B Explanatory memorandum
by Mr Egidijus Vareikis, rapporteur
1 Background to the present report
1. A number of questions relating
to a modification of the Parliamentary Assembly’s Rules of Procedure were
successively referred to the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities
and Institutional Affairs, for report. These were:
- amending Rule 19 of the Rules
of Procedure on political groups (Reference 4316 of 9 October 2017), including
the question of members of the Assembly not belonging to any political
group (Bureau decision of 23 November 2017);
- amending Rule 20.3 of the Rules of Procedure on the status
of the immediate past President of the Assembly (Bureau decision
of 23 November 2017 and Reference 4346 of 24 November 2017);
- the possible improvement of the procedure for considering
motions for resolutions and recommendations (Bureau decision of
23 November 2017 and Reference 4347 of 24 November 2017).
2. The committee therefore decided, at its meeting on 25 January
2018, to merge all these references into a single report on the
modification of various provisions of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure.
Having been appointed rapporteur on the first reference on 10 October
2017, the committee decided to confirm me as rapporteur on all of
these issues.
3. In addition, the Rules Committee was once again tasked with
making further amendments to the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure as
part of the follow-up to be given, at regulatory level, to the proposals
made by national delegations and the political groups in the context
of the work of the Ad hoc Committee of the Bureau on the role and
mission of the Parliamentary Assembly.
Note
4. More specifically, at its meeting on 29 June 2018, the Bureau
of the Assembly decided to refer to the Rules Committee, for report:
- “proposals aimed at streamlining
the Assembly work;
- proposals aimed at maintaining, changing or supplementing
the Rules governing ratification or challenging of credentials and/or
representation or participation rights of national delegations for
report at the October 2018 part-session of the Assembly;
- proposals regarding the voting rights of members or the
voting procedures of the Assembly for report at the October 2018
part-session of the Assembly;Note
- other proposals aimed at modifying the Assembly’s Rules
of Procedure”;
specifying that the Bureau “decided
to continue its dialogue with the Committee of Ministers, as appropriate, on
all proposals aimed at enhancing the Assembly’s role vis-à-vis the
Committee of Ministers or improving the dialogue between the two
statutory organs”.
Note
The Bureau also decided to “refer proposals aimed at reforming
the overall monitoring system of the Assembly or the current working
methods and internal procedures of the Monitoring Committee on the
basis of Resolution 1115
(1997) for consideration to the Monitoring Committee and the
Committee of Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs
which should act in concert”.
5. Lastly, in accordance with
well-established practice, the committee is ready to consider proposals
for amendments to the Rules of Procedure which relate to procedures
which need to change or be adapted to parliamentary practice, or
to rules which need to be clarified.
2 Status
and prerogatives of political groups: amending Rule 19 of the Rules
of Procedure
6. Political groups in the Assembly
are, from a regulatory point of view, parliamentary bodies, constituting an
organised structure for the political parties and formations represented
in the national delegations to the Assembly. The Assembly’s Rules
of Procedure contain provisions governing the creation and prerogatives
of groups (Rule 19),
NoteNoteNoteNoteNoteNote leaving
it to the groups themselves to establish, in full independence,
the rules relating to their organisation and methods of operation.
7. The debate surrounding the formation and recognition of a
sixth political group in the Assembly – the Free Democrats Group
(FDG) – in September 2017, a discussion in which the Committee on
Rules of Procedure has been closely involved, has highlighted certain
gaps in the legal and regulatory framework governing political groups
– in particular the criteria and conditions for establishment or
dissolution of a political group, as well as their functioning having
regard to the reference date of 30 June (see Memorandum on the interpretation
of Rule 19 of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliamentary Assembly,
document AS/Pro (2017) 19 def of 21 September 2017).
8. Similarly, the request for recognition made on 21 January
2019 by the Group of New European Democrats/Europe of Nations and
Freedom (NED/ENF) prompted the Bureau of the Assembly to ask the Committee
on Rules of Procedure about the procedure defined in Rule 19.1,
concerning compliance, by groups and their members, with the fundamental
values promoted by the Council of Europe.
2.1 The
conditions for the formation of political groups
9. In the first place, the committee
wondered whether it was necessary to supplement Rules 19.1, 19.2
and 19.3 of the Rules of Procedure as to the conditions for the
formation of a political group, in particular by adding a new criterion,
namely that all the members of the same political group should have
a common ideological and political identity. In this respect, it
was recalled that the members of the Assembly belong to a national
political party, which is generally affiliated, at European level,
to a specific political group. The members of the Assembly must
respect the commitments of political affiliation of their national
party and belong to the political group to which their political
party is affiliated at European level, when this is the case.
NoteNoteNoteNoteNoteNoteNoteNoteNoteNote The
affiliation of a member of the Assembly to a political group within
the Assembly should therefore be dictated by his or her membership
of a national political party and his or her membership of a political
family sharing the same ideology.
10. The European Parliament recently took a decision on the statute
and funding of European political parties and European political
foundations (see Resolution P8_TA(2018)0098 adopted on 17 April
2018). In particular, “for reasons of transparency and in order
to strengthen the scrutiny and the democratic accountability of
European political parties”, the European political parties shall
publish their political programme, and they “should respect certain
principles and fulfil certain conditions …, in particular in their programme
and in their activities, the values on which the Union is founded,
as expressed in Article 2 TEU, namely respect for human dignity,
freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human
rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities”.
NoteNoteNoteNoteNote
11. In a context of fragmentation of politics and party allegiances
which could fuel, in the Assembly, a temptation to increase the
number of groups for reasons which are clearly political but undoubtedly
also strategic, opportunistic and material, it is essential to have
a politically representative, credible and effective Parliamentary
Assembly that must be able to act, debate and decide on the basis
of ideas and positions expressed by the representatives of the major
European political families.
