|
|
For debate in the Standing Committee see Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure
Pour débat à la Commission permanente – Voir article 15 du Règlement
Doc. 8870
12 October 2000
Modification of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure
Report
Committee on Rules of Procedure and Immunities
Rapporteur: Mr Rudolf Vis, United Kingdom, Socialist Group
Summary
The Assembly adopted a general revision of its Rules of Procedure in November 1999. At the end of one year of application, the Assembly proposes to modify the Rules whose interpretation or application raised difficulties during the 2000 Ordinary Session, in particular the rule regarding quorums.
Draft resolution
1. The Assembly approved a general revision of its Rules of Procedure on 4 November 1999.
2. In Resolution 1202, the Assembly held that its Rules should be “up-to-date, consistent and effective”. The Assembly considers it necessary to modify those Rules whose interpretation or application raised difficulties during the 2000 Ordinary Session, in particular the rule regarding quorums.
3. The Assembly consequently decides to amend its Rules of Procedure as follows (the changes to the current wording are underlined):
i. Add the following footnote to Rule 5.2.:
“This does not prevent the provisional President from addressing the Assembly for five minutes at the most”.
ii. In Rule 20.5., delete the words “by standing up”.
iii. Replace Rule 34.1. as follows
“For amendments and sub-amendments to be tabled, they must be signed by at least five Representatives or Substitutes or approved by the committee submitting the report or an opinion”.
iv. Delete Rule 37.4.
v. Replace Rule 39.3.* as follows:
“39.3. If need be, the President may decide that the Assembly shall vote by show of hands or by sitting and standing.”
vi. In Rule 39.4., add after the words “in case of a show of hands”:
“or of a vote by sitting and standing”
vii. In Rule 39.5., replace the words “if at least twenty members so request” by the words “if at least one sixth of the Representatives of the Assembly authorised to vote, belonging to at least five national delegations, so request2”.
viii. Replace Rule 39.7. as follows:
“Voting by roll call shall begin after the warning bells have been run. The President asks if all members have voted before declaring the vote closed and announcing the result. The votes are recorded in the Minutes of Proceeding of the sitting in the alphabetical order of the Representatives’ names. If the electronic voting system cannot be used for technical reasons when the Assembly is to proceed to a roll-call, the roll shall be called in alphabetical order, beginning with the name of a representative drawn by lot. Voting shall be by word of mouth and shall be expressed by ‘yes’, ‘no’ or ‘abstention’ only”.
ix. Replace Rule 39.8. as follows:
“Once the President has declared the vote closed, a member may not change his or her vote”.
x. Replace Rule 41 as follows:
“41.1. The Assembly may deliberate, decide the Orders of the Day, approve the Minutes of Proceeding, decide upon procedural motions, and agree to adjourn, whatever the number of Representatives present.”
“41.2. All votes other than votes by roll call shall be valid whatever the number of members voting, unless, before the voting has begun3, the President has been requested to ascertain whether there is a quorum. At least one sixth of the Representatives authorised to vote4, belonging to at least five national delegations, have to vote in favour of the request. To ascertain whether there is a quorum, the President, before proceeding to a vote on the subject matter that prompted the request, invites Representatives to mark their presence in the Chamber using the electronic voting system.”
“41.3. The quorum is one third of the number of Representatives of the Assembly authorised to vote5.”
“41.4. A vote by roll call shall not be valid, nor the result made public, unless one third of the Representatives authorised to vote4 took part. The President may decide to ascertain whether there is a quorum, using the procedure of Rule 41.2., before proceeding to a vote by roll-call”.
“41.5. In the absence of a quorum, the vote shall be postponed until the next sitting or, on a motion from the Chair, until a subsequent sitting6. The Assembly proceeds to the next item on the Order of the Day.”
xi. Replace Rule 43.4.a as follows:
“43.4.a. The Assembly may set up ad hoc committees for specific purposes. A motion to set up an ad hoc committee is considered by the Bureau. If the Bureau approves it, it refers the proposal to the committee concerned by the proposal’s subject matter, for report, and to the Committee on Rules of Procedure and Immunities, for opinion”.
4. This resolution shall enter into force at the first part of the 2001 session of the Assembly (22 January 2001).
Explanatory memorandum by Mr Vis
1. Introduction
1. In a decision of 30 June 2000, the Bureau asked the Committee on Rules of Procedure and Immunities, in the light of the difficulties encountered by the Assembly in carrying out the procedure laid down for establishing whether a quorum is present, to examine Rules 39 (electronic voting) and 41 (quorum) of the Rules of Procedure in particular, and to report on the matter by the end of the year.
The Committee on Rules of Procedure and Immunities held a preliminary exchange of views during its meeting in Paris on 7 September. It appointed Mr Vis (United Kingdom, SOC) as Rapporteur. The Committee adopted his draft report and the preliminary draft resolution at its meeting of 26 September 2000.
2. The report lists the provisions of the Rules of Procedure whose interpretation or application proved difficult since the new Rules came into force. The first and second parts deal with the quorum and electronic voting. The third lists other provisions which the committee discussed about.
The report raises for each of the three parts a number of questions and suggests, in some cases, possible solutions. It then states, in bold, the position of Committee on each particular issue, explaining the proposed modifications of the Rules of procedure or providing guidelines on the interpretation of the existing text.
