B Explanatory
memorandum by Mr Cebeci, rapporteur
1 Introduction
1. At its meeting on 30 September 2008, the Committee
on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs approved
an opinion to the Bureau of the Assembly on the implementation of
the proposals contained in
Resolution
1600 (2008) on the Council of Europe and its observer states: the
current situation and a way forward. This opinion (document AS/Pro
(2008) 06 def) contains various proposals for changes to Rules 35.6,
47.5, 47.6, 59.8 and 60.4 of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure.
The opinion also includes elements for good practice on relations
with observers and friendly parliaments of non-member states (see
appendix to document AS/Pro (2008) 06 def), which could be taken
into account by the Bureau concerning the drafting of guidelines
on the participation of observer delegations in plenary debates,
in the Standing Committee and in committee meetings.
2. The purpose of this exercise is to enable Parliamentary Assembly
members and the Assembly to benefit from the contribution of observers
in appropriate circumstances.
3. On 27 November 2008, the Bureau of the Assembly accordingly
instructed the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional
Affairs to prepare a report under Rule 66.2. This report will first
deal with those proposals in
Resolution
1600 which imply changes of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure
and subsequently examine the consequences of the remaining proposals
which do not require changes, but do have a bearing on the Assembly’s
practice.
4. It is recalled that during its external relations debate on
23 January 2008 the Assembly adopted not only
Resolution 1600 (2008) on the Council of Europe and its observer states but
also
Resolution 1598 (2008) on strengthening co-operation with the Maghreb countries
and
Resolution 1599 (2008) on the situation in the Republics of central Asia. The
two latter resolutions contain proposals for strengthened dialogue
between the Assembly and the parliaments concerned.
Note Where appropriate,
these parliaments and other partner parliaments of non-member states
will be taken into account in this report. Furthermore, it should
be borne in mind that the Assembly has gone one step further in
its relations with certain partner parliaments by adopting
Resolution 1680 (2009) on the establishment of a “partner for democracy” status.
2 Proposals
in Resolution 1600 (2008) involving changes to the Rules of Procedure
5. The Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and
Institutional Affairs has already examined in detail the implications
of
Resolution 1600 (2008) for the Assembly’s procedure and practice (see in particular document
AS/Pro (2008) 06 def). Consequently, the suggested changes are only
summarised. They refer to participation of observers in plenary
sessions and committee meetings.
2.1 Participation of
observers and representatives of partner parliaments of non member
states in plenary debates
6. Under current Rule 35.6 members may ask for the floor
for one minute on the first day of a part-session “to draw the Assembly’s
attention to a matter of political importance which is not the subject
of a report by an Assembly committee”. At the moment, this provision
is not used by Assembly members. Nevertheless, it could be envisaged
to give also members of observer delegations similar rights.
7. Therefore Rule 35.6 could be modified as follows.
“For a period not exceeding 15
minutes the President may, on the first day of a part-session, give
the floor to members or to members of special guest, observer or
partner for democracy delegations for one minute to draw the Assembly’s
attention to a matter of political importance which is not the subject
of a report by an Assembly committee. They shall indicate beforehand
the subject of their statement to the Table Office. If time permits,
the President may allow similar shorter speaking periods during
the same part-session. A member or a member of a special guest,
observer or partner for democracy delegation shall not be given
the right by virtue of this provision to speak more than once during
the same part-session”.
2.2 Participation of
observers in committee meetings and sub-committee meetings
8. The current rights of observers in committee meetings
are laid down in Rules 47.5 and 60.4 As indicated in the above-mentioned
document of the Committee on Rules of Procedure (AS/Pro (2009) 6
def) the time may have come for enabling observers also to table
amendments to draft texts examined in committee meetings. This possibility
would not alter decision-making in committees, as they are free
to accept amendments or not. Committee chairpersons would decide
whether an amendment tabled by the member of an observer delegation
is in order, in the same way as for all other proposals for amendment.
