture which this should generate
could not give fresh topicality to Mr Juncker’s proposal and to
the perspective of EU accession to the Statute of the Council of
Europe (ETS No. 1).
76. In this respect, I also support the proposal made by Ms Grozdanova,
Chairperson of the Bulgarian delegation, in her motion for a recommendation
on “The Council of Europe in the European political architecture”.
Ms Grozdanova suggests that, as part of the preparations for a Fourth
Summit, the Committee of Ministers could organise, together with
the Assembly and the European Parliament, a discussion about the future
of Europe and the role of the Council of Europe within the European
political architecture.
77. Also at the level of European architecture, it is high time
to show imagination and courage in order to respond to today's great
challenges. We should reflect, in an innovative and creative way,
on the reality in front of us, that of a Europe of concentric circles:
from the wider circle of the 47 Council of Europe member States to
the European Union, the Schengen area and the Eurozone, avoiding
unnecessary overlapping, ensuring coherence of standards, and aiming
to harmonise the various levels of international co-operation. As
they are the same European States which co-operate among themselves
at various levels, it would be paradoxical not to be able to harmonise
in the best possible way their co-operation. The Council of Europe
represents the widest circle in this dynamic co-operation and this
is why it is best placed to stimulate a reflection in this sense. This
would also be highly appreciated by the citizens who are often critical
of international institutions failing to co-operate significantly
with each other.
78. During my consultations with national parliamentary delegations
and representatives of the executive of member States, other themes
have also been brought to my attention as possible issues to be
put on the Summit’s agenda, such as: the role of the Council of
Europe in the fight against terrorism or in the fight against extremism
and radicalisation leading to terrorism, or the challenges raised
by the ongoing massive migratory and refugee flows in Europe.
79. Some delegations, and in particular the Chairperson of the
French delegation, are of the opinion that the fundamental problems
related to terrorism and migration have already been discussed in
several Heads of State and Government summits in different fora.
That said, some proposals recently made during the migration debate
at the June 2017 part-session of the Assembly could be taken up
on the Summit’s agenda. This could be the case for instance with
respect to the Assembly proposal to consider the feasibility of
creating, possibly as an enlarged partial agreement in co-operation
with the European Union, “a European migration and intercultural
development observatory, which would assist Council of Europe member
States in the development of strategies, legal frameworks, action
plans and specific projects in the field of migration”.
6. On the way towards the Fourth Summit
80. The success of a future Council
of Europe Summit will largely depend on the level of participation
and the degree of commitment shown by European leaders: unless we
manage to bring together the Heads of State and Government themselves
and ensure, despite differences and ongoing conflicts, a strong
political commitment by all to the ideal of European unity and the
shared values and principles upheld and promoted by the Council
of Europe, the Summit loses its relevance. Against the current critical
background, mobilising the Heads of State and Government will not
be an easy task but the challenge is so important for preserving the
unity of the continent and avoiding the building of new walls that
it is worth the effort.
81. In a way, the decision to convene a Summit, the careful preparation
of its agenda and of the final declaration and the ultimate level
of participation of member States are all issues closely linked.
Previous experience shows that, unless a member State proposes to
host a Summit and invests time and energy in co-ordinating and preparing
it, the process is too complex for the rotating chairmanship of
the Committee of Ministers to deal with.
82. Former French President François Hollande has already extended
an invitation to organise the Fourth Summit during the French chairmanship
of the Organisation in 2019 and on the occasion of its 70th anniversary.
83. Following the election of the new French President, Emmanuel
Macron, France has not yet pronounced itself as to whether the invitation
is maintained. The pro-European profile of the new President, who
chose the music of the European anthem to accompany him as he walked
in victory through the Louvre esplanade for his first appearance
before the French citizens and the whole world, increases the probability
that he will be willing to take up the challenge.
84. As also mentioned above, the ultimate decision to hold a Fourth
Summit, the focus to be given and its actual organisation fall on
the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers with the Secretary
General having an important co-ordinating role to play. For its
part, the Assembly, bringing together representatives of the citizens of
Europe, should be closely associated both in the definition of the
agenda and the preparation of the final declaration. The Assembly
has been associated, in different ways, in all previous Summits.
85. The preparatory work for a Summit of Heads of State and Government
is quite a long process and an important one in itself. An efficient
preparation of the Summit requires the development of synergies
between all sectors of the Organisation and more significantly between
its two statutory organs, the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary
Assembly.
86. The preparation of a future Summit could also be an occasion
for the Assembly to continue an in-depth reflection of its own identity,
role and mission as a statutory organ of the Organisation and, in
a broader sense, as a European forum for inter-parliamentary dialogue
which aims at having an impact in all Council of Europe member States.
