At its meeting on 26 January, the Bureau appointed me as rapporteur for this report, which covers its activities over the period from the last Bureau meeting of the first part-session of 2018 (Friday 26 January) until 21 April 2018.
The following chapters include the decisions taken at the Bureau meetings of 26 January in Strasbourg and 15 March in Paris. Chapter 2 presents a list of decisions, which have either already been ratified by the Standing Committee on 16 March or which do not require ratification.
An addendum to this report will be issued after the Bureau meetings of 22 and 23 April, which will also include decisions to be ratified the same day. Another addendum will be issued after the Bureau meeting of 27 April. It will include only the decisions to be ratified by the Assembly the same day, notably the references and transmissions which will have been approved by the Bureau.
The Bureau will hold its next meetings in Strasbourg on Friday 27 April, then on 31 May in Zagreb. The next meeting of the Standing Committee will also be held in Zagreb, on 1 June.
On 26 January, the Bureau held an exchange of views on the first-part session.
On 26 January and 15 March, the Bureau took note of the draft agenda.
On 26 January and 15 March, the Bureau drew up the draft agenda.
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the request tabled by Mr Akif Çaǧatay Kiliç (Turkey, EC) and 25 members of the Assembly for the Assembly to hold a debate under urgent procedure on Rising anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and xenophobia in Europe: a threat to European values.
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the communications by the President of the Assembly and by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe.
On 26 January, the Bureau decided to hold an additional meeting on Sunday 22 April 2018 to have an exchange of views with the three members of the independent investigation body on its final report.
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the information provided by the Secretary General of the Assembly on the preparation of the 22 April meeting and decided:
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the report of the meeting.
On 15 March, the Bureau:
On 15 March, the Bureau:
On 26 January, the Bureau approved the list of members of the Ad hoc Committee to observe this election (subject to receiving their declarations on conflict of interest) and appointed Mr Jonas Gunnarsson (Sweden, SOC) as Chairperson of the Ad hoc Committee. On 15 March, the Bureau approved the revised list of members of the Ad hoc Committee to observe this election (Appendix 2).
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the document.
On 26 January, the Bureau held an exchange of views on the memorandum prepared by the Secretary General of the Assembly and approved the proposals contained therein (Appendix 3).
On 15 March, the Bureau:
On 15 March, the Bureau:
On 15 March, the Bureau considered and approved the following references and transmissions to committees, which were subsequently ratified by the Standing Committee on 16 March:
Doc. 14474, motion for a resolution, Greek islands: more needs to be done: reference to the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons for report;
Doc. 14476, motion for a resolution, Strengthening parliamentary dialogue with Algeria: reference to the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy for report;
Doc. 14477, motion for a resolution, Jewish cultural heritage preservation: reference to the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media for report;
Doc. 14478, motion for a resolution, Concerted action on human trafficking: reference to the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons for report and to the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination for opinion;
Doc. 14479, motion for a resolution, Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination and the rule of law, in Malta and beyond: ensuring that the whole truth emerges: reference to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights for report;
Doc. 14480, motion for a resolution, Stepping up co-operation between European initiatives for better child protection against sexual violence: reference to the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development for report;
Doc. 14482, motion for a resolution, European weapons and funds for Daesh: reference to the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy for information;
Doc. 14483, motion for a resolution, Improving the protection of whistleblowers all over Europe: reference to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights for report;
Doc. 14485, motion for a resolution, So-called “tax optimisation” and policy, two incompatible concepts: reference to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights for information;
Doc. 14262, motion for a resolution, Russian racial discrimination of Crimean Tatars in Crimea: reference to the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination for report.
