Relations with the European Union (follow-up to the European Union’s Amsterdam Summit)

Doc. 8051

1 April 1998

Relations with the European Union (follow-up to the European Union’s Amsterdam Summit)

Report

Political Affairs Committee

Rapporteur: Mr. Eisso Woltjer, Netherlands, Socialist Group

Summary

The Amsterdam Treaty has given increased competence to the Union in areas in which the Council of Europe has an important ‘acquis‘ .

Consequently, the European Community should accede to all Council of Europe Conventions which foresee this possibility as well as to the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Social Charter and the European Cultural Convention.

Moreover, the European Union, once it acquires international legal personality, should adhere to the Council of Europe’s Conventions regarding police and co-operation in criminal matters.

The possible accession by the European Community (Union) as such to the Council of Europe should also be re-examined.

The Assembly should increase its co-operation with the European Parliament.

The Assembly and the European Parliament should be invited to participate in co-ordination meetings between the Council of Europe and the European Union (« Quadripartite meetings »).

I. Draft recommendation

1. The European Union’s Amsterdam Treaty has given increased competence to the Union in areas in which the Council of Europe has been active for many years and in which it has established a considerable ‘acquis.’

2. The Assembly welcomes the strengthening of human rights protection within the Union. Accession of the European Community (and the Union, once it acquires international legal personality) to the European Convention on Human Rights would further strengthen this protection and eliminate the current risk of divergent case-law between the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights.

3. The Assembly also welcomes the explicit reference to the Council of Europe’s Social Charter in the Amsterdam Treaty. The best way to achieve the objectives of the new Article 117 of the Treaty establishing the European Community would be accession of the Community (Union) as such to the Social Charter.

4. Both the European Union and the Council of Europe carry out important activities in the cultural field. The Assembly, therefore, reiterates its call on the European Community (Union) to adhere to the European Cultural Convention.

5. The Assembly notes with satisfaction that co-operation between the Council of Europe and the European Union takes place as regards Justice and Home Affairs. A concrete example was the Octopus programme (June 1996-December 1997) on the fight against corruption and organised crime. The Assembly strongly supports the establishment of an Octopus II programme.

6. The Council of Europe has established important Conventions and its Committee of Ministers has adopted several Recommendations regarding police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters. The Assembly considers that the possibility of opening these Conventions to accession by the European Union, once it acquires international legal personality, and implementation by the Union of the relevant Recommendations, merits close examination.

7. The Assembly notes that the European Community is already a party to certain Council of Europe Conventions. Since 1987, all Council of Europe Conventions dealing with matters in which the Community is competent contain a clause enabling the European Community to accede. However, the most recent Convention to which the European Community has acceded dates back to 1979. The Assembly therefore calls on the European Community (Union) to accede to all Conventions which foresee this possibility.

8. The Assembly further considers that the possibility of accession of the Community (Union) – without replacing its member states - to the Statute of the Council of Europe should also be actively examined. The Assembly notes in this context that the Community has already acceded to international organisations, such as the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).

9. The Amsterdam Treaty strengthens the European Union’s common foreign and security policy (CFSP). Article J.9 provides that member states shall co-ordinate their action in international organisations and shall uphold common positions in such fora. The Assembly considers that the implementation of this provision would enhance political dialogue within the Committee of Ministers. Increased contacts between the Committee of Ministers’ Deputies and the High Representative for the common foreign and security policy on issues of common concern are thus to be encouraged.

10. The Assembly notes that the European Conference, to which all states having applied for European Union membership are invited, held its first meeting in London on 12 March 1998. The Assembly considers it essential that the Council of Europe, given its role in the political and legal preparation of candidates for European Union membership, be invited to participate in the Conference.

11. The Assembly welcomes the Quadripartite meetings between the European Union and the Council of Europe. It recalls its position that these meetings should also have a parliamentary dimension.

12. The Assembly resolves to increase its co-operation with the European Parliament regarding:

i. the promotion of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, including its monitoring procedure, and assistance programmes;

ii. the observation of elections.

13. The Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers :

i. promote actively the accession of the European Community (Union) to all Council of Europe Conventions which foresee this possibility as well as to the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Social Charter and the European Cultural Convention;

ii. create the possibility for the European Union, once it acquires international legal personality, to adhere to the Council of Europe’s Conventions regarding police and co-operation in criminal matters ;

iii. re-examine the question of accession by the European Community (Union) to the Council of Europe ;

iv. take the necessary steps to ensure the participation of the Council of Europe in the European Conference;

v. propose that the Presidents of the Assembly and the European Parliament be invited to the next Quadripartite meeting ;

vi. establish regular contacts, at Deputies’ level, with the High Representative for the common foreign and security policy.