2. The quorum
3. At the June 2000 part-session, there were a number of requests to ascertain whether a quorum was present, in accordance with Rule 41.2. of the Rules of Procedure. These requests highlighted the need to clarify the whole procedure regarding quorums.
4. Rule 41 of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure provides:
“41.1 The Assembly may deliberate, decide the Orders of the Day, approve the Minutes of Proceedings and agree to adjourn, whatever the number of Representatives present.41
41.2. All votes other than votes by roll-call shall be valid whatever the number of members voting unless, before the voting has begun, the President has been requested, by at least ten Representatives present in the Chamber, to ascertain the number of those present.
41.3. The quorum is half the number of Representatives of the Assembly plus one7.
41.4. A vote by roll-call shall not be valid, nor the result be made public, unless more than half the Representatives who make up the Assembly took part. The President may decide to verify that a quorum is present before proceeding to a vote by roll-call.
41.5. In the absence of a quorum, the vote shall be postponed until the next Sitting or, on a motion from the Chairperson, until a subsequent Sitting.
41.6. If, owing to the absence of a quorum, the Assembly is unable to take a decision on one of the procedural motions specified in Rule 37, the President shall declare that motion to be null and void.”
The application of this rule raises the following questions:
a. What steps should be taken to ensure that the members requesting verification of whether a quorum is present are actually entitled to attend the sitting?
5. It follows from Rule 41.2. that “ten Representatives present in the Chamber” may, “before the voting has begun”, request the President to ascertain whether a quorum is present. However, it is not enough for the ten representatives to be physically present in the Chamber; they must be entitled to attend the sitting in question. In other words, their respective national delegations must have given advance notification of possible substitutions. Two procedures have been employed so far to check whether a request to ascertain the presence of a quorum is supported by ten of the members present. Firstly, the electronic voting system has been used, with those supporting the quorum request being asked to vote “in favour”. Secondly, members supporting the request have been asked to stand up. The committee should choose between these two systems for future occurrences.
It should be pointed out that at the June 2000 part-session, the first procedure (electronic voting) caused confusion among the Assembly members, who were unsure how to register their choice. If it is decided to adopt this procedure, the President should give a clearer indication that only those members supporting the quorum request should take part in the “vote” by voting “in favour”. The disadvantage of the second procedure (sitting and standing, with the possibility of taking members’ names) is that it is relatively slow. Moreover, at the June 2000 part-session, a number of Assembly members objected to this procedure, in the course of which names were taken. If it is decided to adopt this procedure, it would probably be preferable to work on the assumption that the members concerned have been duly registered for the sitting8. However, it is worth considering whether it is really desirable to resort to standing and sitting at a time when the Assembly is systematically moving towards electronic voting9.
Opinion of the Committee
Taking into account the Committee’s proposal to raise the number of members required to submit a quorum request to one sixth of the members authorised to vote belonging to at least five national delegations (see paragraphs 9 and following), the Committee decided to use the electronic voting system to ensure that a sufficient numbers of members who are entitled to attend the sitting support the quorum request. When a member asks the President to ascertain whether there is a quorum on a specific subject matter, the President invites members who support the quorum request to vote in favour. Members who do not support the request are not required to vote against : they do not have to take part in the vote at all.
b. What method should be used to check whether a quorum is present?
6. When at least ten members formally request the President to check whether a quorum is present, what procedure should be used to “ascertain the number of those present”, as Rule 41.2. puts it?
So far, two methods have been used. The first involves asking members to vote. This does not mean voting in the normal sense, on a text or a motion; rather, the aim is to establish how many people are taking part in the “vote” and hence whether or not there is a quorum. The second involves asking members to insert their voting card in the machine, without actually voting. The number of cards in the machines is then counted to ascertain whether there is a quorum.
In retrospect, bearing in mind the current wording of the Rules of Procedure, neither of these two methods is perfect. As was rightly pointed out during the debate on reform of the Assembly’s working methods and its committee structure, the purpose of a quorum request is to “ascertain the number of those present” in the Chamber. Members should not therefore be required to vote; they merely need to be “present” to be included in the calculation of whether there is a quorum10. If the calculation is based on the number of cards inserted in the machines and no “vote” is held, there is a risk that members who are no longer in the Chamber but have left their voting card in the machine will be counted. Conversely, those who are present but have removed their card from the machine will not be counted11.
In the Italian Senate, the electronic voting system is also used to establish how many members are present12. However, the total is boosted by the inclusion of members who request that the presence of a quorum be established and then leave the Chamber and those who fail to register their presence using the electronic voting system13. Although it would technically be possible to check whether the members present in the Assembly’s Chamber had actually taken part in establishing whether there was a quorum, this would not be workable in practice. The procedures of checking who had taken part in the quorum count, who was registered for the sitting and who was actually present in the Chamber would take much too long.
Manually counting those present in the Chamber is not a realistic alternative either. The presence of observers, special guests, permanent representatives and officials in the Chamber would have to be taken into account. Moreover, substitutes who have not been registered for a sitting and representatives who have been replaced may also enter the Chamber. Manual counting would therefore be an approximate, time-consuming method.