– Discussion points
12. The committee should consider whether it is necessary to strengthen
the conditions and criteria for forming a political group, and in
particular whether there is a need to:
- specify that members must belong to the political group
to which their national party is affiliated and that they must be
part of a common political identity;
- specify that the statement that political groups must
submit to the Bureau at the time of their formation and recognition
must include their political programme and/or their statutes or
rules of procedure;
- revise the minimum number of members and delegations to
form a group;
- provide for an additional condition relating to the composition
of the group in order to avoid a situation where a group is made
up of a very large majority of substitute members of delegations
(and who would not therefore necessarily be able to take an active
part in the work of the Assembly).
13. The committee may therefore consider it advisable to supplement
the conditions laid down in Rule 19 of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure
so as to include the obligation to table a political programme,
a charter or a political statement specifying the group’s objectives
and its statutes or its rules of procedure.
2.2 Political
groups’ prerogatives: immediate or deferred exercise
14. Under the Rules of Procedure
and the complementary texts, political groups in the Assembly have
the following rights which they exercise in their own right or through
their chairpersons:
- political
groups are represented on the Bureau (Rule 14.3), the Presidential
Committee (Rule 14.4), the Standing Committee (Rule 17.3) and the
Joint Committee (Rule 58.2) by their Chairperson or their representative;
- they have a role in the composition of the bureaux of
committees (Rule 46.3) and the allocation of committee chairmanships;
- they appoint members of the Committee on the Honouring
of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of
Europe (Monitoring Committee), Committee on Rules of Procedure,
Immunities and Institutional Affairs and the Committee on the Election
of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights (Rule 44.3);
- they appoint members of the ad hoc committees (or missions)
to observe elections and chair them on a rotating basis;
- their chairpersons are ex officio members
of four committees (Rule 19.5);
- they may request an urgent debate (Rule 51.1) or a current
affairs debate (Rule 53.2);
- they may appoint a spokesperson in each debate in the
Assembly (first round of the list of speakers), including a spokesperson
to ask a question to the Chair of the Committee of Ministers and
other invited guests;
- they may appoint an observer for elections in the Assembly
(elections of judges to the European Court of Human Rights, the
Commissioner for Human Rights, the Secretary General and Deputy
Secretary General of the Council of Europe, and the Secretary General
of the Parliamentary Assembly).
15. Most of these prerogatives can be exercised by a new political
group from the date on which it is recognised by the Bureau of the
Assembly. Exercise of other rights, referred to in Rule 19.6, however,
is staggered and is dependent upon the numerical representativeness
of each group, assessed at 30 June of the previous year, namely:
- the receipt of a budgetary allocation
for operational expenses;
- participation in the allocation of chairmanships and vice-chairmanships
of the nine committees;
- appointment of members in the three committees whose composition
is made up of the political groups (the Monitoring Committee, the
Rules Committee and the Committee on the Election of Judges to the European
Court of Human Rights);
- inclusion on the list of speakers in Assembly debates;Note
- and, in line with the consistent practice based on an
agreement between political groups, the appointment of members to
ad hoc committees (or missions) to observe elections and the alternating chairpersons
of these committees or missions.
16. This means that a political group which would be constituted
and recognised after the date of 30 June of year n, will be able
to profit from the rights listed above only at the opening of the
session of year n+2, on the basis of its representativeness on 30
June of year n+1. Members of the committee therefore considered that
it was not fair for a new group to be deprived, for more than a
year, of the practical means of functioning, on the ground that
it was constituted after 30 June.
17. It should be recalled, however, that the date of 30 June was
decided upon as a reference date in order to take into account the
constraints relating to the granting of the rights of political
groups to a budget allocation. Allocations to political groups are
included in the Assembly’s budget, which is prepared and finalised
as part of a procedure and in accordance with a timetable established
for the entire Council of Europe, under the responsibility of the
Secretary General of the Council of Europe. On the other hand, it
is possible that the exercise of the other rights mentioned in Rule
19.6 should no longer be contingent on this reference date.
– Discussion points
18. Should the rights of political groups be revised in order
to allow them to enjoy the rights provided for in Rule 19.6 without
the exercise of these rights being conditional upon their representativeness
as at 30 June, but at a reference date closer to the opening of
the annual session?
19. The committee may wish to propose that entitlement to the
rights provided for in Rule 19.6 be established at the opening of
the annual session in year n+1 on the basis of the representativeness
of the groups at a more recent date (for example, 1 December of
year n) – with the exception of the receipt of the budgetary allocation
which must remain set with a reference date of 30 June in year n.
2.3 The
disappearance or dissolution of a political group
20. The Assembly’s Rules of Procedure
do not deal with the question of the “disappearance of a political group”,
namely the consequences of a reduction of members below the minimum
number required. The committee therefore decided in September 2017
to revise Rule 19 on this point.
21. There is no need for the Assembly to have a complex procedure.
NoteNoteNoteNoteNote Accordingly,
and given the fact that political groups are required to notify
the Bureau of the Assembly “of any subsequent changes as soon as possible”
(Rule 19.3), a political group whose number of members falls below
the required 20-member threshold, or which no longer comprises members
from at least six national delegations, shall cease to exist. The
Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly must officially
notify the Bureau of this and the Bureau will take note thereof
at its next meeting.
– Discussion points
22. In 2017, the committee had decided that Rule 19 of the Rules
of Procedure should make express reference to a “notification” procedure
for the disappearance or dissolution of a political group.
23. In addition, the committee must also consider the practical
consequences of the disappearance of a political group. The committee
is therefore invited to stipulate that, as soon as a political group
ceases to exist:
- members belonging
to the dissolved political group automatically become non-registered
members (pending, if applicable, their affiliation to another group);
- committee chairpersons and vice-chairpersons elected in
respect of that group shall retain their term of office until it
expires;
- members of the Monitoring Committee, the Committee on
Rules of Procedure and the Committee on the Election of Judges to
the Court shall immediately lose their seats;
- members of an ad hoc committee for the observation of
elections shall also immediately lose their seats.