II. Explanatory memorandum by the rapporteur

A. Introduction

1. After two years of difficult negotiations, the Treaty of Amsterdam was concluded in June 1997 and signed on 2 October by the Foreign Ministers of the 15 member States of the European Union.

2. The new treaty, which will not come into force before 1999, the year when the euro is due to be launched, has four main objectives:

- to place employment and citizens’ rights at the core of the Union;

- to increase security and remove the remaining obstacles to freedom of movement;

- to give the European Union a real voice in global issues;

- to make the Union’s institutional structure more efficient with a view to further enlargement.

3. In other words, the Treaty of Amsterdam reinforces each of the three main pillars on which the Union’s activities have been based since the Maastricht Treaty came into force.

4. However, it is generally thought that the Treaty of Amsterdam was not a success where institutional reform is concerned.

5. Indeed, the fifteen member states decided to delay carrying out a three-point reform of the institutions which would have reduced the number of European Commissioners, re-weighted the votes of large and small member States within the Council of Ministers and increased the use of qualified majority voting.

6. Agreement on the issues of voting procedures within the Council and the composition of the Commission was only possible in a protocol containing the following elements:

- on the date of entry into force of the first enlargement, the Commission shall have no more than one member from each member State, provided that a compensatory change in the Council’s voting procedures, whether by re-weighting of the votes or by dual majority, has come into effect;

- at least one year before the Union’s membership reaches twenty, a conference of representatives of member States’ governments (IGC) shall be convened in order to carry out a comprehensive review of the Treaty’s provisions on the composition and functioning of the institutions.

7. The new Treaty of Amsterdam increases the European Union’s powers which clearly seem to overlap with the Council of Europe’s fields of expertise. Closer co-operation is needed between the two organisations at a time when the European Union is on the verge of welcoming into its fold countries that are already members of the Council of Europe and for which the Council has set up specific assistance and co-operation programmes (Themis, Demosthenes, Demosthenes Bis and LODE). The Council of Europe’s extensive work in this field contributes substantially to the preparation of these countries for accession to the European Union.

8. This report will deal with areas which already fall within the remit of both organisations as well as ways in which to increase synergy between them.

B. The European Union and human rights

Accession of the Union to the European Convention on Human Rights

9. In its Resolution 1068 (1995), the Assembly proposed that the European Union accede to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

10. However, on 28 March 1996, the day before the opening of the Intergovernmental Conference, the European Court of Justice ruled that the European Union could not accede to the ECHR because it had no legal personality. The Court of Justice emphasised that the only way of removing this obstacle would be to revise the treaty.

11. However, neither the Intergovernmental Conference nor the ensuing Treaty of Amsterdam was able to consider the possibility of accession because of a lack of unanimous support amongst the European Union’s member States. On the contrary, the States set up an internal system for protecting human rights, entrusting this task to the European Court of Justice. Hence it is now possible that the case-law of the European Court of Justice will diverge from that of the European Court of Human Rights .

Protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms within the EU

12. The Treaty of Amsterdam refers several times to the ECHR. The protection of fundamental rights within the European Union will be strengthened when the Treaty of Amsterdam comes into force. In particular:

- every individual will be entitled to dispute before the European Court of Justice any EU action which they believe constitutes a breach of their fundamental rights;

- if the European Council determines the existence of a serious and persistent breach by an EU member State of the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms or the rule of law, some of that State’s rights, including voting rights, may be suspended;

- the European Union can also take appropriate action to combat discrimination on the grounds of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.

13. The Treaty also contains a declaration on the abolition of the death penalty, with reference to Protocol No.6 to the ECHR.

14. Regarding fundamental social rights, the new Article 117 of the Treaty of Amsterdam refers to the example of the 1961 European Social Charter. However, the main principles of this Charter are not yet incorporated in the Treaty.

15. The importance attached by both the Council of Europe and the European Union to the fight against racism and xenophobia should also be stressed. On 2 June 1997 the Council of the European Union adopted a regulation establishing a European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, with its headquarters in Vienna. Taking into account the Council of Europe’s experience in the fight against racism and xenophobia, the regulation proposes that the EU and the Council of Europe should sign an agreement to establish close co-operation between the Council of Europe and the Monitoring Centre and that the Council of Europe appoint a member of the Monitoring Centre’s administrative council. To this end, the Council authorised the Commission to begin negotiations with the Council of Europe. The Commission was able to draw up a draft agreement after an initial meeting with Council of Europe representatives.