Consequently, although using the electronic voting system to establish whether a quorum is present is not a perfect method, it would be preferable to persist with it. The disadvantages of all the other methods are just as great, if not greater, than those of electronic voting. The committee might wish to consider rewording Rule 41 in order to avoid using the word “present”. In parliamentary law, a quorum is defined in relation to the number of people present in the Chamber14. However, the aim of a quorum request should not be to ascertain the exact number of those present, but rather to establish whether there is a quorum.
It would also be advisable if the committee chose between the two procedures that have so far been followed when electronic voting has been used (holding a “mock vote” or inserting voting cards into the machines). The second method is probably more efficient and less likely to cause confusion. If need be, ushers could walk around the Chamber to make sure that members who were no longer present but had left their voting card in the machine were not counted. Consideration might also be given to whether the number of members present could be displayed even if no vote was held.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee held that the electronic voting system should be used to ascertain whether there is a quorum. Members are asked merely to insert their voting card in the terminals without proceeding to a vote. It is thus established whether at that particular moment the required number of members is present in the Chamber.
c. Should the establishment of the presence of a quorum be regarded as a preliminary question or should there merely be a vote on the text itself when a quorum request is submitted?
7. Another question raised is whether, following a quorum request, the presence of a quorum should be established before a vote is held on the subject that prompted the request, or whether a quorum can be established by proceeding directly to the vote. In the second scenario, the number of members voting would indicate whether there was a quorum.
The existing Rules of Procedure and the Assembly’s established practice are based on the principle that a quorum request is to be regarded as a preliminary question, i.e. it should first be established whether a quorum is present and, if this is so, then voting on the text itself should take place15. At the June 2000 part-session, it was decided to continue with this practice. If it were decided to abandon this method and to establish whether a quorum was present by voting on the text which prompted the quorum request, this would need to be made explicit in the Rules of Procedure.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee decided to maintain existing practice. Once a request has been submitted to ascertain whether there is a quorum, this issue should be dealt with before the Assembly proceeds to vote on the subject matter that prompted the request.
d. Should members deprived of their voting rights be included in quorum calculations?
8. One question arising in connection with the procedure for establishing the presence of a quorum is whether members deprived of their voting rights should be included. According to Rule 41.3., the quorum is half the number of Representatives of the Assembly plus one. The footnote indicates that “the number of Representatives of the Assembly shall correspond to the number of seats allocated to each of the member states under Article 26 of the Statute of the Council of Europe, and to which appointments were made…”. Hence vacant seats are not taken into consideration. However, the Rules of Procedure do not specify any arrangements concerning members who have been deprived of their voting rights. The committee should therefore take a stand on the matter, rewording the Rules of Procedure if need be.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee decided that members who have been deprived of their voting rights, or whose credentials have not been ratified should not be taken into consideration when calculating the quorum. Moreover, those members cannot support a quorum request. Only members authorised to vote are entitled to submit or support such a request and are included in the quorum calculations. Members of a delegation who are deprived of other rights of participation and/or representation, but who have the right to vote, should, on the contrary be included when calculating the quorum. They could also support a request to ascertain whether there is a quorum.
e. Should there be a reduction in the number of members required for a quorum and an increase in the number required to submit a quorum request?
9. Experience suggests that the time may well have come to reduce the figure used to determine whether there is a quorum. An examination of the votes held in the Assembly since the introduction of electronic voting in April 2000 reveals that in the vast majority of cases, fewer than half the Assembly’s representatives have voted. There are two possible ways of reacting to this finding: either the quorum can be kept at its present level to encourage members to attend more frequently, or the quorum can be reduced.
If it were decided to reduce the number required for a quorum, the figure should not be too low, as the quorum is intended to guarantee the legitimacy and representativeness of the Assembly’s decisions16. One possible solution could be to reduce the quorum to one third (approximately 100 members), by analogy with the rule in force for the committees17.
To restrain the number of quorum requests, one solution might be to increase the number of members required to support such a request. Currently, this figure stands at ten. Yet Rule 39.5 provides that at least twenty members are required to request a vote by
roll-call, and, under Rule 41.4, a vote by roll-call cannot be valid unless more than half the representatives who make up the Assembly take part. A request for a vote by roll-call thus amounts to a request for the presence of a quorum to be established. It would be logical to require the same minimum number of members in both instances and to set this figure at twenty.
In order to avoid the perverse situation of there being insufficient members present to request that a quorum be established, provision should be made for the President to rule that there is not a quorum (at the request of the majority of the members present) if fewer than twenty members are present in the Chamber.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee decided to reduce the quorum to one third of the members of the Assembly authorised to vote and to set the number of members required to support a quorum request at half of that number, i.e. at one sixth of the members of the Assembly authorized to vote and belonging to at least five different nationalities. Logically, the number of members required to request a roll-call should be adapted accordingly, as a vote by roll-call amounts to a request for the presence of a quorum to be established. If the number of representatives authorised to vote is not divisible by three or six the number obtained as a result of the division is rounded down.
The Commission held that no provision should be made for the President to declare that there is no quorum when there are insufficient members present to request that a quorum be established.
The Committee also decided that at the opening of each part session, the President should inform the Assembly of the exact number of members required to submit a quorum request or for the quorum itself, taking into account for instance the number of vacant seats.
f. Should members requesting to ascertain whether there is a quorum be automatically included among those present?