9. It has also been suggested that members of observer delegations
should have the possibility to make proposals concerning the draft
agenda of committee meetings, it being understood that the committee chairperson
shall decide on any further action.
10. For the sake of transparency both proposed new possibilities
for observer delegations should be included in Rule 60.4. On this
occasion the current wording of this provision could be slightly
adapted with a view to harmonising terminology used in the Assembly’s
rules concerning observer delegations. Rule 60.4 could therefore
be amended and adapted as follows:
“Members
of observer delegations may participate in committee meetings as
provided in Rule 47.5 They may submit to the committee chairperson
proposals concerning the draft agenda of committee meetings and
proposals for amendments to draft texts examined in these meetings.
The committee chairperson shall decide on any further action. They
may sign motions for resolutions and recommendations and written
declarations. However, they shall not be taken into account for
the number of signatures required. Members of observer delegations
may participate in the work of political groups according to the conditions
established by the groups”.
11. In addition to Rule 60.4, the wording of the first sentence
of Rule 47.5 should be clarified as follows:
“Subject to paragraph 6 below, members of special guest,
observer and partner for democracy delegations appointed to a committee
may participate in its meetings and speak if called by the committee
chairperson; they shall not have the right to vote.”
12. Paragraph 27.2 of Assembly
Resolution 1600 (2008) invited members of observer delegations to participate
regularly in the work of sub-committees. In 2008 observers were,
however, present only in meetings of sub-committees of the Political
Affairs Committee. Where appropriate, the contribution of observers
to the work of further sub-committees could be encouraged and mentioned
in the elements for good practice which are appended to this report.
2.3 Consequences of
a possible amendment of Rule 60.4 concerning the rights of observers
for those of special guests in Assembly committees
13. It has been a constant practice of the Assembly,
when giving new rights to observers or special guests, to adapt
accordingly the corresponding provisions of the other status with
the Assembly. The rights of special guests with respect to committee
meetings are laid down in Rule 59.8. Therefore, this provision should
be amended as follows:
“Members
of special guest delegations may participate in committee meetings
as provided in Rule 47.5. They may submit to the committee chairperson
proposals concerning the draft agenda of committee meetings and
proposals for amendments to draft texts examined in these meetings.
The committee chairperson shall decide on any further action. They
may sign motions for resolutions and recommendations and written
declarations. However, they shall not be taken into account for
the number of signatures required. Members of special guest delegations
may participate in the work of political groups according to the
conditions established by the groups.”
14. It goes without saying that this provision shall equally apply
to partner for democracy delegations.
3 Rule change concerning
participation in Assembly debates of delegations of non member parliaments
without observer status (implementation of resolutions 1598 and
1599 (2008))
15. According to Rule 60.5 of the Assembly’s Rules of
Procedure, “The Bureau may, by a two thirds majority, invite representatives
of parliaments of other non-member states to attend a debate in
the Assembly”. In this connection “parliaments of other non-member
states” are those having no observer, special guest or partner for
democracy status with the Assembly. With a view to Resolutions
1598 and
1599
(2008) mentioned in paragraph 4 above and to other Assembly
texts governing relations with parliaments of non-member states, the
procedure foreseen in Rule 60.5 could be simplified. Instead of
the Bureau, it should be left to the President of the Assembly to
authorise – in line with the Assembly’s policy – members of parliaments
of non-member states to attend Assembly debates.
16. Consequently, Rule 60.5 could be worded as follows:
“The President of the Assembly
may invite representatives of parliaments of other non-member states to
attend a debate in the Assembly”.
4 Implications of
other proposals in Resolution 1600 (2008) and related texts not
requiring changes to the Rules of Procedure
17. Resolution
1600 (2008) and the above-mentioned Resolutions
1598 and
1599
(2008) include other proposals which have a bearing on the
Assembly’s procedure and practice, without requiring Rule changes.
