State of democracy in Europe
Functioning of democratic institutions in Europe and progress of the Assembly’s monitoring procedure
- Author(s):
- Parliamentary Assembly
- Origin
- Assembly
debate on 25 June 2008 (23rd Sitting) (see Doc. 11628Doc. 11628, report of the Committee on the Honouring of Obligations
and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring
Committee), rapporteur: Mr Holovaty). Text
adopted by the Assembly on 25 June 2008 (24th Sitting).
- Thesaurus
1. The Parliamentary Assembly acknowledges
the work carried out by its Committee on the Honouring of Obligations
and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring
Committee) in accompanying 11 countries currently under monitoring
(Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia,
Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, the Russian Federation, Serbia and
Ukraine) and three countries engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue
(Bulgaria, Turkey and “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”)
through the process of consolidating their democratic institutions
in compliance with the principles of the rule of law and the protection
of human rights.
2. The Assembly welcomes in particular the initiative of the
Monitoring Committee to contribute to its debate on the state of
democracy in Europe by focusing this year’s progress report on the
functioning of democratic institutions in the above-mentioned member
states on the basis of its most recent country monitoring reports. Some
of the latter were prepared under accelerated procedure in order
to enable the Assembly to react quickly and efficiently to urgent
and critical situations, such as:
2.1 the
dissolution of parliament by presidential decree in Ukraine, in
April 2007, after months of political crisis;
2.2 the pre-term presidential elections in Georgia, in January
2008, called in a bid to resolve the political crisis which erupted
in the country after several days of political protest, and the
declaration of the state of emergency in November 2007;
2.3 the post-electoral crisis in Armenia, in February 2008,
which led to the declaration of the state of emergency, and the
tragic events of 1 March, during which 10 people died and more than
a hundred were wounded;
2.4 the preparation for the presidential elections in Azerbaijan,
due in October 2008.
3. On the basis of its Monitoring Committee’s reports, the following
progress and major shortcomings are to be noted:
4. With respect to the separation of powers and the role of parliament:
4.1 although the role and influence
in political life of parliaments has been gradually reinforced in
two member states (Albania and Moldova), much remains to be done
to strengthen parliamentary control over the executive and improve
the checks and balances in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Russian Federation
and Ukraine. A proper role and appropriate rights should be guaranteed
for the opposition, in accordance also with Assembly
Resolution 1601 (2008) on procedural guidelines on the rights and responsibilities
of the opposition in a democratic parliament, and political dialogue
between the ruling majority and the opposition, both inside and
outside parliament, must be initiated (Armenia and Azerbaijan) or
improved (Georgia);
4.2 constitutional reform is strongly needed to ensure effective
separation of powers and properly functioning democratic institutions
in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Monaco and Ukraine. The new constitution
has to be properly implemented in Montenegro. The assistance which
the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission)
is offering or could offer to these member states in the process
of constitutional revision, often upon the request of the Monitoring
Committee, is of significant importance;
4.3 the independence of the judiciary from the other branches
of power should be strengthened in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria,
Georgia, Monaco, Montenegro, Serbia, the Russian Federation and Ukraine;
4.4 regarding Monaco, the Assembly acknowledges that the constitutional
reform of 2002, carried out on the basis of the recommendations
of the Council of Europe, has given more powers to the National Council
and has reinforced the balance between the branches of powers. The
Assembly recommends not to stop and to continue the reform process
in order to strengthen further the role of the National Council
and to improve the system of checks and balances.