10. Another pertinent question is whether it would be advisable to specify in the Rules of Procedure that members who request to ascertain whether a quorum is present but do not subsequently take part in establishing whether there is a quorum (e.g. by removing their voting card from the machine or leaving the Chamber) should nevertheless be counted as being present. Examples of similar provisions may be found in the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament18 and the Italian Chamber of Deputies19 and Senate20. However, such a provision could not be implemented under the current electronic voting system and would require considerable adjustments to the computer programme.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee held that ethics require members who support a quorum request also to take part in establishing whether there is a quorum. It should be regretted if they fail to do so. Nevertheless, the Committee agreed that when ascertaining whether there is a quorum, one should only count members who insert their voting cards in the machine. No special provision should be made for those members who, having requested to ascertain the quorum, then fail to take part in establishing whether there is a quorum.
g. Should there be a provision stipulating that if it has been established that there is not a quorum, the sitting should be suspended or closed or that the Assembly may not hold any further votes during the sitting?
11. As things stand, quorum requests only relate to one item on the agenda or a specific vote. If the Assembly finds that there are not enough members to vote on a specific agenda item, it moves on to examine and vote on the next item. The question arises whether, once it has been ascertained that there is not a quorum, the sitting should be suspended21 or closed, or, at the very least, the Assembly should be unable to hold any further votes during the sitting22.
However, bearing in mind the Assembly’s established practice, it would not be desirable for the effects of a quorum request to extend beyond one agenda item; otherwise, the effectiveness of the Assembly’s work would be jeopardised.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee held that the effects of a quorum request are strictly limited to a specific item of business. If the Assembly finds that there are not enough members to vote on a specific agenda item, it should move on to examine and vote on the next item on the agenda.
h. Would it be advisable to stipulate that only one quorum request may be made per report?
12. It could be inferred from the existing wording of Rule 41.2. that a request to establish whether a quorum is present may be made in respect of each vote. All that is necessary is to submit the request “before the voting has begun”. Such an interpretation would mean that successive quorum requests could be made in respect of each vote on a single report (e.g. votes on individual amendments and then the text as a whole), even if it is established after the first request that a quorum is present. To avoid this possibility, it should be made clear that only one quorum request may be made for any given report during a sitting.
There may well be a case for going further by specifying in general terms that only one quorum request may be made for any given report. This would mean that if a vote had to be postponed until the following sitting in the absence of a quorum, it would not be possible to request verification of whether a quorum was present at that sitting23. Accordingly, a vote on a text could not be held up indefinitely by quorum requests. However, such a provision could result in a report - the vote whereof has been postponed in the absence of a quorum - being adopted at the next sitting by less members, while it would not be possible to ascertain whether there is a quorum.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee held that during one sitting there can only be one quorum request per report. Once it is established that there is a quorum for a report, it is no longer possible to submit another request for that report during the same sitting. However, if a vote has to be postponed until the following sitting in the absence of a quorum, it would be possible to submit another quorum request for that report.
If, on a Friday, the Assembly is unable to take a decision owing to the absence of a quorum, the vote on the report concerned is then postponed until the next part-session, not necessarily until the first sitting of that part-session.
3. Electronic voting
13. At the June 2000 part-session, questions were raised concerning the right of substitutes to take part in proceedings at plenary sessions, particularly with regard to voting rights, following the introduction of the electronic voting system.
14. Under Rule 39.1., “only those Representatives or, in their absence, the Substitutes duly designated by the national delegation who have signed the register of attendance for a specific sitting, shall be entitled to vote”.
15. For a substitute to be able to take part in a sitting, the relevant delegation must inform the Assembly Secretariat in advance. National delegation secretaries have consequently been informed in writing that they must give notice of any substitution, by a specified deadline, for each sitting24. For each substitution, the national delegation must submit the name of the representative and that of his or her substitute. Consequently, it is not enough to send in two separate lists containing, respectively, the names of representatives and substitutes attending the session. National delegation secretaries must also give notice of the sittings in which replacements will occur. They may inform the Secretariat that a substitute will replace a representative for several sittings or for the entire part-session, provided that this is specified when notice of substitutions is given. However, it cannot be assumed that the notification of a substitution for one sitting is automatically valid for the following sitting. On the contrary, unless there is an explicit statement in the first notification, notice of the substitutes attending must be given before each sitting.
16. If the Secretariat is not provided with the necessary information, it is unable to validate substitutes’ voting cards. For technical reasons, particularly in order to ensure that there is sufficient time to enter members’ names in the electronic voting system’s database and to validate substitutes’ voting cards, the existing procedure cannot be altered. It should also be pointed out that if all national delegations conscientiously follow the instructions, there will be no repeat of the incidents that occurred at the June 2000 part-session.
17. According to the Rules of Procedure, notification of replacements must be given by the national delegations. One question that has been raised is whether representatives themselves should be able to inform the Secretariat that they are to be replaced at a particular sitting by a particular substitute or that, contrary to information submitted previously, they will in fact be attending a sitting. However, considerable administrative problems would then be created by the proliferation of people notifying the Secretariat of substitutions. Another factor to consider would be what to do if conflicting information was submitted.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee held that the notification of substitutes should remain in the hands of the secretariat of the national delegations concerned. Once a substitute has been duly designated, he should be entitled to take part in a sitting, provided the notification was done properly.