4.1 Specific possibilities
of action concerning Assembly plenary sessions and meetings of the Standing
Committee
18. Resolution
1600 (2008) proposed the possible extension of the special rules
governing the Assembly’s OECD debates to other debates of particular
interest for observers. The Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities
and Institutional Affairs has analysed this proposal. It agrees
that it would be useful to give observer delegations not only in
OECD debates but also in some further specific debates of common
interest the same rights as to Assembly members. However, at the
present stage, this would further reduce the little time available
for ordinary Assembly debates in plenary and could raise organisational
problems (see document AS/Pro (2008) 06 def).
19. The Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional
Affairs considers that the Standing Committee would be a more appropriate
forum for special enlarged debates with observers, where the provisions
for OECD debates could apply mutatis mutandis. The Bureau of the
Assembly could agree with observers to test this procedure. Such
a possibility should be included in the elements for good practice
which are appended to this report.
20. More generally, due to its flexible and simple procedures
(for example, no formal list of speakers is established), the Standing
Committee could be an interesting forum for observers. However,
according to the statistics available, observers rarely participate
in its meetings.
21. Furthermore, as is specified in paragraph 20 of
Resolution 1598 (2008), the Standing Committee could be used for a dialogue
with parliamentarians from Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia on subjects
of common interest.
4.2 Initiation by observers
of current affairs debates
22. If appropriate, observer delegations may propose
to an Assembly national delegation or political group to request
the holding of a current affairs debate on a subject of common interest.
This type of debate has the advantage of offering almost similar
rights to members of the Assembly and observers, as neither reports
nor texts are presented for adoption and thus no amendments tabled.
4.3 Possible participation
of observers in election observation
23. The Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and
Institutional Affairs has analysed this proposal. While admitting
its interest, it concluded that there may be some obstacles to its
implementation. In certain cases the authorities of the country
where an election is taking place may not wish that observers to
the Assembly are included in ad hoc election observation committees.
Moreover, the co-operation arrangements between the Assembly, the
European Parliament and the OSCE Assembly and ODIHR are currently
being reviewed. Therefore, the Committee on Rules of Procedure considered
that in the present circumstances it would not be appropriate to
support participation of observers to the Assembly in Assembly election observation.
4.4 Co-operation with
parliamentarians from Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia (paragraph 20
of Resolution 1598 (2008))
24. To a certain extent, these proposals have been superseded
by
Resolution 1680 (2009) on partner for democracy status. However, pending the
granting of this status to the respective parliaments, the following proposals
could be implemented. The possibility of using Standing Committee
meetings as a forum for dialogue with these parliamentarians has
been included in the draft elements for good practice which are
appended to this report. This is also the case for two other proposals
contained in
Resolution
1598 (2008):
- inviting the three
parliaments concerned to be represented at Assembly plenary sessions
with the possibility of intervening in relevant debates;
- encouraging Assembly committees to invite delegations
from the parliaments present at Assembly part-sessions to attend
their meetings if issues of common interest are on the agenda.
4.5 Preparation of
draft guidelines on the participation of parliamentary observer
delegations in the work of the Assembly and its committees [(paragraph
30.7 of Resolution 1600 (2008)]
25. On the basis of this report, elements for good practice
concerning relations with observers and partner parliaments of non-member
states have been prepared and are appended. The Bureau of the Assembly
could take them into account for the elaboration of guidelines in
accordance with paragraph 30.7 of
Resolution 1600 (2008).
26. The draft guidelines could also refer where appropriate to
special guests and partners for democracy, in keeping with the Assembly’s
constant practice to align – insofar as their rights are concerned
– observer and special guest status. Such references could also
include partners for democracy as this status is often defined in
terms similar to special guest status.