87. In this respect, the current year has been particularly challenging
for our Assembly especially as we were faced with unprecedented
situations which required brave, prompt and innovative action: we
set up an independent external investigation body to look into allegations
of corruption and fostering of interests made against some members
or former members of the Parliamentary Assembly; we started reviewing our
Code of Conduct in order to prevent possible future violations by
Assembly members and strengthen the Assembly’s transparency, accountability
and integrity; considering that the principle
of accountability includes a duty of transparency and an obligation
to account for one’s actions, without which the Assembly cannot
have any confidence in those it has elected to office, we decided
to complete the Assembly’s regulatory framework by creating a procedure
to bring into play the institutional accountability of holders of
elective offices within the Assembly (notably its President and
chairpersons of committees) and the possibility to dismiss them
during their term of office.
we started reviewing our
Code of Conduct in order to prevent possible future violations by
Assembly members and strengthen the Assembly’s transparency, accountability
and integrity; considering that the principle
of accountability includes a duty of transparency and an obligation
to account for one’s actions, without which the Assembly cannot
have any confidence in those it has elected to office, we decided
to complete the Assembly’s regulatory framework by creating a procedure
to bring into play the institutional accountability of holders of
elective offices within the Assembly (notably its President and
chairpersons of committees) and the possibility to dismiss them
during their term of office. 88. All the above-mentioned measures aim at improving the internal
functioning of our Assembly and strengthening its credibility as
a statutory organ of the Organisation which, inter
alia, elects the judges to the European Court of Human
Rights, the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General of
the Organisation and the Commissioner for Human Rights.
89. Enhanced by the recent reforms, to be completed at the forthcoming
October part-session with the revision of its Code of Conduct, the
Assembly should expect to play an important role in the preparation
of the Summit, especially as it was the first to launch this idea
back in 2009 and has repeatedly promoted it ever since.
90. Nevertheless, there is still an inconsistency which affects
the ability of the Assembly to participate fully in the preparation
of the future Summit, in particular if the latter primarily aims
at reaffirming the role of the Council of Europe as guardian of
European unity and promoting democratic security throughout the
continent: for three consecutive years one of the Council of Europe
member States, the Russian Federation, has participated and been
represented in the activities and the bodies of only one of the
two statutory organs of the Organisation, namely the Committee of
Ministers, but not of the Assembly.
91. As mentioned above, following the annexation of Crimea by
the Russian Federation in February 2014 and the conflict in Donbas,
the Assembly decided to apply sanctions with respect to the participation
and representation rights of the Russian parliamentary delegation.
This triggered the latter’s decision not to participate at all in
the work of the Assembly. Since January 2016, the Russian Federation
has not submitted credentials of any parliamentary delegation to
the Assembly with the result that today not all member States of the
Organisation are represented in our midst.
92. The recent decision of the Russian authorities to suspend
the payment of their contribution to the budget of the Council of
Europe for 2017 until the full and unconditional restoration of
the credentials of the delegation of the Federal Assembly of the
Russian Federation within our Assembly is surely not helpful.
93. The overall situation within the Organisation is now counterproductive.
Not only because the very fact that a State which is a full member
of the Organisation participates in the activities and is represented
in the bodies of only one of the two statutory organs constitutes
an incoherence, but also because this situation adversely affects
the overall impact of the Organisation as a guardian of human rights
and democracy throughout the continent and therefore it is not in
the interest of the citizens of the 47 member States. This is certainly
not a situation which can persist if a Summit is to be organised
in the near future and a renewed commitment to the Council of Europe
is to be sought by European leaders.
94. This issue of major importance for the preparation of the
Summit cannot, in my view, be solved by simply looking at the internal
functioning and the rules of our Assembly, as some seem to suggest,
but requires a joint reflection between the two statutory organs
of the Organisation.
95. The starting point should be the Statute of the Council of
Europe. The latter, as supplemented by Statutory Resolution (51)
30, provides for a clear synergy between the two statutory organs
as regards membership of the Organisation.
96. However, over the years, and in particular after the Organisation’s
enlargement during the 90s, the Assembly has developed rules governing
the participation and representation rights of members of national delegations
in its own activities and bodies respectively which do not provide
for any kind of synergy or coherence with the Committee of Ministers
(consultation, discussion, etc.).
97. I therefore believe that, in the context of the preparations
for the Organisation’s Fourth Summit, it is necessary to initiate
a procedure aimed at harmonising the rules governing participation
and representation of member States in both statutory organs, while
of course fully respecting the latters’ autonomy.
98. The aim should not be to allow member States to violate the
Organisation’s Statute without any consequences but to ensure full
coherence between the two statutory organs of the Council of Europe.