4. Other amendments to the Rules of Procedure
18. This part of the report will list other provisions of the Rules of Procedure which have proved difficult to apply and interpret and which could usefully be clarified and fine-tuned by the committee. The provisions concerned are dealt with in a logical order, as far as possible reflecting that of the existing Rules of Procedure.
a. Should the oldest member present be able to make a speech?
19. Under Rule 5.2., “no debate may take place unless concerned with the examination of credentials or the election of the President of the Assembly, and no speeches may be made, while the Provisional President is in the Chair”.
20. In a letter of 27 June 2000, Ms J. Durrieu, Chairperson of the French delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly, requested that the reference in Rule 5.2. prohibiting all speeches while the provisional President was in the Chair be deleted.
21. The ban on speeches was introduced as part of the general revision of the Rules of Procedure in November 1999. In the previous version, Rule 5.2. prohibited all discussions that were not concerned with the examination of credentials or the election of the President of the Assembly.
22. Parliamentary traditions and practice in Council of Europe member states differ greatly in this respect. In some countries, it is traditional for the oldest member present to make a speech - the assumption being that he or she enjoys the same prerogatives as the Speaker25 - while in other countries, his or her role is merely to ensure that the examination of credentials and the election of the Bureau are carried out properly26. Rule 14.2. of the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure provides: “Only the elected President may deliver an opening address”.
23. It is for the committee to decide whether Rule 5 should be amended.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee agreed that the provisional President could address the Assembly during five minutes at the most. However, to stress that his speech should be as short as possible, it is suggested not to delete the reference in Rule 5.2. prohibiting speeches to be made while the provisional President is in the chair, but rather to mention the possibility for the provisional president to address the Assembly in a footnote to Rule 5.2. or in the complementary texts to the Rules of Procedure.
b. Substitutes’ rights at plenary sittings
24. Under Rule 11.1., “a Representative prevented from attending a Sitting of the Assembly may arrange to be replaced by a Substitute of the same nationality duly designated by the national delegation”. A substitute who has been duly designated and has signed the register of attendance has the same rights in the Assembly as a representative for the duration of the sitting (Rule 11.4.). Since the electronic voting system was introduced, however, a number of questions have been raised as to the rights of substitutes who have not been designated to replace a representative. Are they entitled to: (1) move an amendment? (2) speak against an amendment? (3) put questions to Committee of Ministers representatives and guests? These questions also apply to representatives who have been replaced by a substitute.
25. In theory, the answer to each of these questions should be “no”. Substitutes who have not been designated to replace a representative for the duration of a sitting do not enjoy any rights of representation in the Assembly. In practice, a more flexible approach could be adopted, enabling substitutes to move amendments of which they are the main authors or to put oral questions.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee agreed that substitutes who have not been designated to replace a representative for a sitting are not entitled to move amendments. Even if a substitute has tabled questions for oral answer by the Chairperson-in-office of the Committee of Ministers, if he is not designated to replace a representative during the sitting when the question is scheduled, then he is not entitled to present the question orally and to ask supplementary questions. The question even arises whether the Chairperson-in-office of the Committee of Ministers should respond to a question of a substitute who cannot present it orally. In any event, the Committee decided that the Rules should not be modified in this respect.
c. The register of attendance
26. Rule 11.2. provides: “Each Representative or, in his absence, each Substitute duly designated by the national delegation, shall sign the register of attendance before entering the Chamber for a Sitting”.
27. Members who do not take part in a sitting have on occasion asked whether they may sign the register of attendance and hence be included in the minutes of the sitting in question.
28. It is technically possible to comply with this request, by placing a separate list on the tables by the entrance to the Chamber, without having to amend Rule 11. It must be made clear, however, that members who sign the register but are not entitled to vote at the sitting in question will not be counted when there is a need to ascertain the number of members present in the Chamber (for quorum purposes). A distinction should therefore be drawn in the register between “members present” and “members entitled to vote”.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee agreed that members who do not take part in a sitting may sign the register of presence and can be mentioned in the minutes of the sitting as being “also present”, it being understood that they are not counted when there is a need to ascertain the number of members present in the Chamber. Observers and special guests are also entitled to sign the register of presence.
d. Amendments and sub-amendments tabled on behalf of a committee
29. Under Rule 34.1, amendments and sub-amendments must be signed by at least five representatives or substitutes. No mention is made, however, of amendments tabled on behalf of a committee, although this is common Assembly practice (even if the text concerned has not been referred to that particular committee for report or opinion). It would be advisable to clarify this practice.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee held that only committees to which a text was referred for report or opinion are entitled to table amendments on behalf of the committee, as these amendments are part of their report or opinion. Otherwise, Rule 34.1. should be applied literally: “amendments can only be tabled if signed by at least five representatives or substitutes”. One member can therefore not table an amendment on behalf of a committee to which a document was not referred for report or opinion.
e. Moving an amendment or sub-amendment tabled on behalf of a committee
30. The last sentence of Rule 34.8 provides that rapporteurs may not move an amendment which has been rejected by the committee on whose behalf they are reporting. But who should move amendments tabled on behalf of a committee if the rapporteur does not support them? The Chairperson of the committee would probably be the most suitable person. However, making explicit provision for this in the Rules of Procedure would remove the flexibility needed in cases where the Chairperson of the committee was also opposed to the amendment.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee held that it would be for the Chairperson of the committee concerned to decide who should move an amendment or sub-amendment tabled on behalf of the committee. It is not necessary to modify the Rules in this respect.