5 Preliminary considerations
concerning procedural consequences of the adoption by the Assembly of
Resolution 1680 (2009) on the establishment of a “partner for democracy
status” with the Parliamentary Assembly
5.1 General
27. On 26 June 2009 the Assembly adopted
Resolution 1680 (2009). On the same day, the Bureau of the Assembly asked the
Committee on Rules of Procedure to take into account
Resolution 1680 in the preparation of the report on amendment of various
provisions of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure (rapporteur: Mr Holovaty)
(see also paragraph 16 of Resolution 1680). However, because of
a close link between Resolutions
1598 and
1599
(2008) and
Resolution
1680 (2009) on the establishment of a partner for democracy status,
the rapporteur has included in the present report some preliminary
considerations on the procedural consequences of Resolution 1680,
it being understood that specific rule changes are included in Mr
Holovaty’s report (see
Doc.
12071).
5.2 Reasons for the
creation of the new status
28. The partner for democracy status was established:
- In order to develop co-operation
with neighbouring regions as a means of consolidating democratic transformations
and promoting stability, good governance, respect for human rights
and the rule of law;
- as a response to the interest expressed by several parliaments
of the neighbouring countries with which the Assembly has established
working contacts (Algeria, Kazakhstan, Morocco and Tunisia, as well
as with the Palestinian Legislative Council) in upgrading the status
of the existing co-operation by establishing a relationship on a
permanent basis;
- as a remedy to the absence of an approximate framework
for a strengthened co-operation with these parliaments in the Assembly’s
Rules of Procedure.
29. Partner for democracy status is the sole competence of the
Assembly, applies only to it and is different from special guest
status and observer status.
5.3 Conditions for
obtaining the status (eligible parliaments, commitments required)
30. According to paragraph 15 of
Resolution 1680 (2009) the national parliaments of all southern Mediterranean
and Middle Eastern countries participating in the Union for the
Mediterranean - Barcelona Process (including the Palestinian Legislative
Council) and of central Asian countries participating in the OSCE (Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) should be eligible
to request partner for democracy status. Furthermore, the same paragraph
specifies that requests from parliaments of other states may also
be considered if the Bureau of the Assembly so decides.
31. Requests for this status should be addressed to the President
of the Assembly by the President of the respective parliament (or
by the Presidents of the chambers, if appropriate, in case of bicameral
parliaments) which should contain the elements (commitments and
obligations, etc.) listed in paragraphs 12.2.1 to 12.2.7 of
Resolution 1280 (e.g. reference to the values of the Council of Europe,
moratorium on death penalty, free and fair elections). Furthermore,
when a request for partner for democracy status is examined, particular consideration
has to be given to the existence of a multi-party composition of
the parliament and to the respect of the rights of the opposition.
Finally, the Assembly committee concerned may, depending of the
particular situation of each country, propose that specific conditions
be met before or after the status has been granted.
5.4 Main procedural
issues
32. The Committee on Rules of Procedure could usefully
discuss four issues:
- the number
of seats of partner for democracy delegations;
- the composition of these delegations;
- reporting on progress made by partner for democracy parliaments;
- the modalities for granting, suspending and withdrawing
partner for democracy status;
5.4.1 Number of seats
33. It is the Assembly’s practice to fix the number of
a national delegation’s seats between a lower limit of 2 seats and
an upper limit of 18 seats, the principal determining factor being
the population of each member state. For special guest delegations,
the number of seats (without substitutes) is the same as that they
would be entitled to as members of the Council of Europe (see Rule
59.5 of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure). Observer delegations
to the Assembly are generally allocated half the number of seats
they would be entitled to as members of the Council of Europe (see
Doc. 7792, paragraph 18). However, the maximum number of seats
allocated to an observer delegation is 6 (see
Doc. 8561, paragraph 58).
34. Concerning seats of partner for democracy delegations, either
the system established for observers or that for special guests
could be applied. This would mean in practice that a possible partner
for democracy delegation from Morocco or Algeria would have either
6 (observer model) or 12 seats (special guest model). The rapporteur
considers that it would be preferable to apply to partners for democracy
the observer model as this would keep the number of partners for
democracy at a reasonable level. Therefore, it could be proposed that
the number of seats allocated to delegations of partners for democracy,
which should not exceed six (and the same number of substitutes),
should be half the number of seats they would be entitled to as
members of the Council of Europe.