This coherence should strengthen the sense of being part of a community
and the obligations incumbent upon every member State.
99. Such a common reflection should be carried out jointly and
as a matter of priority by the Assembly and the Committee of Ministers
as part of the preparations for the Fourth Summit. It could be co-ordinated
by the Joint Committee, “the organ of co-ordination” between the
two statutory organs in line with Statutory Resolution (51) 30,
and carried out by a smaller and thus more flexible ad hoc working
group to be set up by the Joint Committee.
100. If this proposal is accepted, the process should be completed
rapidly so as to allow for timely preparations for the next Summit.
Therefore, the ad hoc working group should start its work at the
beginning of the next ordinary session of the Assembly, in January
2018, and complete it, at the latest, at its autumn part-session
of the same year.
101. For this process to be credible and fruitful, both the whole
Assembly and every single member State should do their utmost to
ensure that all member States of the Organisation will be fully
represented in the process on both parliamentary and intergovernmental
sides.
102. In the meantime, the Assembly could already now decide to
continue its own reflection of its identity, role and mission as
a statutory organ of the Council of Europe and, linked with that,
provide its own vision of the future of the Organisation.
103. How can the Assembly preserve its role as a pan-European forum
for inter-parliamentary dialogue and at the same time continue to
safeguard the values and principles of the Organisation? After having
played a decisive role in the enlargement process of the Organisation,
completed some 20 years ago, and in the subsequent process of accompanying
new member States, are its working methods and tools still up to
date and capable of having an impact in all member States?
104. In order to continue this reflection on the preparation of
the Fourth Summit and the future of the Organisation, I suggest
that the Bureau of the Assembly asks the Committee of Rules of Procedure,
Immunities and Institutional Affairs and the Committee on Political
Affairs and Democracy to undertake a thorough analysis of these
matters and make concrete proposals in the framework of relevant
reports.
7. Conclusions
105. When called upon to think today
of the future of the Council of Europe and the necessity to preserve
and further strengthen its role and mission, it seems to me necessary
to step back for a moment and remember its origins and the spirit
of its foundation.
106. Unity is its cornerstone, human dignity its main goal.
107. The Message to Europeans,
adopted at the final session of the European Congress in 1948 in
The Hague, was pronounced 69 years ago, but it still sounds terrifyingly
topical:
“Europe is threatened, Europe is divided, and the greatest danger comes from her divisions … The hour has come to take action commensurate with the danger … Between this great peril and this great hope, Europe’s mission is clear. It is to unite her peoples in accordance with their genius of diversity and with the conditions of modern community life, and so open the way towards organised freedom for which the world is seeking … Human dignity is Europe’s finest achievement, freedom her true strength. Both are at stake in our struggle…”
108. These words, which led to the foundation of our Organisation,
could have been spoken today. The threats are not the same nor are
the divisions, but they still constitute “the greatest danger”.
The same is also true about our responsibility “to take action commensurate
with the danger”.
109. We owe it to the generations to come to do our utmost not
to weaken, through fear or hesitation to act, what our predecessors
have built, but to defend and further strengthen it, first and foremost
in the interest of the European people. In the challenging times
we are going through and when the whole world seems to be changing,
it is our responsibility to fight nationalism, the worst of all
the plagues, and prevent the building of new walls.
110. We have inherited a pan-European organisation which was created
out of the dream of European unity and for the very purpose of turning
this dream into reality. Even though we should be self-critical
about our past faults and cautious against the risks for our future,
we also have to be proud of our present achievements. If a “Human
Rights Charter” and a Court “with adequate sanctions for the implementation
of this Charter” were a dream for our founding fathers, they are
today the reality of 835 million Europeans and the best proof that
our Organisation is first and foremost here not to defend the political
or economic interests of any State, but the rights of the people.
111. The same is true about the desire for a “European Assembly
where the life forces of all our nations shall be represented”.
What was pledged by Europeans in May 1948 became a reality one year
later and our Assembly (then called “Consultative”) met in August
1949 in Strasbourg to represent the peoples of Europe. Having largely
contributed to the standard-setting achievements of the Organisation
and played a leading role in its enlargement process in the 90s
which resulted in the reunification of the continent, today it has
a primary responsibility to defend and further promote the Organisation’s
role in the overall European political architecture. It owes it
to itself to also look at its past and design its future.
112. It is in this context and against this background that I submit
my pleading in favour of a Fourth Summit of the Heads of State and
Government of Council of Europe member States: to preserve and strengthen
the unique pan-European project, currently threatened by divisions
and growing nationalism, through a renewed commitment by all member
States, at the highest political level, to the ideal of European
unity and the common values and principles of democracy, human rights
and the rule of law which the Organisation upholds.