2.4 The
status and prerogatives of members of the Assembly not belonging
to any political group (non-registered)
24. In accordance with the current
Rules of Procedure, members not belonging to any political group
do not enjoy certain rights of participation and representation
which are directly related to membership of a political group (see
paragraph 15 above). In particular, they can be members of only
seven committees out of nine (six committees under their national
delegation, two seats are reserved on the Rules Committee for non-registered members),
and cannot be elected to the bureaux of the committees, or participate
in election observation missions.
Note
25. At present, 82 members of the Assembly are not affiliated
to any political group (14%). The committee could therefore consider
changing the status of these non-registered members, either in terms
of “collective” rights,
Note or
in terms of individual rights (appointment to the Monitoring Committee
and the Committee on the Election of Judges, in accordance with
the terms and conditions of the Rules Committee; possible submission of
candidatures to the committees’ bureaux).
– Discussion points
26. The committee has considered the need to change the rights
of Assembly members who are not affiliated to any political group.
At the meeting of 4 September 2018, the vast majority of the members
of the committee felt that there was no merit in setting up a mixed
group of non-registered members, a “technical” group, in view of
the very diverse nature of the political parties to which non-registered
Assembly members are affiliated, since such a group was not based
on any political rationale given the very different positions held
by these members.
27. However, the members of the committee did not immediately
rule out the possibility of non-registered members being granted
seats on the Monitoring Committee and the Committee on the Election
of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights, in the same way
as for the Rules Committee, which reserves two seats for non-registered
members.
Note
– Proposed amendment to the Rules
of Procedure
28. The committee proposes to amend Rule 19 as regards the conditions
of formation and disappearance of a political group, as follows:
“19.1. Representatives and substitutes
may form political groups according
to their political affinities. To be acknowledged by
the Bureau, political groups shall undertake,
in particular in their political charter, statutes and activities,
to promote and respect the values of the Council of Europe,
notably political pluralism, human rights and the rule of law.
19.2. A political group shall have no fewer than 5% of the members composing the Assembly from at
least eight national delegations.
No Assembly member may belong to more than one political group.
19.3. At the time it is formed, each political group shall
submit to the Bureau of the Assembly a statement which shall include
the name of the group, the list of its members, the composition
of its bureau, a political charter setting
out the purpose of the group, and its statutes or rules of procedure, which
shall conform to the European Convention on Human Rights. All members
of the group shall declare in writing in an appendix to the statement
that they share the same political and ideological affinities.
Each group shall notify the Bureau of any subsequent changes
as soon as possible.
Any political group which
no longer satisfies the conditions set out in Rule 19.2 shall cease
to exist. This shall be notified to the Bureau by the Secretary
General of the Parliamentary Assembly. The Bureau shall take note
thereof at its subsequent meeting.”
(no changes to 19.4, 19.5 and 19.6)
3 The
status of the immediate past President of the Assembly: amending
Rule 20.3 of the Rules of Procedure
29. Rule 20.3 provides that: “The
immediate past President, as long as he or she remains a representative or
substitute in the Assembly without interruption and provided that
he or she has not been dismissed from office pursuant to Rule 54,
shall be an ex officio member of the Committee on Political Affairs
and Democracy, the Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and
Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring
Committee) and the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and
Institutional Affairs. Rule 44.6 shall not apply to him or her.”
30. It should be recalled that since 2002, when the Assembly granted
the outgoing President of the Assembly the status of ex officio member of the Political
Affairs Committee, his or her status has been upgraded several times,
so that, at present, in the three committees concerned where he/she
is an ex officio member, the
immediate past President of the Assembly enjoys the same rights
as the other members of the committee (right to vote, right to be
a member of the committee’s bureau, right to be a member of the
sub-committees and their bureaux, right to be a candidate for a
rapporteurship, etc.).
31. On the initiative of the Bureau of the Assembly, the Committee
on Rules of Procedure was asked, in a very specific context (resignation
of the President of the Assembly in 2017 before the end of his term
of office), to give a detailed interpretation of Rule 20.3 and the
concept of “outgoing President”.
Note
32. The committee noted, in particular, that, as the Rules currently
stood, Rule 20.3 confers a privilege on the outgoing President of
the Assembly, which applies automatically – unless the President
is no longer a member of the Parliamentary Assembly or has been
dismissed. A President who resigned from office remains the holder
of this privilege and is automatically an ex officio member in the
three committees concerned, until the President of the Assembly
who has been elected to succeed him/her becomes outgoing President.
The committee therefore considered that Rule 20.3 should be amended
in this regard.
33. Moreover, members of the committee considered that the membership
of the immediate past President of the Assembly in three committees
should not be automatic but require that he/she expresses the wish
and is actually willing to participate in their work. Some members
also questioned the capacity of a President who has carried out
a short and incomplete term of office to assert in these three committees
the “considerable political experience and expertise” he/she is
supposed to have acquired during that time in office.
– Discussion points
34. The committee is invited to consider the question of amending
Rule 20.3:
- it should be clearly
stated that a President of the Parliamentary Assembly who has resigned
from office, while still a member of the Assembly, shall not be
an ex-officio member of the committees concerned;
- it should be made clear that only the Presidents of the
Assembly who have been elected by the Assembly have the status of
immediate past President of the Assembly; the acting President,
i.e. the most senior Vice-President (or the next most senior Vice-President)
who fulfils the duties of President of the Assembly until the election
of a new President at the following part-session does not have the
status of immediate past President of the Assembly;Note
- further consideration may be given to the need to amend
other provisions of Rule 20.3, in particular to authorise the outgoing
President to be an ex officio member of three committees provided
that he or she has served at least one full term.
– Proposed amendment to the Rules
of Procedure
35. The committee proposes to amend Rule 20.3 as regards the status
of the immediate past President of the Assembly as follows:
“For as long as he or she remains
a representative or substitute in the Assembly, and provided that he or she has not resigned as President or
has not been dismissed from office pursuant to Rule 54, the immediate
past elected President shall
be an ex officio member of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy,
the Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by
Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee) and
the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional
Affairs. Rule 44.6 shall not apply to him or her.”;
4 Possible
improvement of the procedure for considering motions for resolutions
and recommendations
36. The Secretary General of the
Assembly had been invited by the Bureau of the Assembly to “draft
a memorandum on the procedure applied by the Assembly when considering
motions for resolutions and recommendations and its possible improvement”.