5.4.2 Composition of
delegations
35. According to paragraph 12.3 of
Resolution 1680 (2009), the composition of partner for democracy delegations
shall respect, as far as possible, the principles set forth in Rule
6.2.a of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure:
- fair representation on the delegation of political groups
or parties in the respective national parliament (if the number
of members allows for this);
- inclusion of the under-represented sex in the delegations
at least in the same percentage as is present in their parliaments
and, in any case, one representative of each sex.
36. It could be proposed that the parliaments enjoying partner
for democracy status should not transmit credentials to the President
of the Assembly but (less than one week before the opening of an
ordinary session) a list of members appointed with the approval
of the respective parliament (or its chambers in a bicameral parliament)
for the whole duration of the session (parliamentary year). It should
be understood that, if appropriate, the President may submit the
list to the Bureau of the Assembly to consider whether the above-mentioned
criteria have been fulfilled. In case of problems, the Bureau should
be able to refer the matter to the Political Affairs Committee for
report and any other committees (including the Committee on Rulesof Procedure)
for opinion.
5.4.3 Regular reporting
on progress made by parliaments enjoying partner for democracy status
37. One of the reasons for the introduction of a partner
for democracy status is the Assembly’s wish to promote the Council
of Europe’s core values in the respective countries. That is why
paragraph 12.4 of
Resolution
1680 stipulates that the Assembly shall periodically review
the progress made by the parliaments concerned in the framework
of the partner for democracy status. Moreover, paragraph 12.2.7
of the resolution obliges these parliaments regularly to inform
the Assembly on the state of progress in implementing Council of Europe
principles.
38. The aim of these arrangements is to allow the Assembly to
accompany the respective parliaments in the process of democratisation
and modernisation of their countries. It could be envisaged that
the parliaments or delegations of parliaments enjoying partner for
democracy status should submit an annual written report on progress
made via the President to the Assembly’s Bureau, which should refer
it for comments to the Political Affairs Committee and other relevant
committees. The Bureau should also have the possibility to ask the parliaments
/delegations having partner for democracy status to prepare an interim
report, when appropriate.
5.4.4 Modalities for
suspending and withdrawing partner for democracy status
39. Resolution
1680 (2009) stipulates that the decision on granting, suspending
and withdrawing the partner for democracy status shall be taken
by the Assembly following a debate on the report by the Political
Affairs Committee and opinions of the other relevant committees.
Note The
only open question relates to initiating a suspension or withdrawal
procedure. Obviously, the Political Affairs Committee should have
the right to take an initiative by submitting a reasoned written
application to the Bureau. The Bureau would then have to decide if
it refers the matter for report to the Political Affairs Committee
and for opinion to the other committees concerned. In case of urgency,
the Bureau should also have the possibility to ask the Political
Affairs Committee directly and the other committees concerned to
elaborate a report and an opinion.
5.5 Implications of
partner for democracy status in connection with the proposals made
for changes of the provisions concerning special guest and observer
status
40. For procedural purposes, it is proposed to define
partner for democracy status in terms similar to observer status.
The draft resolution in this report presents changes to Rules 35.6
and 47.5 concerning special guests and observers, so it is proposed
to include the changes regarding partner for democracy status with these.
6 Final remarks
41. The Assembly is invited to examine and adopt the
draft resolution included in this report, which should be presented
to the Standing Committee (Bern, 20 November 2009).
42. The elements for good practice appended to this report could
be forwarded to the Bureau for further consideration.
43. The relevant considerations developed in section V above on
partner for democracy status have been taken into account in Mr
Holovaty’s report on the amendment of various provisions of the
Rules of Procedure. Furthermore it could be useful to foresee that,
in future, the Assembly (rather than the Bureau) should, on the basis
of a report and opinions of its competent committees, decide on
the granting, suspension or withdrawal of special guest status.
