|
|
Doc. 8701
5 April 2000
Credentials of the delegation of the Russian Federation
Opinion1
Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
Rapporteur: Mr György Frunda, Romania, EPP/CD
I. Conclusions of the Committee
The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights recommends that the credentials of the delegation of the Russian Federation be ratified, but that the members of the delegation be deprived of their voting rights in the Assembly and its bodies – in accordance with Rule 8.5.c. of the Rules of Procedure.
It decides to submit an amendment to the report of the Political Affairs Committee to this effect.
II. Explanatory memorandum
by Mr Frunda
1. The credentials of the Russian parliamentary delegation were challenged on 3 April 2000 by Mr van der Linden on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party/Christian Democrats.
2. The credentials were challenged on substantial grounds, in accordance with Rule 8.2.a. of the Rules of Procedure, alleging a “serious violation of the basic principles of the Council of Europe mentioned in Article 3 of, and the Preamble to, the Statute” in connection with the conflict in Chechnya.
3. The conflict in Chechnya is the subject of a separate report2, prepared by the Political Affairs Committee, and of an opinion3, prepared by this Committee. The conclusions of the present opinion should, in principle, not be in contradiction to the conclusions reached in this Committee’s opinion on the conflict in Chechnya.
4. Russia, as a member state of the Council of Europe, is obliged to respect the organisation’s statute, Article 3 of which reads: “Every Member of the Council of Europe must accept the principles of the rule of law and of the enjoyment by all persons within its jurisdiction of human rights and fundamental freedoms […].”. A definition of the Council of Europe’s understanding of human rights and fundamental freedoms can be found in the European Convention on Human Rights and its Protocols, most of which Russia has ratified.
5. These texts, inter alia, guarantee the right to life, the right to liberty and security, protect private property and prohibit torture and inhuman and degrading punishment and treatment to all persons within the jurisdiction of a State party, i.e. also to the persons currently in Chechnya (as a part of the Russian Federation).
6. As documented in the Committee’s opinion on the conflict in Chechnya, many of these fundamental human rights continue to be violated in the gravest manner by the Russian authorities in Chechnya. Despite the demands made by the Assembly in January, very little progress has been made on the ground. The Russian military campaign in Chechnya has continued with the use of indiscriminate and disproportionate force (culminating in the total destruction of the capital Grozny), including direct attacks on civilians. War crimes and serious violations of human rights have been committed by the Russian Federal forces, ranging from pillage and extortion, over arbitrary arrest and ill-treatment and torture in detention to rape and murder. Few, if any, of the perpetrators of these crimes are being held accountable for them.
7. Recommendation 1444 (2000), adopted by the Assembly in January after a heated debate, spelt out, in Lord Judd’s words “a realistic, tough and specific agenda for action”. “The report makes plain the issues on which there must be progress and leaves no room for doubt that, if there is no convincing progress, the issue of Russian membership will come before the Assembly in April”, he said in January, adding that “our Russian colleagues should remain full members of the Assembly with all their rights until April, when we will undertake a fundamental review of whether there has been progress.”
8. The time for this review has now come. The realistic, tough and specific demands of the Assembly were not complied with: There has been no cease-fire, no negotiations have started, and human rights violations have continued. The appointment of Mr Kalamanov and the holding of two seminars cannot make up for that. As the delegation of the Bureau pointed out during their visit to Chechnya on 13 March 2000, “all the requirements of the Assembly remain on the table”.
9. In January, the Assembly decided by a narrow majority vote not to deprive the Russian delegation of their voting rights, hoping that this would enable the parliamentarians, on their return to Moscow, to use their influence to end the military campaign in Chechnya and enter into negotiations with the Chechen side. The Russian parliamentary delegation did not make use of this reprieve. On the contrary, with a few notable exceptions, both the State Duma and the Council of the Federation have repeatedly aligned themselves with the policy of the Russian government in Chechnya.
10. In the circumstances, I see no reason why the Russian delegation should be given an additional reprieve. Indeed, it is the duty of the Assembly to defend the Council of Europe’s standards and principles. The time has come to show that the Assembly means what it says and will implement threats made when there is no compliance with its demands. Nevertheless, the channels of communication to the Russian delegation should stay open – non-ratification of the credentials is therefore not an option.
11. I would thus recommend that the credentials of the delegation of the Russian Federation be ratified, but that the members of the delegation be deprived of their voting rights in the Assembly and its bodies – in accordance with Rule 8.5.c. of the Rules of Procedure. This measure should be reviewed at the June part-session of the Assembly. If it is found in June that the Russian parliamentary delegation has used its influence to ensure that the basic principles of the Council of Europe mentioned in Article 3 of the Statute are no longer violated by the Russian authorities in Chechnya, the voting rights of the members of the Russian delegation should be restored at that time.
*
* *
Reporting committee: Political Affairs Committee
Committee for opinion: Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
Reference to committee: Reference No. 2492 (03/04/2000)
Opinion approved by the committee on 4 April 2000
Secretaries to the committee: Mr Plate, Ms Coin and Ms Kleinsorge
2 See AS/Pol (2000) 11.
3 See AS/Jur (2000) 28.