16. The Treaty of Amsterdam has made encouraging improvements to the protection of human rights within the European Union. However, the European Convention on Human Rights must remain the principal reference not only for the European Union’s member States but also for its institutions. The European Union, once it obtains international legal personality, should accede to the Convention, in order to bring coherence to the system of human rights protection and to prevent divergent case-law by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Community. The Community (Union) should also accede to the Council of Europe’s Social Charter.

C. Legal co-operation

17. The Treaty of Amsterdam makes provision for the use of “1st pillar” procedures (qualified majority, co-decision, initiative of the Commission and full jurisdiction of the Court) in the fields of internal and judicial affairs, including internal and external borders as well as policies regarding visas, asylum and immigration, and judicial co-operation in civil matters.

18. Such « communitarisation » will require major procedural changes: the use of directives or regulations; monitoring by the Court; the Commission as the only source of legislative initiatives; issues dealt with in the Council by working parties and the Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper).

19. This creates a very clear structure, placing everything that affects the movement of persons in the “1st pillar” and limiting the “3rd pillar” to areas involving criminal law and the police.

20. Clear improvements to the “3rd pillar” itself include a more specific description of its objectives, provision for consultation with the European Parliament, the establishment of a new legal instrument (the “outline decision”), extension of the Commission’s powers to make proposals in all fields and an initial role for the Court.

21. Lastly, the Schengen system, gradually abolishing border controls between signatory states is incorporated in the Community’s legal system and thus fosters the convergence of two separate legal systems.

22. However, such co-operation requires the Council to make unanimous decisions in all the relevant spheres except visas. Nevertheless, after five years the Council will decide unanimously and without national ratification whether all or some of these areas should be subject to qualified majority voting and co-decision; moreover, if the “Fifteen” cannot agree, it will still be possible to implement the Schengen Protocol with the support of just 13 States.

23. Protocols have been added for the United Kingdom and Ireland. These countries are not preventing the others from forging ahead with the agreement, while reserving the right to join them at any time. In a separate protocol, Denmark reserved the right to decide whether or not it will implement in its national law a decision of the Council on a proposal or initiative to build upon the Schengen acquis.

24. Dialogue already exists between the Council of Europe and the K.4 Committee (on co-operation in the fields of justice and internal affairs). A meeting between the troika of the K.4 Committee and a Council of Europe delegation was held on 6 March 1998.

25. The European Union should take advantage of the achievements and considerable expertise of the Council of Europe in matters covered by the “3rd pillar”. In particular, the Council of Europe has drawn up conventions and its Committee of Ministers has made recommendations in areas such as the fight against drug addiction, judicial co-operation in criminal and civil matters, police co-operation and data protection as well as asylum, refugees and the movement of persons. The European Community’s accession to these conventions and implement these recommendations would prevent double standards.

26. The Octopus Project, in operation between June 1996 and December 1997, is an example of the necessary co-operation between the Council of Europe and the European Union in the fight against corruption and organised crime. As is currently being discussed, the Project should be allowed to continue in spite of certain technical problems being raised by the European Commission.

27. Co-operation is becoming possible in the fight against corruption and organised crime as part of the 3rd pillar. The European Union must be encouraged to strengthen its links with the Council of Europe and to take advantage of its experience in this field. It must avoid duplicating the work already being carried out by the Council of Europe and ways should be sought to enable the European Union to accede to the relevant conventions.

D. Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)

28. The CFSP is becoming more operational. Qualitative progress is now feasible, but not guaranteed. It will continue to depend on the governments’ will to implement the CFSP tools.

29. The CFSP tools have become more coherent and the decision-making process is now more efficient:

- a clearer hierarchy between better defined instruments and a single decision-making procedure should eliminate what has often been a source of confusion;

- the key development is the laying down of “common strategies”, to be decided upon by a consensus of the European Council, comprising the Heads of State and Government, who will determine how these strategies should be implemented by taking joint action and adopting common positions through qualified majority voting. Hence there is now a real possibility that qualified majority voting will actually be used for the CFSP;

- this change has only been made possible because the member States have two escape routes: “constructive abstention”, which enables them to opt out of an activity, and the possibility of blocking a decision on important national policy grounds;

- it should also be noted that the need for coherence between the pillars is even stronger and that they should remain independent and of equal importance.