5. With respect to elections and electoral reform:
5.1 the Assembly, referring also
to its
Resolution 1547
(2007) on the state of human rights and democracy in Europe,
reiterates that holding free and fair elections is an essential
element of a democracy and a prerequisite for building democratic
institutions;
5.2 throughout the reporting period (April 2007-June 2008),
parliamentary or presidential elections have been held in most states
under monitoring or engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue and were observed
by an Assembly delegation: Armenia, Georgia, Monaco, Montenegro,
the Russian Federation, Serbia, “the former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia”, Turkey and Ukraine;
5.3 electoral reforms are still needed in Albania, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia, Montenegro, Moldova, the Russian Federation,
Serbia and Ukraine. The electoral threshold remains too high, in particular
in the Russian Federation (7%) and Turkey (10%). In this respect,
the Assembly welcomes the lowering of the electoral threshold to
3% in Bosnia and Herzegovina and to 5% in Georgia, whereas it regrets
the recent decision of the Moldovan Parliament to raise this threshold
for party lists to 6%;
5.4 in particular, such electoral reforms, possibly with the
assistance of the Venice Commission, should ensure:
5.4.1 improved voters’ lists in Albania,
Georgia, Montenegro and Ukraine and the abolition of provisions
allowing for persons travelling abroad during the period prior to
elections to be removed from the voters’ list in Ukraine;
5.4.2 an impartial and transparent election administration in
Armenia and Azerbaijan with a view to restoring public confidence
in the electoral process;
5.4.3 an effective election-related complaints and appeals procedure
in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Moldova;
5.4.4 a level playing field, including equal and unbiased campaign
coverage, in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova and the Russian Federation;
in the latter, the absence of this condition led the Assembly observers
to conclude that the parliamentary elections of December 2007 were free
but not fair;
5.4.5 proper separation between the state and political parties/candidates
in Montenegro and in the Russian Federation;
5.4.6 that harassment and intimidation of opposition candidates
and supporters are eradicated in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and
the Russian Federation;
5.4.7 that constitutional and legislative provisions providing
for the recall of peoples’ representatives by the political parties
(the so-called “imperative mandate”) should be abrogated in the
Russian Federation, Serbia and Ukraine;
5.4.8 that the legislative provisions in Serbia and in Montenegro
allowing political parties to change the order of the candidates
on the party lists after the elections should be abolished as limiting
transparency and misleading voters;
5.5 following investigation by the Monitoring Committee into
an application to initiate a monitoring procedure with respect to
electoral fraud in the United Kingdom, it was concluded that the
electoral system in Great Britain is clearly open to electoral fraud,
in particular as a result of the rather arcane system of voter registration
without personal identifiers. This vulnerability was exacerbated
by the introduction of postal voting on demand, especially under
the arrangements as existed before the changes in the Electoral
Code in 2006. However, despite these vulnerabilities in the electoral
system, since elections in the United Kingdom are conducted democratically
and represent the free expression of the will of the people, the
Assembly decided not to open a monitoring procedure with respect
to the United Kingdom.
6. With respect to political parties and their funding:
6.1 the Assembly reiterates that
the recall of peoples’ representatives by the political parties
(the so-called “imperative mandate”) is unacceptable and contrary
to the principles of the rule of law and the separation of powers.
Regulations on the registration of political parties and the prohibition
of electoral blocs, combined with the 7% electoral threshold, make
it extremely difficult for new and small parties to compete effectively
in the Russian Federation;
6.2 with regard to financing, the Assembly refers to the initial
results from the evaluations carried out by the Council of Europe’s
Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) in its Third Evaluation
Round on transparency of party funding which show that, while member
states have intensified their regulatory efforts in this area, domestic
standards vary considerably among them and fall short, in some respects, of
Council of Europe standards;
6.3 the Assembly thus recommends that all member states which
have not yet established independent, specialised and strong mechanisms
of control over political party funding should do so at their earliest
opportunity;
6.4 the Assembly reiterates its recommendation that a law
on political parties be adopted with a view to ensuring the transparency
of party and campaign funding in Monaco and Montenegro.
7. With respect to the fight against corruption:
7.1 despite commendable efforts
made by the authorities, with the assistance of the Council of Europe,
the adoption of National Anti-Corruption Strategies and the implementation
of action plans, corruption remains a major problem in practically
all member states under monitoring;
7.2 the Assembly urges the authorities of the member states
to implement the recommendations made by GRECO, in particular to
improve domestic legislation and effectively implement the measures adopted.
State efforts in eradicating corruption should include measures
not only in the area of repression but also in prevention and policy
co-ordination. In this respect, the Assembly recalls its recommendation
that measures be taken to guarantee a professional civil service
respectful of ethical rules in Albania, Georgia and Ukraine;
7.3 Ukraine should ratify the Council of Europe’s Criminal
Law Convention on Corruption (ETS No. 173).
8. With respect to media pluralism:
8.1 the absence of media pluralism has raised Assembly concerns
to various degrees in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova and the Russian
Federation. Deficiencies caused by the monopolisation of some mass
media by political groups and businessmen in Serbia have also given
rise to concerns. The independence of media regulatory bodies should
be guaranteed in Armenia and Azerbaijan;
8.2 despite efforts made with Council of Europe assistance,
the creation of a genuinely public broadcasting service has not
yet been completed in Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, the
Russian Federation and Ukraine. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, which
has one of the most advanced self-regulatory mechanisms in Europe,
the establishment of a unified public broadcasting service with
state-level management is one of the requirements for signing the
Stabilisation and Association Agreement with the European Union;
8.3 censorship, prosecution, imprisonment and intimidation
of or even physical threats against journalists continue to occur
in Azerbaijan and the Russian Federation. The Assembly welcomes
the fact that defamation has been decriminalised in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Georgia and Ukraine and partially decriminalised in Moldova and
in “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”. It urges other member states
concerned to continue the process of decriminalisation of defamation.