f. Right to speak
31. On 10 January 2000, the Bureau approved new criteria for drawing up the list of speakers. One such rule is that members may be entered on the list of speakers for a maximum of three debates. This rule may sometimes have unfortunate consequences: members may be entered on the list for three debates but subsequently may not have the opportunity to speak at any of them. In such circumstances, there is probably no justification for preventing them from being entered on the list for other debates. A better solution would be to stipulate that members may not speak at more than three debates.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee decided that a member should not be entered on the list of speakers more than five times, and should not speak more than three times. The criteria for drawing up the list of speakers should be modified accordingly.
g. Procedural motions
32. Under Rule 37.4, the Assembly votes on procedural motions by sitting and standing. However, now that electronic voting has been introduced, the Assembly normally votes by using the electronic voting system (Rule 39.2). There does not seem to be any particular reason for keeping this specific provision with regard to procedural motions. Deleting it would mean applying the usual rules on voting methods (electronic voting unless the President decides otherwise, e.g. if there are technical problems).
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee agreed that the specific procedure for voting procedural motions (voting by sitting and standing) is no longer warranted. Rule 37.4. should therefore be deleted and the general rules on voting methods (Rule 39) should apply to votes on procedural motions. However, voting by sitting and standing should be added to Rule 39.3., as a second alternative (together with voting by show of hands) when the electronic voting system does not work properly. In that case, it would be for the president to decide whether to vote by show of hands or by sitting and standing.
h. Ad hoc Assembly committees
33. Under Rule 43.4a, any motions to set up an ad hoc committee are referred to the Committee on Rules of Procedure and Immunities for report. It would probably be advisable if any such motions could also be referred for opinion to the committee concerned by the proposal’s subject matter, which would be in a position to provide more detailed explanations. The Committee on Rules of Procedure and Immunities could still be asked to report on the matter so that the committee concerned would not be both judge and judged.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee held that as a motion to set up an ad hoc Assembly committee raises few procedural issues, but is a political decision, it should be for the Bureau to decide such an issue. A motion to set up an ad hoc committee should therefore be considered by the Bureau. If the Bureau approves it, it refers the proposal to the committee concerned by the proposal’s subject matter, to set up the committee and for opinion to the Committee on Rules of Procedure and Immunities. Rule 43.4.a should be modified accordingly.
i. Presence of “outsiders” at committee meetings
34. Committee meetings are in principle held in private. The Rules of Procedure specify which types of people other than committee members may attend the meetings of a particular
committee: for example, Assembly members, members of observer and special guest delegations27 and national delegation secretaries28.
35. A committee may also authorise “outsiders” to attend one of its meetings. Under Rule 47.7, any other people may be “heard” by a committee on terms decided by the committee itself. The provision thus empowers committees to authorise other people to attend their meetings, working on the principle that “if you can do something complicated, you can do something simple”. A number of committee Chairpersons have, however, taken the view that the Rules of Procedure are not sufficiently clear in this respect. The committee should take a stand on the matter and reword the text if need be.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee held that a committee may decide to hear outsiders only for a specific item of business at a specific meeting. Those guests should not be entitled to take the floor on other items of business. The same limitation applies to outsiders who ask to attend a committee meeting, without being heard. They can be invited by the Committee’s chairperson, provided the committee agrees. Such an invitation should be limited to a specific meeting. An outsider should not be authorized to attend for instance all the meeting of a certain committee or sub-committee. The Committee decided not to modify the Rules in this respect.
Rule 46.7. provides that a full member of a committee who is prevented from attending a meeting shall arrange to be replaced by his or her alternate. The Rule then continues to say that if a full member of a committee cannot be replaced by his or her alternate, he may inform the committee’s chairperson which other member of his or her delegation is authorized to take his or her place. The committee held that this information should be given to the committee’s chairperson in writing, before the opening of the meeting concerned. This clarification will be mentioned in a footnote to Rule 46.7.
APPENDIX
Electronic vote - Guidelines for members of the Assembly
1. With the adoption of the new Rules of Procedure in November 1999, the Assembly has finally approved the introduction of electronic voting for its sessions, already operational as from the April 2000 part-session.
2. The following are guidelines for using the system of electronic voting:
Voting cards
a. Members’ identification badges are now replaced by voting cards which will be simultaneously used for identification and voting.
b. Distribution of voting cards is ensured by the Protocol of the Council of Europe. In principle, this distribution has to be organised via secretaries of each national delegation. Members who do not have their card (in case a card has been lost or forgotten or when the Parliamentary Assembly data-base does not contain the Member’s photo) should present themselves at the Protocol desk at the main entrance of the Palais de l’Europe in order to receive their card. Protocol staff, before delivering a new card, will invite the Member to present his/her identification document. If a third and consecutive card is issued to the same Member during the same calendar year for whatever reason, loss or otherwise, the national delegation will be required to pay the cost (40 FF a card).
c. Voting cards as distributed by the Protocol do not give an automatic right to vote. In order to enjoy such a right, the Member’s card has to be validated. This operation will be carried out by the Assembly Secretariat.