30. The Treaty of Amsterdam seems less innovative with regard to the administration of foreign policy.

31. The Secretary General of the Council will exercise the newly created function of High Representative for the CFSP, delegating his or her traditional administrative responsibilities to a deputy.

32. The Secretary General will assist the Presidency and the Council, in particular by acting as their representative and by heading the new planning unit.

33. The new “policy planning and early warning unit”, in which the Commission is heavily involved, is clearly designed to assist with preparatory work for the CFSP.

34. Finally, the Commission remains very involved in the implementation phase, particularly by helping to implement the CFSP budget in accordance with the new inter-institutional agreement, and as part of the new troika (Presidency, Secretary General, Commission).

35. The Treaty also establishes a new Article J.9, which provides that member States should co-ordinate their activities within international organisations and uphold common positions in such fora. Accordingly, the CFSP should also be expected to develop within the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers.

Security and defence

36. The real innovations consist firstly of the Council’s authority to take political decisions concerning the so-called “Petersberg” tasks (“humanitarian and rescue tasks, peacekeeping tasks, tasks of combat forces in crisis management, including peacemaking”), adopted by the WEU Council of Ministers on 19 June 1992, and secondly of the provisions under which the Union may avail itself of the WEU to implement these political decisions, with the ad hoc participation of countries which are not militarily aligned.

37. Bearing in mind the size of these operations in the current geostrategic context, this is certainly a positive development.

38. However, the scope of provisions on the overall future defence structure is unclear: on the one hand, the possibility of the WEU becoming part of the Union has been mentioned without reference to any timetable or stages of integration; on the other, this could yet take place if the European Council were to agree, in which case there would be no need to modify the Treaty further. Nevertheless, given some countries’ views on this subject, it is unlikely that such a decision will be taken unanimously in either the short or the medium term.

39. Links need to be strengthened between political dialogue within the Council of Europe and the Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy. The CFSP should also be implemented within the Committee of Ministers. To this end, co-ordination should be encouraged between the Committee of Ministers’ Deputies and the High Representative for the CFSP.

E. Democratisation of the Union

40. The general public is now largely aware of what is known as the European Union’s democratic deficit. In order to deal with this problem, the Treaty of Amsterdam was supposed to increase the powers of the European Parliament in the legislative process by simplifying decision-making procedures and to give national parliaments a bigger say in the Union’s decision-making process.

Powers of the European Parliament

41. The Treaty of Amsterdam was designed to increase the powers of the European Parliament, which is the only organ elected by direct universal suffrage. One way of achieving this was to reduce the number of decision-making procedures.

42. The European Parliament was also given the power to approve nominations for President of the Commission, rather than just being consulted on the matter.

43. On the basis of amendments to Article F of the Maastricht Treaty, the European Parliament acquired the right of approval in the process whereby the Council can punish member States that breach the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, on which the Union is founded. This is a new procedure introduced by the Treaty of Amsterdam. By increasing the powers of the Court of Justice, which now monitors the Community institutions’ respect for human rights, this procedure is an alternative solution to the European Union’s failure to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. However, two diverging sets of case-law may result from the Court of Justice’s new powers. Furthermore, the European Parliament hoped that co-operation with other international organisations which specifically monitor respect for human rights, such as the Council of Europe, would be taken into account.

44. The Treaty of Amsterdam states that the number of members of the European Parliament should not exceed 700, and that its seat should be in Strasbourg. The European Parliament can establish its members’ rights and duties only after seeking the unanimous approval of the Council.

45. The Treaty of Amsterdam has had a significant impact on the European Parliament, but this still falls short of what the Parliament wanted. The co-decision procedure has not been immediately extended to cover applications of the “3rd pillar” Community mechanisms, while it has been excluded totally from the spheres of agriculture and indirect taxation. The artificial distinction between obligatory and non-obligatory budgetary expenditure, which prevents the European Parliament from acting as an equal partner with the Council in all matters of expenditure, has been maintained and the Parliament’s power of approval has not been extended to cover revision of the Treaty, the Community’s own resources or international agreements.

The role of national parliaments

46. A protocol on the role of national parliaments provides that they should be formally and systematically informed about the Union’s activities. It acknowledges the role of the Conference of European Affairs Committees (COSAC), which is given the power to contribute at Union level, particularly with regard to “3rd pillar” issues or fundamental rights.