At the same time, professional ethics of journalism must be improved
in many member states, possibly with Council of Europe assistance;
8.4 an investigation by the Monitoring Committee into an application
to initiate a monitoring procedure with respect to the monopolisation
of the electronic media and possible abuse of power in Italy confirmed
that Italy’s media spectrum was clearly experiencing an anomaly
in its television sector, with one of the highest levels of concentration
on the national level in Europe. However, Italian citizens generally
have access to a wide variety of information sources and content
diversity across the media landscape. Therefore, the Assembly concluded
that the anomaly in one of its electronic media sectors did not
in itself warrant the initiation of a fully fledged monitoring procedure
with respect to Italy but that the legislative developments in Italy
should be followed in the Monitoring Committee’s periodic reports.
9. With respect to local and regional democracy:
9.1 the Assembly notes that in many
member states under monitoring or engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue,
decentralisation reforms should be stepped up. The lack of clear
assignment of competences to local authorities is an obstacle to
effective decentralisation in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Moldova and Serbia. Moreover, revenues devolved to local authorities
often do not match the decentralised competences and are unevenly
distributed (Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Moldova, Serbia, “the
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” and Ukraine). The unsettled
issue of devolution of property prevents local authorities from
exercising their competences effectively in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Montenegro, Serbia and “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”.
Supervisory procedures are often complex and unclear, thus creating
the risk of undue interference of central authorities in the activities
of local and regional authorities (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Moldova);
9.2 in some member states, local authorities are too small
and weak to take over substantial competences in the provision of
the main public services (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova). The Assembly therefore
welcomes and further encourages the efforts of the authorities of
these countries to establish mechanisms of intermunicipal co-operation,
for instance in Armenia and Moldova. Furthermore, the Assembly encourages
member states to consider drawing up and implementing territorial
reforms to establish stronger and financially more sustainable communities.
Where appropriate, such reforms should include the establishment
of autonomous regional structures with increased operational and financial
capacity;
9.3 furthermore, effective decentralisation requires the building
of capacities at both national and local level. This entails for
the central government to work in the context of decentralised service provision
and, for the local authorities, to participate fully in the implementation
of decentralisation policies and continually improve their performance
by boosting the standards of their leadership and strategic management,
service provision, community participation and public ethics (Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Moldova, Serbia, “the former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia” and Ukraine).
10. With respect to the continuing existence of unresolved conflicts
in member states under monitoring:
10.1 the Assembly considers that democratic developments in
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Moldova cannot be consolidated as long as
their territorial integrity is not restored;
10.2 the Assembly welcomes the Monitoring Committee’s initiative
to organise a hearing “on frozen conflicts” with respect to the
conflicts of Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Transnistria in
Berlin, in November 2007. In this respect, the Assembly reaffirms
the role that national parliaments can play in promoting confidence
building as a prerequisite for the peaceful settlement of conflicts.
The Assembly itself can also help foster a positive negotiating
climate, through dialogue at the parliamentary level. Therefore,
the Assembly encourages the organisation of further hearings on
the above-mentioned conflicts;
10.3 at the same time, the Assembly regrets that no significant
positive developments have been registered during the reporting
period (April 2007-June 2008) with respect to any of the above-mentioned conflicts;
tension has recently escalated with respect to the Abkhaz and South-Ossetian
conflicts.
11. The Assembly urges all states currently under monitoring or
engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue to continue their co-operation
with the Monitoring Committee and to implement all the recommendations contained
in the country-specific resolutions adopted by the Assembly. It
reaffirms its readiness to provide necessary support to the countries
concerned through its parliamentary co-operation and assistance programmes.
12. Furthermore, the Assembly takes note of the periodic reports
on the third and last group of 11 member states among those member
states which are not subject to a monitoring procedure or involved
in a post-monitoring dialogue: Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the
United Kingdom. As in the previous two years, they are based on
the country-by-country assessments made by the Commissioner for
Human Rights and other Council of Europe monitoring mechanisms or
institutions.