At its meeting on 24 November 2017, the Bureau took note of this
memorandum (document AS/Bur (2017) 81 rev) and referred the matter
to the Rules Committee.
37. It should be recalled that the Bureau’s initiative was aimed
more specifically at the issue of requests for changes to references
or extensions of references from committees, it being understood
that the decisions taken by the Bureau to refer or transmit motions
to committees or to take no further action, are, pursuant to the regulations,
subject to ratification by the Assembly, but once those decisions
had been ratified, they became final. From a regulatory point of
view, any subsequent request for changes to a reference, or for
the extension of a reference, is clearly inadmissible. In practice,
the regulatory constraints have tended, to a certain extent, to
be ignored.
38. Motions for resolutions or recommendations tabled by members
of the Assembly are first examined by the Presidential Committee,
which is responsible for preparing meetings of the Bureau. The proposals
of the Presidential Committee for follow-up to the motions are then
sent to the Bureau of the Assembly for decision. The chairpersons
of the committees are members of the Bureau and can therefore state
the position of their committee before the Bureau takes a decision.
Decisions taken by the Bureau on referring motions for resolutions
or recommendations to committees, transmission for information or
for no further action, are subsequently submitted to the Assembly
for ratification on the Monday and Friday morning of a part-session (in
the Progress Report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee or
its addendum) or to the Standing Committee. They may be contested
on this occasion.
4.1 Position
of the Rules Committee
39. In June 2014, the Rules Committee,
at the request of the Bureau of the Assembly, was asked to clarify the
matter of references to committees approved by the Bureau and challenges
to those references in plenary (Rules 26
NoteNoteNoteNote and 33
Note of the Assembly’s Rules of
Procedure)
Note. The
committee pointed out that “the Rules of Procedure quite explicitly
provide that proposals for reference or transmission to a committee
or for no further action decided upon by the Bureau must be submitted
to the Assembly for ratification. That is why the agenda of each
part-session, under the item ʽDebate – Progress report of the Bureau
and the Standing Committeeʼ, clearly indicates ʽ[possibly] Voteʼ.
The members of the Assembly therefore receive formal notice of the possibility
of a vote being held on any of the questions raised in the progress
report which might be the subject of a challenge in plenary sitting”.
40. On that occasion, the Rules Committee felt that it would be
worthwhile expressing its opinion first on the subsequent modification
of references of motions – subsequent to the Assembly’s ratification
of the references – i.e. requests for extensions of references and
for modifications to references, and second, on the time-frame for
the Bureau to consider motions before reaching its decision.
41. With regard to
requests to modify
already ratified references, the Rules Committee stated
in 2014 that “in stipulating that proposals for references, transmissions
to committees or no further action must be ratified by the Assembly,
the Rules of Procedure lay down a principle that such ratification
implies a final and irrevocable decision. That is also the purpose
of the procedure enabling the Bureau’s decisions in that regard to
be challenged in sittings – for example, by proposing a reference
for report to another committee, reference to a committee for an
opinion, reference for report instead of forwarding for information,
etc.” The committee commented that this procedure was, in practice,
very rarely used and that it was not uncommon for the Bureau to
receive requests for modification of a reference originating from
the committees, which ought normally to have been made at the proper
time in the Chamber when the Bureau’s proposals were to be ratified.
Note The committee
considered that “changes to references are nothing more or less
than a way of circumventing Rule 26 of the Rules of Procedure” and
reiterated the need to comply with “the prescribed procedure as
it now exists, according to which it should no longer be possible
to go back on a decision ratified by the Assembly”.
42. With regard to
requests for extension
of references, the Rules Committee reiterated the wording
of Rule 26.4 of the Rules of Procedure (“A reference to committee
shall lapse in two years or, at the request of the committee concerned,
by a decision of the Assembly”), inserted in the Rules of Procedure
in 2000. The committee commented that in practice, this provision
was “not strictly observed since the committees regularly approach
the Bureau for time extensions of references, backed by a variety
of justifications, for example a change of rapporteur, the need
for additional research or extra time to finalise the report”.
Note The committee stated that
“the Assembly saw fit to give the proceedings of committees a time-frame
in order that they reply in reasonable time to the questions put
to them for consideration” and that the practice of extending references decided
upon by the Bureau of the Assembly – with such extensions not being
ratified by the Assembly – was in breach of the existing regulatory
provisions.
43. In conclusion, the committee stated that the practice whereby
the Bureau grants extensions to the references to committees beyond
the two-year time-frame stipulated in the Rules of Procedure, or
reconsiders decisions to refer a motion to a committee, transmit
for information or take no further action, where such decisions
have been duly ratified by the Assembly, is contrary to the Rules
and fails to comply with the requirements of the principle of transparency
of decisions.
44. Similarly, the aforementioned memorandum also raised the question
of the time-frame for consideration of motions before the Presidential
Committee and the Bureau, noting that no time-frame was stipulated
in the Rules of Procedure, with the result that several weeks could
pass without any action being proposed for a particular motion and,
in a few vary rare cases, no action being proposed at all.
4.2 Proposals
of the Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly
45. In his aforementioned memorandum,
the Secretary General of the Assembly stresses that the procedure provided
for in the Rules of Procedure concerning consideration of motions
for a resolution or a recommendation tabled by members of the Assembly
or committees is clear as regards their consideration by the Bureau
of the Assembly, ratification of the Bureau’s decisions in this
regard by the Assembly and the possibility of challenging those
decisions at the time ratification is being debated in plenary.
46. The Bureau must ensure compliance with Rule 26.4 of the Rules
of Procedure on the lapse of references to committees and with Rule
26.3 in the event of requests to modify references already ratified
by the Assembly. Accordingly, the Bureau should:
- place greater emphasis on consulting
committees at an earlier stage;
- undertake to consider proposed references and reach a
decision in a shorter time-frame;
- focus closer attention on the substance of motions, and
their importance in the light of the Assembly’s previous decisions
and the committees’ work programmes.