47. Members of the European Parliament and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe have been elected by universal suffrage. They represent the European institutions most able to meet the European peoples' demands for democracy, which should facilitate co-operation between the two bodies.

48. In its Resolution 1108 (1997), the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe resolved “to increase its efforts for concordant and complementary action with the European Parliament”. It stated that “the contributions of national parliaments of Council of Europe member states to all subjects dealt with by the European Union which affect the democratic functioning of the continent should be enhanced.”

49. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the European Parliament have had regular contact through meetings between delegations from their respective Bureaux, the most recent of which was held on 6 April 1995. In future, these contacts could be organised differently, bringing together the President of the Parliamentary Assembly and the Chairs of the political groups, to represent the Assembly, with the President of the European Parliament, the Chairs of the political groups and the Chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, representing the European Parliament. On 19 February 1998, the Secretary General of the European Parliament met the Clerk of the Assembly in order to discuss ways of establishing closer co-operation between the two assemblies.

50. The important role played by national parliaments in European policy should be made better known. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, has the two-fold advantage of being composed of nationally elected representatives, which represent almost the whole of the European continent. Its representation meets the national parliaments’ legitimate concern that their voice be heard, and it has unique experience as an established parliamentary forum in which elected representatives of all member states of the European Union, and of all candidate states, participate on an equal basis.

F. Relations with the Council of Europe

51. On the initiative of the Chair of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, the 10th Quadripartite Council of Europe/European Union meeting was held in Brussels on 15 September 1997, bringing together Mr Poos, President of the Council of the European Union, Mr van den Broek, member of the European Commission, Mr Moscovici, Chair of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and Mr Tarschys, Secretary General of the Council of Europe. It is regrettable that, despite its repeated requests, in particular in its Recommendation 1267 (1995), the Assembly was not represented at this meeting.

52. Co-operation already established between the Council of Europe and the European Union to deal with crises in Europe, especially in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania and Belarus, should be stepped up and institutionalised in order to avoid duplication of effort.

53. Co-operation between the two institutions has already been strengthened with regard to their current activities in central and eastern Europe. Further joint programmes should be adopted to enable the European Union to make better use of the Council of Europe’s expertise in the sphere of democracy. Assistance and co-operation in the field of democratisation should be increased, especially for the new member States of the Council of Europe, which deserve greater support; this requires the active participation of the European Union.

54. At present, the European Commission and the Council of Europe co-finance joint programmes for the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova and the Caucasian Republics. Further programmes may yet be implemented. The Commission must be encouraged to increase its current co-operation with the Council of Europe and be invited to help finance programmes which are currently fully funded by the Council of Europe.

55. Closer co-operation is needed to provide assistance to the countries of central and eastern Europe. The Council of Europe’s Themis, Demosthenes, Demosthenes Bis and LODE programmes are helping to prepare applicant countries for accession to the European Union. Entry of these countries into the Union would also be a great achievement for the Council of Europe. The European Union should help to fund these aid programmes for applicant countries because, although it profits from them in connection with its future enlargement, it currently makes no financial contribution.

56. The European Council, meeting in Luxembourg on 12 and 13 December 1997, invited twelve States that had applied to join the European Union, all members of the Council of Europe, to participate in the European Conference which met in London for the first time on 12 March 1998. Turkey, however, refused to participate.

57. At the last Quadripartite Council of Europe/European Union meeting, the then Chairman-in-Office of the Committee of Ministers assured the Secretary General that the Conference would not become a new institution, but rather an ad hoc structure linked to the enlargement process and to the preparation of countries wishing to accede to the Union. Furthermore, neither the group of States attending (probably 27 of the 40 Council of Europe member States) nor the subjects under discussion would be the same as those of the Council of Europe, which would always remain a vital institutional forum for co-operation with countries such as Russia.

58. In its Recommendation 1347 (1997) on the enlargement of the European Union, the Parliamentary Assembly considered that “the Treaty of Amsterdam fell short of reforming EU institutions to prepare them for the enlargement”. It considered it “essential that such reforms be introduced rapidly, in consultation with the applicant states, and without causing any delays in the process of enlargement.”

59. The European Community should incorporate into its legislation the Council of Europe’s considerable achievements in the fields covered by the “3rd pillar” (justice and internal affairs) as well as in the spheres of culture, education and science. The Parliamentary Assembly should recommend that the Committee of Ministers strongly encourage the governments of the European Union’s member States to take the necessary steps.