Notification of substitutes
d. In principle all Representatives at the opening of the first sitting (on Monday, at 3.00 p.m.) have their cards validated, but not Substitutes unless the Secretariat of the Assembly is properly informed about substitutions. Therefore secretaries of national delegations have the duty to inform the Secretariat of the Assembly about all cases of substitution. If this is not done, Substitutes attending the sitting are deprived of their speaking and voting rights.
e. Notice of substitutions has to be given before the opening of the sitting concerned (at the latest before 8.30 a.m. for a morning sitting and before 1.00 p.m. for an afternoon sitting). This notification, including the names of substitutes, the names of representatives to be substituted and the length of substitution, must be given in writing to the Secretariat of the Assembly (Mrs S. Kssis - room No 1076, fax: 27 27 during session weeks, fax outside session weeks: 37 95).
f. If the Substitute is replacing the Representative for one or more consecutive sittings, the substitution for each sitting must be notified. Substitutions are never carried automatically over to the following sitting.
g. When the correct notification has been given, Substitutes will have their voting cards validated. At the same time, cards of Representatives who are to be replaced by Substitutes will become invalid, preventing them from speaking in the debate and voting.
Register of attendance
h. Members shall continue to sign the register of attendance before entering the Chamber for a sitting (rule 11.2. and 39.1.). A duly designated Substitute will find his/her name in the register next to the name of Representative for whom he/she is substituting. If, in the register of attendance, no name is found next to the Representative’s name, it means that no substitution was notified for the Representative for that particular sitting and therefore the Representative is authorised to speak in the debate and vote.
i. All members of the Assembly – Representatives and Substitutes as well as Special Guests and Observers – have access to the hemicycle at any time of the sitting, regardless of their speaking and voting rights. Therefore, all Members, even those who are not authorised to speak in the debate and vote, are invited to sign the register of attendance in case they attend the sitting.
Speakers’ register
j. Only those members who are authorised – i.e. Representatives or duly designated Substitutes – can speak in debates or present questions for oral answer by the Chairperson-in-office of the Committee of Ministers or by invited guests. The speakers’ list is drawn up accordingly.
Voting
k. While they are sitting in the hemicycle, Members are invited to keep their voting cards inserted in the voting terminals. However, when they leave, they should take their cards with them.
l. Voting cards should be inserted correctly into the terminals (the photo side of the Member’s card is facing the President’s table; then the card is pushed down until a “click” is heard). A card correctly inserted is signalled by its number being displayed on a small screen in the voting terminal. Any malfunctioning or error message displayed on the voting terminal screen should be immediately reported to the Secretariat present in the hemicycle.
m. The opening of a vote by the President is confirmed by a small green light on the voting terminal.
n. After the opening of a vote, Members should vote by putting their hands into the small booth of the voting terminal and by pressing one of the three voting buttons (stickers which are on the top of voting terminals are put there only for information in order to show on which side “for”, “abstention” and “against” buttons are placed). The chosen vote is confirmed by a coloured light on the terminal: green (“for”), white (“abstention”) or red (“against”).
o. Rule 39.8. indicates that once the Member has voted, she/he may not change her/his vote. However, this rule should be interpreted in that way that Member cannot modify his/her vote after the voting is closed. Therefore, during the period from the opening of the vote until the President decides to close the vote, Members are allowed to change or correct their vote by pressing a different voting button.
Committee responsible for the report : Committee on Rules of Procedure and Immunities
Reference to committee: Bureau’s decision 30 June 2000
Draft opinion adopted by the committee on 26 September 2000
Members of the committee : Mr Kroupa, (Chairperson), MM. Gjellerod, Pokol, Kresák,
(Vice-Chairpersons), MM. Andreoli, Bal, Besostri, Bianchi (Alternate: Dolazza), Bilinski, Ceder, Debono Grech, Dias, Enright, Gehrcke, Goulet, Gremetz, Gross, Haupert, Mrs Hren-Vencelj, MM. Kittis, Kostytsky, Laakso (Alternate: Tiuri), Magnusson, Maltsev, Mrs Markovic-Dimova, MM. Michels, Minarolli, Nadezhdin, Nastase, Mrs Ojuland, Mrs Posada, Ms Pusic, Mrs Ragnarsdottir, Mrs van't Riet, MM. Rusu, Salaridze, Schieder, Simonsen, Sinka, Taliadouros (Alternate: Liapis), Vis.
N.B. The names of members who took part in the vote are printed in italics.
Secretary of the committee: Mr Koen Muylle.
* Since the electronic voting system has entered into force, Rule 39(bis) on page 80 of the Rules of Procedure has replaced rule 39 on p. 48.
2 “The number of Representatives of the Assembly authorised to vote shall correspond to the number of seats allocated to each of the member states under article 26 of the Statute of the Council of Europe, and to which appointments were made in accordance with Article 25 of the Statute and Rules 6 to 11 of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure, excluding Representatives who have been deprived of their voting rights in the Assembly or whose voting rights have been suspended under Rule 7.3., 8.5. or 9.4. If the number of Representatives authorised to vote is not divisible by six, the number obtained as a result of the division is rounded down”.
3 A quorum request made for a draft text must be made before the start of the vote on amendments or on the whole of the draft text if there are no amendments.