47. Consequently, the Secretary General of the Assembly invited
the Bureau of the Assembly to establish and respect the following
procedure when considering new motions for a resolution or a recommendation, which
the Bureau took note of at its meeting on 23 November 2017:
1. New motions – following their
tabling and provided they are in order – shall be submitted to the
nearest meeting of the Presidential Committee. The Presidential
Committee shall consider motions and make proposals to the Bureau
of the Assembly on possible follow-up.
2. Proposals of the Presidential Committee shall be subsequently
distributed to committee chairpersons for information in time before
the second Bureau meeting following the Presidential Committee meeting mentioned
in paragraph 1.
3. The Bureau, at its second meeting following the said
Presidential Committee meeting, shall consider and take position
on all motions, and decide on their reference for report, transmission
for information to committees, or that no further action is needed
(in line with Rule 26). The Bureau may also decide to refer a motion
to a committee to be taken into account in the preparation of an
ongoing report.
4. Titles of motions tabled cannot be modified by the
Bureau. However, the Bureau may decide to merge several motions
concerning the same or a similar subject under a new title.
5. The Bureau decisions on references shall be submitted
to the nearest sitting of the Assembly or meeting of the Standing
Committee for ratification.
6. If a decision taken by the Bureau on a motion is successfully
challenged in the Assembly or the Standing Committee, the motion
will be referred back to the Bureau for reconsideration.
7. References – once ratified by the Assembly/Standing
Committee – cannot be subsequently challenged or modified (except
in the case of an additional reference to a committee for opinion).
8. Delays or postponements in consideration of references
by the Presidential Committee or the Bureau shall not be allowed
(a request for a consultation by the committee concerned before
the decision on a reference is taken by the Bureau shall not be
considered as a postponement; the decision of the Bureau, taken
on Monday morning meeting during a part-session, to postpone consideration
of the references initially scheduled on that day to its meeting
of Friday morning the same week, will also not be considered as
a postponement).
9. References shall remain valid for the time provided
for in the Rules of Procedure (Rule 26.4). The Bureau of the Assembly
shall not accept any request for the prolongation of the validity
of references.
10. When considering new motions, the Presidential Committee
and the Bureau shall comply with the following guidelines
a the motion must fall within the
scope of the Council of Europe’s competences;
b the relevance of a motion should be taken into account,
especially when it concerns new issues and challenges or would help
to enhance the political relevance and visibility of the Assembly;
c consideration shall be given to the previous work of the
Assembly in the field concerned;
d the existence of previous motions tabled which are still
under consideration by the committees shall also be taken into account.
4.3 Proposals
by national delegations and political groups in the context of the
Bureau’s Ad hoc Committee on the role and mission of the Parliamentary
Assembly
48. A number of specific proposals
have been made to streamline the Assembly’s work. Among these, it
was suggested that the Rules of Procedure be amended to introduce
a higher threshold (currently only 20 signatures are required) for
the tabling of a motion for a resolution or recommendation. It was
also suggested that the committees be given responsibility for selecting
which motions should result in a report, with the Bureau simply
checking whether they meet the formal criteria.
– Discussion points
49. The committee is invited to examine the procedure for reference
to committees and to approve the proposals of the Secretary General
of the Assembly as guidelines (paragraph 47); the Bureau of the
Assembly should be called to abide by these when considering new
motions for resolutions or recommendations.
5 Reforming
the Assembly’s overall system for monitoring the honouring of obligations
and commitments or the current working methods and internal procedures
of the Monitoring Committee
50. A number of proposals from
national delegations and political groups made as part of the work
of the Bureau’s Ad hoc Committee on the role and mission of the
Parliamentary Assembly focused on the working methods and procedures
relating to the Assembly’s monitoring function. However, the aim
of these proposals was not to amend the Rules of Procedure as such,
but rather they reflected a wish to either reform the Assembly’s
monitoring procedure or at the very least to streamline the Monitoring
Committee’s working methods in this area. The Monitoring Committee
closely examined these proposals and produced a detailed analysis
and conclusions.
Note With regard
to the length of the monitoring procedure, it decided to draw up
clear and uniform criteria for the evaluations and closure of the
monitoring procedure and the post-monitoring dialogue; the rapporteurs
will also be responsible for drawing up, for each country subject
to a full monitoring procedure or engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue,
a clear list of specific issues to be addressed and action to be
taken with a precise timetable in order to move the monitoring procedure
forward. Moreover, in response to criticisms of the lack of equal
treatment between member States, the Monitoring Committee decided
to no longer submit periodic reports on the honouring of obligations
entered into by States, in alphabetical order, but to select the
States subject to such examination on substantive grounds, while
maintaining the objective of conducting periodic examinations of
all member States in due course.
51. Resolution 2261
(2019) made some minor changes to the committee’s terms of
reference in order to reflect the conclusions of the Monitoring
Committee’s deliberations. I do not think that the Committee on
Rules of Procedure has any further points to add at this stage,
apart from the discussions on the number of reports for which an
individual member can be rapporteur (Section 7.2.2).
6 Implementation
of Resolution 2248 (2018) on the procedure for the election of judges to the European
Court of Human Rights
52. In
Resolution 2248 (2018), which seeks to strengthen the framework for the election
of judges and improve the election procedure, the Assembly calls
on the Rules Committee to “
consider those
proposed changes in the election procedure before the Assembly that
would require amendments to the Rules of Procedure and to submit
any such proposals to the Assembly in due course; and to consider
ways and means to guarantee high attendance in the Committee on
the Election of Judges” (paragraph 9.1)
53. Regarding the first point,
Resolution 2248 (2018) proposes the following changes to the procedure:
“8.1. the Chairperson or a representative
of the Advisory Panel shall be invited by the Chairperson of the Committee
on the Election of Judges to explain the reasons for the panel’s
views on candidates, during the briefing sessions scheduled before
each set of interviews;
8.2. a list of candidates shall be rejected when:
8.2.1. not all of the candidates fulfil all the conditions
laid down by Article 21.1;
8.2.2. the national selection procedure did not fulfil
minimum requirements of fairness and transparency;
8.2.3. the Advisory Panel was not duly consulted;
8.3. the Committee on the Election of Judges shall decide
on a proposal to reject a list of candidates by a majority of the
votes cast;
8.4. members of the Committee on the Election of Judges
from the country whose list is under consideration shall not have
the right to vote in the committee, either on a possible rejection
of their country’s list or on the expression of preferences among
candidates.”