13. On the basis of these reports, which are appended to the Monitoring
Committee’s 2008 progress report, the Assembly:
13.1 urges the national parliaments
of the countries concerned to:
13.1.1 use
these reports as the basis for a debate on their country’s record
with regard to the fulfilment of their statutory and conventional
obligations as member states of the Council of Europe;
13.1.2 promote execution of the judgments of the European Court
of Human Rights (the Court) and compliance with recommendations
made by the Commissioner for Human Rights and other specific Council
of Europe monitoring bodies, both by provoking and accelerating
the necessary legislative initiatives and exercising their role
of oversight with respect to government action;
13.2 invites the European Union bodies, as far as applicable,
to use these reports and take into account the findings of the Council
of Europe human rights institutions and monitoring mechanisms, such
as the judgments of the Court and reports of the Commissioner for
Human Rights and of the Assembly’s Monitoring Committee, as well
as the relevant resolutions and recommendations adopted by the Assembly;
13.3 urges:
13.3.1 Sweden, Switzerland
and the United Kingdom to sign and ratify, and Norway, Portugal, Slovakia,
Slovenia and Spain to ratify, Protocol No. 12 to the European Convention
on Human Rights (ETS No. 177);
13.3.2 Poland and Spain to ratify Protocol No. 13 to the European
Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 187);
13.3.3 Switzerland to sign, and Poland, Slovakia, Spain, and
the United Kingdom to ratify, the revised European Social Charter
(ETS No. 163);
13.3.4 Poland, Romania, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom
to sign and ratify, and Slovakia and Slovenia to ratify, the Additional
Protocol to European Social Charter Providing for a System of Collective
Complaints (ETS No. 158);
13.3.5 Portugal, San Marino and Switzerland to sign and ratify,
and Spain and the United Kingdom to ratify, the Civil Law Convention
on Corruption (ETS No. 174);
13.3.6 San Marino and Spain to ratify the Criminal Law Convention
on Corruption (ETS No. 173);
13.3.7 Switzerland to adopt a law on political parties with a
view to ensuring the transparency of party funding.
14. The Assembly notes that the year 2008 marks the end of the
first three-year cycle of periodic reporting carried out by its
Monitoring Committee on all member states not subject to a monitoring
procedure or involved in a postmonitoring dialogue.
15. In carrying out this periodic reporting, as well as its own
country-specific monitoring procedure through its Monitoring Committee,
the Assembly has continued to benefit from the work carried out
by other Council of Europe institutions and monitoring bodies, in
particular: the Court; the Committee of Ministers in its supervisory function
of the execution of the Court’s judgments; the European Committee
of Social Rights; the Commissioner for Human Rights; the Congress
of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe; the Group
of States against Corruption (GRECO); the Committee of Experts on
the Evaluation of Anti-Money Laundering Measures and Financing of
Terrorism (MONEYVAL); the European Committee for the Prevention of
Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT);
the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities; the Committee of Experts of the European Charter
for Regional or Minority Languages and the European Commission against
Racism and Intolerance (ECRI). The European Commission for Democracy
through Law (Venice Commission) is of special importance since,
with its expertise, it significantly assists both the Monitoring
Committee’s rapporteurs in their tasks and the member states in
honouring their obligations and commitments. The work of the European
Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) is also of relevance.
16. At the same time, the Assembly has continued to promote the
work of all these institutions and monitoring bodies, in particular
by calling for the execution of judgments of the Court or the implementation
of the recommendations of those instruments and bodies in all countries
subject to monitoring, post-monitoring dialogue or periodic reporting.
17. The Assembly commends the remarkable work carried out by the
Council of Europe human rights institutions and monitoring bodies
and the acquis they have established over the years. In this respect,
the Assembly believes that the efficiency of this unique monitoring
machinery can be further enhanced by defining tools aimed at optimising
synergies and enhancing co-operation among the various bodies, while
preserving their independence and respecting their mandates, distinct
working methods and priorities.
18. Since this would be beneficial to its own work, the Assembly
therefore welcomes the Monitoring Committee’s initiative to organise
a hearing as a forum for exchanging ideas and identifying ways and
means to improve synergies among all those primarily concerned,
namely the Council of Europe institutions, bodies and mechanisms
referred to above in paragraph 15.
19. With a view to ensuring increased efficiency, the Assembly
also calls on member states to set up or enhance national mechanisms
in charge of ensuring that appropriate follow-up is given to findings
of Council of Europe monitoring bodies.
20. The Assembly stresses that national parliaments should be
regularly informed of measures taken by the governments to implement
recommendations by Council of Europe monitoring bodies, as well
as to ensure execution of the judgments of the Strasbourg Court.
21. The Assembly reiterates that national parliaments have a special
role of democratic oversight of governmental action. This includes
the need to ensure that:
21.1 recommendations
of Council of Europe monitoring bodies are complied with;
21.2 judgments of the Strasbourg Court are speedily and fully
implemented, especially where legislative corrective measures are
required;
21.3 neither national security nor state secrecy be invoked
indiscriminately to shield unlawful activity of state officials
from robust parliamentary and judicial scrutiny.