60. A clause enabling the European Community to accede has been systematically included in all conventions of the Council of Europe concerning areas within the Community’s remit since 1987. Unfortunately, the Community has not yet used this possibility. Conventions prior to 1987, in which such an accession clause was not originally included, can be amended by means of a Protocol. In this way, the European Community has acceded to seven Council of Europe conventions, the most recent of which is the 1979 Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (see Annex).

61. Cultural matters fall within the European Union's remit, provided that the subsidiarity principle is applied. This affects the Council of Europe’s activities. The Parliamentary Assembly’s proposal that the European Union accede to the European Cultural Convention, as set out in its Resolution 1299 (1996), should be reiterated.

62. The European Community should be encouraged to make use of the Council of Europe’s experience of conventions in the various fields of application of Community law. The time has also come to consider the possibility of the European Community, which has international legal personality and is already a member of international organisations such as the FAO, acceding to the Statute of the Council of Europe. Given the role the Council of Europe played in the political and legal preparation of candidates for EU membership, it should be invited to take part in the European Conference which brings together 26 Council of Europe member states.

Conclusions

63. The Treaty of Amsterdam has improved the protection of human rights within the European Union. However, the European Convention on Human Rights must remain the principal reference not only for the Union’s member States but also for its institutions. The Community’s accession to the Convention, and that of the Union once it obtains international legal personality, would eliminate the risk of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights diverging from that of the Court of Justice of the European Communities. The Community (Union) should also adhere to the Council of Europe’s Social Charter.

64. The Council of Europe has drawn up major conventions and its Committee of Ministers has adopted recommendations in fields covered by the 3rd pillar. These conventions should be opened for European Community (Union) accession.

65. The important role played by national parliaments in European policy should be recognised. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the European Parliament should co-operate more actively in this field. The Presidents of the Assembly and of the European Parliament should be invited to participate in the Quadripartite Council of Europe/European Union meetings.

66. The Treaty of Amsterdam strengthens the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Article J.9 provides that States should co-ordinate their activities within international organisations and at international conferences as well as upholding common positions within such fora. If this article is implemented, it will enable the CFSP to be developed within the Committee of Ministers.

67. The European Union should be encouraged to adopt the Council of Europe’s « acquis » in the various fields of application of Community law. The time has also come to give serious consideration to the possibility of the European Community, which is already a member of international organisations such as the FAO, acceding to the Statute of the Council of Europe.

68. Given its role in political and legal preparation of candidates for EU membership, the Council of Europe should be invited to take part in the European Conference, which brings together 15 EU member states and 11 candidates for membership.

Annex 1

3) Conventions to which the Community could become a Party

Reporting committee: Political Affairs Committee.

Budgetary implications for the Assembly: to be assessed.

Renvoi en commission: Recommendation 1279 (1995) and Resolution 1067 (1995).

Draft recommendation adopted by the committee unanimously with 2 abstentions on 17 March 1998.

Members of the committee: Mr Bársony (Chairman), Mr van der Linden (Vice Chairman), Mrs Ojuland (Vice-Chairperson), Mr Baumel (Vice-Chairman), MM Antretter, Atkinson, Mrs. Belohorska, MM. Bergqvist, Bernardini, Björck (alternate Mr Hagard), Bloetzer, Chircop, Chornovil, Daly, Davis (alternate : Lord Judd), Diacov, Dokle (alternate : Mr Koçi), Domljan (alternate : Mr Obuljen), Gjellerod (alternate : Mrs Severinsen), Gül, Hadjidemetriou, Hornhues, Mrs Iotti, Irmer, Iwínski, Kalus, Mrs Kautto, MM Kirilov, Krzaklewski, Kuzmickas, Mrs Lentz-Cornette, MM. Lopez-Henares (alternate : Mr Puche), Lupu (alternate : Mr Kelemen), van der Maelen, Maginas, Martínez, Medeiros Ferreira, Meier, Mota Amaral, Mühlemann, Musto, Mutman, Nallet, Oliynik, Pahor, Palmitjavilo Ribo, Popovski, Prusak, Mrs Ragnarsdóttir, Mrs Roudy, MM Schieder, Schwimmer, Séguin, Selva, Shokhin, Sinka, Mrs G Smith, Mrs Stanoiu (alternate : Mr Badulescu), Mrs Stepova, MM. Thoresen, Toshev, Urbain, Volcic, Vrettos, Woltjer, Ziuganov.

N.B. The names of the members who took part in the meeting are printed in italics.

Secretaries of the committee: Mr Kleijssen, Mr Gruden