54. The Committee on the Election of Judges reiterates that it
may reject a list of candidates only for certain duly specified
reasons and that, as long as the national procedure fulfils the
Assembly’s requirements and the three candidates are in principle
eligible, the Assembly has no choice but to carry out the election.
The Resolution now states the principle that one of the grounds
stipulated should systematically lead the committee to recommend
that the Assembly reject the list and that the majority required
for the committee to adopt a recommendation to reject should also
be reduced to a majority of the votes cast and no longer require
two thirds of the votes cast (with the exception of a decision to
take into consideration single-sex lists).
55. The Rules Committee therefore has the simple task of incorporating
into the complementary texts the Assembly’s decision to amend the
Assembly election procedure set out in
Resolution 2248 (2018), while preserving its clarity and consistency and ensuring
that it is in full compliance with the provisions of the Rules of
Procedure.
56. Accordingly, paragraph 4.1 of the terms of reference of the
Committee on the Election of Judges could be amended as follows:
“The committee shall vote by a
majority of the votes cast. A decision to consider a single-sex
list of candidates in exceptional circumstances shall
require a two-thirds majority of the votes cast. The committee shall
vote on candidates by secret ballot. Only members who have attended
in full the interview procedure for a post of judge may vote. Members of the committee from the country
whose list is under consideration shall not have the right to vote,
either on the possible rejection of their country’s list or on the
expression of preferences among candidates. For any other
decision, voting shall take place by a show of hands. However, voting
may be by secret ballot if requested by at least one third of the
members present. The chairperson shall be entitled to vote.”
57. It is also proposed to amend the additional provisions on
candidates for Judges to the European Court of Human Rights by amending
Resolution 1366 (2004), modified, as follows:
- replace paragraph 3 by the following:
“The Assembly decides not to consider lists of candidates
where:
i. the areas of competence of the candidates appear to
be unduly restricted;
ii. not all of the candidates
fulfil each of the conditions laid down by Article 21, paragraph 1,
of the European Convention on Human Rights;NoteNote
iii. one of the
candidates does not appear to have an active knowledge of one of
the official languages of the Council of Europe and a passive knowledge
of the other;
iv. the national selection
procedure did not satisfy the minimum requirements of fairness and
transparency;
v. the Advisory Panel was
not duly consulted.Note
In such cases, the Committee
on the Election of Judges shall decide on a proposal to reject a
list of candidates by a majority of the votes cast. This proposal
shall be endorsed by the Assembly in the Progress Report of the
Bureau of the Assembly and the Standing Committee. The Assembly's
endorsement of the proposal to reject a list entails its definitive
rejection; the State concerned is invited to submit a new list.
Rejection by the Assembly of the committee’s proposal to reject
a list shall entail the referral of the list back to the committee.”;
- amend paragraph 4 as follows:
“Moreover, the
Assembly decides to consider single-sex lists of candidates when
the candidates belong to the sex which is under-represented in the
Court (i.e. the sex to which under 40% of the total number of judges
belong), or in exceptional circumstances where a Contracting Party
has taken all the necessary and appropriate steps to ensure that
the list contains candidates of both sexes meeting the requirements
of paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the European Convention on Human
Rights.
Such exceptional circumstances must be duly so considered
by a two-thirds majority of the votes cast by members of the Committee
on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights. If the required majority has not been achieved,
the committee shall recommend that the Assembly reject the list
concerned. This position shall be endorsed by the Assembly in
the Progress Report of the Bureau of the Assembly and the Standing
Committee.”;
- add after paragraph 5 the following new paragraph:
“The Chairperson or a representative
of the Advisory Panel shall be invited by the Chairperson of the
Committee on the Election of Judges to explain the reasons for the
panel’s views on candidates, during the briefing sessions scheduled
before each set of interviews.”.
58. In addition, the Committee on the Election of Judges asked
the Rules Committee to examine the possibility of “modifying the
rules governing the functioning of the committee in such a way that
incentives are created for more regular attendance of members”,
including by considering possible sanctions against political groups
whose members do not attend committee meetings on a regular basis
as well as against the members themselves.
59. This issue of member participation is of general interest
to all Assembly committees, but it is undoubtedly more pressing
for the three committees whose members are appointed by the political
groups, particularly in view of the fact that two of them do not
have substitutes. However, the participation statistics for recent
years do not show any significant differences between the committees
made up of national delegations and those appointed by the political
groups.
Note In
line with the view of the rapporteur of the Committee on the Election
of Judges, I note that it is the responsibility of the political
groups to draw the appropriate conclusions from the statistics on
individual participation – which are forwarded to them each year
– and to take the necessary steps to replace, in the committees
concerned, any members they have appointed who have a poor attendance record.
I also consider that sanctions would not be an appropriate solution.
If the political groups took robust measures in this regard, such
as replacing members after a certain number of absences (three consecutive
or five non-consecutive absences for example), this would undoubtedly
have an immediate effect on the participation rate in the three
committees concerned.
7 Proposed amendments to the Rules of
Procedure arising from discussions in the Ad hoc Committee of the
Bureau on the role and mission of the Parliamentary Assembly
7.1 Stepping up the dialogue with the
Committee of Ministers
60. Several proposals have been
made by national delegations and political groups within the framework
of the Bureau’s Ad hoc Committee on the role and mission of the
Parliamentary Assembly as regards improving the political dialogue
between the Assembly and the Committee of Ministers, and ensuring
greater respect for the Assembly’s work by the Committee of Ministers.
