B Explanatory memorandum by Ms Maria
Jufereva-Skuratovski, rapporteur for opinion
1 Introduction
1. At the opening of the Assembly’s
part-session, on 24 January 2022, Mr Emanuelis Zingeris (Lithuania, EPP/CD),
supported by the required number of members of the Assembly, challenged
the still unratified credentials of the parliamentary delegation
of the Russian Federation on substantive grounds, pursuant to Rule 8
of the Rules of Procedure. The reasons for which the credentials
were challenged relate to violations of the basic principles of
the Council of Europe as set out in Article 3 and the preamble to
its Statute.
2. The Assembly decided to refer the challenge to the Monitoring
Committee for report and, in keeping with Rule 8.3 of the Rules
of Procedure, to the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities
and Institutional Affairs for opinion.
3. On 25 January 2021, the Monitoring Committee adopted a report
and a draft resolution which:
- proposes
to ratify the credentials of the members of the Russian delegation;
- calls on the Russian authorities to fulfil the recommendations
included in Resolution
1633 (2008), Resolution
1647 (2009), Resolution
1683 (2009), Resolution
1990 (2014), Resolution
2034 (2015), Resolution
2063 (2015), Resolution
2132 (2016), Resolution
2292 (2019), Resolution
2320 (2020), and Resolution
2363 (2021) and in particular to:
- address
concerns with regard to repealing the 2012 law on foreign agents
as amended, and the 2015 law on undesirable organisations as amended
and revising the law on extremism in order to put it in compliance
with Council of Europe standards;
- abstain from adopting new laws putting further restrictions
on civil society, human rights defenders and journalists;
- refrain from acts leading to violations of fundamental
rights and freedoms, in particular freedom of association, freedom
of assembly and freedom of expression;
- co-operate with all Assembly committees and facilitate
the activity of the Assembly's monitoring and information missions;
- incorporate the judgments of the European Court of Human
Rights into the Russian legal system and implement them.
- implement without delay all Committee of Ministers` decisions
regarding the execution of judgements of the European Court of Human
Rights and the multiple recommendations of the European Committee
for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment (CPT);
- fully implement the Resolution
2375 (2021) «Arrest and detention of Alexei Navalny in January 2021»,
Resolution ... (2022) «Poisoning of Mr Alexei Navalny» and Resolution 2297 (2019) «Shedding light on the murder of Boris Nemtsov».
- expects that by ratifying the credentials of the Russian
delegation, this should be reciprocated by a meaningful dialogue,
leading to concrete results. It invites the Monitoring Committee
to continue the dialogue with the authorities of the Russian Federation
and to submit its report on the honouring of obligations and commitments
by the Russian Federation at its earliest convenience and not later
than before the end of 2022.
4. The Committee on Rules of Procedure is asked therefore to
consider the compatibility of the proposed decision with the Rules
of Procedure, in particular Rule 8 as well as with the Statute of
the Council of Europe.
2 On the compatibility
of the proposed decision with the Assembly's Rules of Procedure
2.1 Compliance of
the motion to challenge the credentials with formal requirements
5. The committee points out that
a motion to challenge the credentials of a delegation must comply
with certain formal conditions in order to be admissible. Rule 8.1
provides that “[t]he unratified credentials
of a national delegation as a whole may be challenged on the substantial
grounds set out in paragraph 2 by: at least thirty members of the
Assembly present in the Chamber, belonging to at least five national
delegations”, and that “[t]he
authors shall state the reasons for the challenge”.
6. The committee notes that the challenge was supported by more
than 5 national delegations. No irregularities were observed. It
could therefore be concluded that the request had gathered the support
of members, as required by the Rules.
2.2 Analysis of the
substantial grounds in the light of the scope of Rule 8 of the Rules
of Procedure
7. Rule 8.2 provides that:
“The
substantive grounds on which credentials may be challenged are:
a. serious violation of the basic principles of the Council
of Europe mentioned in Article 3 and the Preamble to, the Statute;
or
b. persistent failure to honour
obligations and commitments and lack of co-operation in the Assembly’s monitoring
procedure.”
8. In its previous opinions the Committee on Rules of Procedure
stressed that any challenge of credentials should be based on a
duly substantiated request. The challenge of the credentials of
the Russian delegation relates to, inter
alia: the non implementation of Assembly resolutions;
the systematic suppression of the political opposition in Russia,
in particular the arrest and ongoing detention of Mr Navalny; the
deterioration of the situation in the Russian Federation with regard
to the rule of law and democracy, the respect for basic freedoms and
human rights, in particular freedom of expression, assembly and
association (the closure of the internationally recognised Memorial
Human Rights Center).
9. The reasons given to challenge the credentials constitute prima facie legitimate grounds able
to fall under the scope of Rule 8.
10. The rapporteur notes that the Monitoring Committee's report
includes a detailed description of the facts leading the rapporteur
and the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Monitoring
Committee) to propose the ratification of the Russian delegation
credentials.
11. However, it is not the role of the Committee on Rules of Procedure
to enter into substantive considerations, the analysis of the substantial
grounds being under the scrutiny of the Monitoring Committee according
to its terms of reference.
12. At the same time, the rapporteur considers it important to
note the Opinion No. 955/2019 of the European Commission for Democracy
through Law (Venice Commission) which stated that, “the Parliamentary Assembly
as an organ of the Council of Europe is therefore bound not to recognise
implicitly an annexation. The discharge of this obligation may include inter alia the verification of the
credentials of the delegation of the annexing State. When verifying
the credentials of MPs who have been elected in elections in a nationwide constituency
which covers a territory that may not be recognised as forming part
of the organising State, the impact of the inclusion of the annexed
territory on the final results of the election should be examined”.
Given that this issue has already been raised several times in the
Assembly, the rapporteur proposes to discuss the possibility of
developing, within the Rules of Procedure, appropriate ways to address
such situations.