4 See footnote 1 to Rule 39.5.
5 The number of Representatives of the Assembly authorised to vote shall correspond to the number of seats allocated to each of the member states under article 26 of the Statute of the Council of Europe, and to which appointments were made in accordance with Article 25 of the Statute and Rules 6 to 11 of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure, excluding Representatives who have been deprived of their voting rights in the Assembly or whose voting rights have been suspended under Rule 7.3., 8.5. or 9.4. If the number of Representatives authorised to vote is not divisible by three, the number obtained as a result of the division is rounded down.
6 If the Assembly is unable to vote on an item of business on the last sitting of a part-session, the vote is postponed until the next part-session.
7 . The number of Representatives of the Assembly shall correspond to the number of seats allocated to each of the member states under Article 26 of the Statute of the Council of Europe, and to which appointments were made in accordance with Article 25 of the Statute and Rules 6-11 of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure.
8 . The possibility of requiring a prior written request might also be considered. For example, Rule 51.2 bis of the Rules of Procedure of the French Senate provides: “The Bureau may not be asked to ascertain how many members are present unless a written request is submitted by thirty senators, whose presence must be verified by roll-call”. The French Constitutional Court has ruled that “this new provision is not intended to abolish the requirement for a quorum but is solely concerned with the conditions under which a request to establish whether a quorum is present may be submitted”; C.C., Decision no. 86-206 DC of 3 June 1986, Official Gazette of 4 June 1986, Rec., p.43. However, even if advance notification were required, it would still be necessary to check whether the members who had signed the request were actually present at the sitting in question and were entitled to attend the sitting. This formality would scarcely simplify the procedure.
. See also paragraph 32 of this memorandum.
10 . Cf. the criticisms by Di Ciollo and Ciaurro, who regarded as simplistic the practice used in the Italian Senate, where the number of members voting, rather than the number present, determined whether there was a quorum: V. Di Ciollo and L. Ciaurro, Il diritto parlamentare nella teoria e nella pratica, 1994, p.304.
11 . In the European Parliament, the notes on Rule 126 of the Rules of Procedure indicate that the electronic voting system cannot be used to establish the result of the vote when a request has been made to ascertain whether a quorum is present; account must be taken of all the members present in the Chamber and all the members who asked for the quorum to be established.
. Rule 108.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the Italian Senate.
. Rule 108.3 of the Rules of Procedure of the Italian Senate. In May 1976, the Parliamentary Assembly decided that for roll-call votes, members who did not answer when their name was called should also be counted if the President could see that they were present in the Chamber. (Resolution 619 (1976) on the quorum in the Assembly and its committees (Updating of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure)). See The Parliamentary Assembly: Procedure and Practice, 1990, p. 160.
14 . Cf. the American Supreme Court’s decision of 29 February 1892, U.S. v. Ballin, 144 U.S. 1 (1892), 6.
15 . Rule 41 of the Parliamentary Assembly’s Rules of Procedure is modelled on Rule 61 of the French National Assembly’s Rules of Procedure, in which a quorum request is likewise regarded as a preliminary question.
16 . In most assemblies, the quorum is either half of the members (e.g. in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) or one third (e.g. in Austria and in the European Parliament). The quorum is however considerably lower in the United Kingdom. In the House of Commons, forty members have to take part in a division. This number goes back to the 17th century and corresponds with the number of counties in England at that time: N. Wilding and P. Laundy, An encyclopaedia of Parliament, 1958, p. 481.
17 . Cf. Rule 46.3: “A Committee may deliberate and take decisions when one-third of its members are present…”.
18 . Rule 126.4 of the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure: “Members who have asked for the quorum to be established shall be counted as being present within the meaning of paragraph 2, even if they are no longer in the Chamber”.
19 . Rule 46.6 of the Rules of Procedure of the Italian Chamber of Deputies (Camera dei deputati): “Signatories to a request for a qualified vote, and deputies requesting a quorum call, shall always be counted as present for the purpose of establishing the presence of a quorum”.
. Rule 108.3 of the Rules of Procedure of the Italian Senate: “Deputies requesting a quorum call shall be counted as being present even if they have left the Chamber or have failed to register their presence”.
. Cf. for example Rule 50 of the Rules of Procedure of the Lower House of the Netherlands Parliament (Tweede Kamer der Staten-General), Rule 48(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Austrian National Council (Nationalrat).
. Cf. for example Rule 46.3 of the Belgian Senate’s Rules of Procedure.
23 . A provision to this effect exists in French parliamentary law. Rule 61.3 of the National Assembly’s Rules of Procedure provides: “Where no vote may be taken for want of a quorum, the sitting shall be suspended after the President has announced that the ballot is to be deferred; the ballot shall then be held not less than one hour later, and the vote shall be valid whatever the number of deputies present”.
24 . The Secretariat prepared a letter to Assembly members explaining how the electronic voting system works. (See Appendix).
25 . Cf. E. Pierre, Traité de droit politique, électoral et parlementaire, 1902, no. 413.
. Cf. Belgian Senate, Annales des séances plénières, Wednesday 14 July 1999, no. 2-3, p. 9: the oldest member present refused to comment on a political group’s representation on committees and the Bureau, saying that this was a matter for the Bureau and “other appropriate bodies and places”.
. Meetings of the Joint Committee, the Committee on Rules of Procedure and Immunities, the Committee on the Budget and the Monitoring Committee are not, however, open to members of observer and special guest delegations (Rule 47.6).
28 . Rule 47.8.