Drawing conclusions from the exercise, the Bureau “decided to continue
its dialogue with the Committee of Ministers, as appropriate, on
all proposals aimed at enhancing the Assembly role vis-à-vis the
Committee of Ministers or improving the dialogue between the two statutory
organs.”
61. I nevertheless note that some proposals, which do not fall
within the scope of political relations between the two organs,
Note have
already been studied by the Committee on Rules of Procedure in the
past – in particular improving the content of the Committee of Ministers'
replies to the Assembly's recommendations in order to make these
replies more substantial – and that others could be considered in
the context of this report, in particular:
- increase in the time allocated to the questions and answers
exercise with the Chair of the Committee of Ministers, following
his or her introductory speech when presenting his or her communication
at each Assembly part-session;
- the possibility of inviting the Secretary General and/or
the Chair of the Committee of Ministers to report and answer questions
on a specific theme or on the follow-up given by the Committee of
Ministers to the Assembly's recommendations;
- better preparation of the dialogue with the Secretary
General of the Council of Europe during the Assembly's part-sessions,
in particular the questions and answers exercise (on the basis of
written questions).
62. Some of these proposals could lead to changes in the relevant
regulatory provisions therefore (see below).
7.2 Streamlining the Assembly’s work
63. Other proposals have been made,
again within the framework of the Bureau’s ad hoc committee, with
a view to streamlining the work of the Assembly.
7.2.1 Organisation of debates
–
Speaking time during sittings
64. The fact is that the speaking time allotted to speakers, which
is currently four minutes, is systematically reduced, in practice,
to three minutes for the vast majority of debates, with Friday morning
debates being the exception. It is therefore proposed that the provisions
on the organisation of debates be amended to set the speaking time
for speakers at three minutes (Rule 53.4 and paragraph 1 of the
additional provisions relating to Assembly debates – speaking time).
The speaking time allotted to the chairpersons of committees submitting a
report, which is currently limited to two minutes, could also be
brought into line with this. It goes without saying that, in practice,
the Bureau of the Assembly enjoys a degree of flexibility and may
propose that the Assembly increase the speaking time during sittings
to four minutes for certain debates (Friday morning or even Thursday afternoon
sittings).
– Provisions relating to requests
for an urgent or current affairs debate
65. Some proposals made within the framework of the Bureau’s ad
hoc committee seek to restrict the thematic and geographical scope
of requests for urgent or current affairs debates and to limit them
to matters within the competence of the Council of Europe.
66. In my view, there is no need to formally amend Rule 51.1 on
urgent procedure in the Assembly, Rule 52.1 on urgent procedure
in the Standing Committee or Rule 53.2 on current affairs debates,
in order to include specific criteria as to the admissibility of
such requests. I note that in 2007 the Bureau approved “criteria for
selection of requests for debate under urgent procedure” (document
AS/Bur (2007) 73), which would no doubt need to be updated.
– Communication from the Chair
of the Committee of Ministers and the Secretary General of the Council
of Europe
67. Question and answer sessions with the Chair of the Committee
of Ministers when presenting his or her communication at each part-session
of the Assembly or with the Secretary General of the Council of
Europe attract undoubtedly members’ interest, who are not afraid
to express their frustration when, because of the limited amount
of time available, the guest speakers concerned are able to answer
only a small number of questions.
68. The committee could explore the proposal to increase the total
amount of time allocated to this exercise (and increase it to one
and a half hours instead of one hour for the Chair of the Committee
of Ministers), along with the proposal to limit the time allocated
to the introductory speech in order to allow more time for questions and
answers.
69. The possibility of organising question time with the Secretary
General of the Council of Europe during part-sessions around written
questions requires the prior agreement of the Secretary General.
70. In order to follow up these proposals, the guidelines for
questions to guest speakers should be amended:
- by supplementing Chapter A on
“Questions to the Chairperson-in-office of the Committee of Ministers” by
adding a paragraph 1 worded as follows:
“In order to enable members of the Assembly to put their
questions to the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers and to
hear the replies, the presentation of the report on the activities
of the Committee of Ministers may not exceed one third of the total
time allotted for the communication from the Committee of Ministers.”
- by supplementing Chapter B on “Questions to other guest
speakers” by adding a paragraph 7 worded as follows:
“Representatives and substitutes
may put written questions to the Secretary General of the Council
of Europe for oral reply. They must enter their names on the appropriate
register and submit the text of the question at least one week before
the opening of the part-session. Written questions on the same or
related subjects may receive a joint answer. This exercise requires
the approval of the Secretary General.”
– Free debate
71. Increasing the amount of time devoted to the free debate was
mentioned by one delegation in the course of the ad hoc committee’s
work. Rule 39 of the Rules of Procedure stipulates that the Assembly
may hold only one free debate during a part-session and limits the
duration of the free debate to one hour. I have observed from experience
that many of those who are down to speak do not actually get the
opportunity to take the floor. In view of the numerous debates which
appear on the agenda of any part-session, and which themselves often attract
large numbers of speakers, it is not easy for the Bureau of the
Assembly to satisfy everyone. In practice, when there has been room
on the agenda, the free debate has been allowed to continue for
an hour and a half or even spread over two sittings, with the Friday
morning sitting being used to hear the remaining speakers on the
list.
72. I therefore propose that the existing regulatory framework
not be amended and that the Bureau of the Assembly be given the
necessary leeway when adopting the draft agenda for Assembly part-sessions.
7.2.2 Multiple rapporteurships held by the
same parliamentarian
73. The question of whether parliamentarians
should be allowed to take on more than one role of rapporteur in
the committees of which they are members has been raised on several
occasions in the past. It was mentioned again in the Bureau’s ad
hoc committee discussions, with several delegations wishing to encourage greater
diversity in terms of rapporteurs and the involvement of a greater
number of parliamentarians in the drafting of reports. The following
proposals were made:
- limit
the number of reports assigned to the same member of the Assembly,
- no member should be responsible for more than one report
at a time, even if he or she is a member of several committees;
- the rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee should not
be rapporteurs on other subjects at the same time;
- the rapporteurs must have been members of the committee
for at least one year.
74. In
Resolution 2002
(2014) on the evaluation of the implementation of the reform
of the Parliamentary Assembly, based on a committee report, the
Assembly decided to limit to five the number of reports or opinions for
which the same parliamentarian may be responsible at any one time
(Rule 50.1 of the Rules of Procedure). At the time, the committee's
rapporteur had proposed limiting to three the number of reports
or opinions for which the same parliamentarian could be responsible,
for all committees combined. Fresh consideration could be given
to this proposal.
75. The committee could therefore propose that the total number
of reports for which the same parliamentarian may be simultaneously
responsible, for all committees combined, be limited to three reports
or opinions, including a maximum of two reports or opinions per
committee – with the exception of the Monitoring Committee, where
a member may be rapporteur for one report only. The mandate of general
rapporteur should count towards this limit.
76. It is proposed that Rule 50.1 of the Rules of Procedure be
amended accordingly, by amending the fourth sentence as follows:
“A rapporteur must have been a member
of the committee for at least one year. A member of the
Assembly who is simultaneously rapporteur for three reports or opinions under
preparation, including a mandate as
general rapporteur, on behalf of one or more committees,
may not be appointed rapporteur. He
or she may not be rapporteur for more than two reports or opinions
per committee. A member of the Monitoring Committee may be rapporteur
for only one report or opinion of this committee (footnote:
Reports or opinions under preparation are those which have still
not been debated by the Assembly or the Standing Committee)”.
8 Various changes necessitated by parliamentary
practice
8.1 Election of the bureaux of committees
77. Under Rule 46 of the Rules
of Procedure on bureaux of committees, when committees hold their
first annual meeting, that meeting is chaired by the oldest member
present “until the chairperson of the committee is elected”. The
candidates for the office of chairperson or vice-chairperson of
a committee “must belong to the political group to which the Chair
or a Vice-Chair has been allocated on the basis of an agreement
reached among the political groups within the Presidential Committee”.
78. In January 2018, however, the failure of the political groups
to agree and to nominate candidates in some committees paralysed
the work of those committees, which were unable to discuss the business
at hand as, under the Rules of Procedure, until the chairperson
of the committee is elected, no subject other than the election
of the chairperson may be considered.
79. The Rules of Procedure should therefore be amended to stipulate
that, in the absence of agreement between the political groups or
if no nominations are sent to the committee secretariats in good
time before the first meeting of the committee, a committee may
continue its work with the oldest member acting as Chair and proceed
to the election of its vice-chairpersons.
80. Rule 46.2 should be amended as follows therefore:
“46.2. Until the chairperson of
the committee is elected or in the absence of agreement among the political
groups or of nominations for the office of Chair until the vice-chairpersons
are elected, the meeting shall be chaired by the oldest member present,
under whose chairpersonship no subject other than the election of
the bureau of the committee may be considered”
8.2 Non-delivered speeches
81. As the processing and publication
of records of sittings are set to evolve in the course of the year,
it is now vital to amend the additional provisions relating to Assembly
debates, on the organisation of debates, with regard to non-delivered
speeches, which will in future have to be submitted to the Table
Office in electronic format. Likewise, if the Assembly decides to
reduce the speaking time to three minutes, the length of undelivered
speeches will need to be reduced proportionally. Paragraph 3 of
the relevant complementary text should therefore stipulate that
non-delivered speeches must be “submitted
in electronic format and be no longer than 400 words”.
8.3 Title in French for the Presidential
Committee
82. In the French version of the
Rules of Procedure, the title “Comité des présidents” should be
changed to “Comité présidentiel”, notably in Rules 14, 20.1 and
46.3. As well as being closer to the English version, this title
is arguably also less sexist.
9 Conclusion
83. At its meeting on 18 March
2019, the Rules Committee examined the proposals for amendments
that might be made to the Rules of Procedure, as recommended herein,
and decided,
inter alia, to:
- amend Rule 19 of the Rules of
Procedure in order to complete the conditions
for the formation of political groups – in particular
as regards the minimum number of members and delegations required
to form a group, the prerequisite documents, and the need to be
part of a common political identity – and to establish
the conditions for the disappearance of a political group;
in addition, the committee specified the consequences of the disappearance
or dissolution of a political group on its members;
- amend Rule 20.3 to supplement the conditions for the immediate past President of the Assembly to
be an ex officio member of
the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy, the Monitoring
Committee and the Committee on Rules of Procedure;
- amend the terms of reference of the Committee
on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights and
the procedure specified in the additional provisions on candidates
for the European Court of Human Rights, in order to incorporate
the changes decided by the Assembly in Resolution 2248 (2018);
- amend Rule 46.2 of the election
of bureaux of committees, in order to allow committees
to continue their work at their first meeting during the January
part-session, in the absence of a Chair;
- amend Rule 50.1 in order to reinforce the provisions for preventing multiple rapporteurships;
- modify the additional provisions relating to Assembly
debates as regards the speaking time
in the plenary sittings;
- amend the guidelines for questions to guest speakers,
in order to stimulate the exercise of the questions/answers to the
Chair of the Committee of Ministers and the Secretary General of
the Council of Europe.
84. With regard to improving the procedure
for considering motions for resolutions and recommendations submitted
by members of the Assembly or committees, the Bureau of the Assembly
is invited to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Rules
of Procedure relating to the lapse of references to committees and to
approve and implement the procedural guidelines prepared by the
Secretary General of the Assembly, set out in his memorandum of
20 November 2017, when considering new motions for resolutions or recommendations.
85. The Bureau of the Assembly is also invited to set criteria
for the admissibility and selection of requests for
debate under urgent procedure and current affairs debates,
by updating the criteria it had approved in 2007.
86. Lastly, with regard to the implementation of the amendments
to be made to the Rules of Procedure, the draft resolution proposes
that these amendments enter into force upon their adoption. However,
transitional measures are needed in order to give additional time
to the political groups concerned by the new conditions stipulated
in Rule 19.2, and to the rapporteurs, who will have to comply with
the new provisions of Rule 50.1.