On 15 March, the Bureau considered and approved the following modification of references, which were subsequently ratified by the Standing Committee on 16 March:
Doc. 14380, motion for a resolution, Defining guidelines for international NGOs (Ref. 4331 of 13 October 2017) reference to the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons for report and to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights for opinion;
Doc. 13812, motion for a resolution, Libya's future between the threats of terrorism and a democratic prospect (Ref. 4140 of 26 June 2015) reference to the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy for report and to the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons for opinion;
On 26 January, the Bureau considered and approved the following extensions of references:
Doc. 13979, motion for a resolution, Detention of Palestinian minors in Israeli prisons (Ref. 4200 of 22 April 2016 – validity: 22 April 2018): extension until 31 December 2018;
Doc. 14033, motion for a resolution, A potential threat to European countries imposed by the nuclear power plant in Belarus (Ref. 4225 of 24 June 2016 – validity: 24 June 2018): extension until 31 December 2018;
Doc. 12866, motion for a resolution, The political transition in Egypt (Ref. 3857 of 23 April 2012 – validity: 30 April 2018): extension until 30 June 2018;
Doc. 13812, motion for a resolution, Libya's future between the threats of terrorism and a democratic prospect (Ref. 4140 of 26 June 2015 – validity: 31 January 2018): extension until 15 March 2018;
Doc. 14000, motion for a resolution, Protecting human rights defenders in Council of Europe member States (Ref. 4202 of 22 April 2016 – validity: 22 April 2018): extension until 30 September 2018.
On 15 March, the Bureau considered and approved the following extension of a reference:
Doc. 13972, motion for a resolution, Education and culture: new partnerships to support personal development and cohesion (Ref. 4194 of 22 April 2016 – validity: 22 April 2018): extension until 22 April 2019
The Ad hoc Committee of the Bureau, meeting on Friday 16 March 2018 in Paris, heard a statement by the Chairperson and held an exchange of views on the replies received to the President’s letter dated 24 January 2018.
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the information memorandum prepared by the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs, and decided to invite the President of the Assembly to notify in writing the chairpersons of the delegations and the speakers of the parliaments concerned by low participation rates (Rule 44.10 of the Rules of Procedure and paragraph 7.2 of Resolution 1583 (2007) – the President of the Assembly is invited “to examine, with the speakers and political groups of the parliaments concerned, the possible consequences if the average level of participation of national delegations in Assembly sittings falls below 50% of their nominal strength”) or to arrange a meeting with the chairpersons of the relevant delegations. The Bureau also decided to make publicly available the statistics related to the participation of national delegations on the Assembly’s website.
On 15 March, the Bureau on the basis of proposals by the EC Group, nominated Mr Yıldırım Tuğrul Türkeş, Turkey.
On 15 March, the Bureau:
On 26 January, the Bureau considered the requests for fact-finding visits submitted by rapporteurs, invited the Secretary General of the Assembly to explore the possibility of having their costs covered by the respective Parliaments, and decided to authorise them, provided that the rapporteurs’ travel and accommodation costs are covered by their respective national parliaments; or, should this not be the case, subject to availability of financial resources of the Assembly.
On 26 January, the Bureau authorised:
On 26 January, the Bureau authorised the fact-finding visit to Morocco by Mr Bogdan Klich (Poland, EPP/CD), Rapporteur on “The evaluation of the partnership for democracy in respect of the Parliament of Morocco”, to be conducted in 2018 in the framework of the preparation of his report.
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the Committee’s decision to merge two references (Reference 4346 and Reference 4347 of 24/11/2017) into a single report currently under preparation (Reference 4316 of 9/10/2017) under the new title “Modification of various provisions of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure”.
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the letter and the draft statement concerning the draft Declaration on the European Human Rights system in the future Europe, as adopted by the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights at its meeting on 14 March 2018.
On 26 January, the Bureau approved the recommendation of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights to invite the delegation of Spain to submit a new list of candidates to the CPT.
On 26 January, the Bureau approved the appointments and asked the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights to come back to the Bureau with a revised proposal concerning the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) to ensure a more balanced political representation. On 15 March, the Bureau approved the appointments of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights concerning the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) and of the Monitoring Committee for the Council on Democratic Elections of the Venice Commission, as set out in Appendix 4.
On 26 January, the Bureau took note of the launch of the 2018 edition of the Prize.
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the information provided and, in view of problems in sending out invitation letters to Presidents of Parliaments of all 47 member States of the Council of Europe, unanimously agreed to propose that a new nominative invitation letter be signed by both the Speaker of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey and the President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe to be sent by the Parliamentary Assembly to each President of Parliament of the 47 member States of the Council of Europe and that this procedure will also be followed for future Conferences of Presidents of Parliament.
On 26 January, the Bureau authorised:
On 15 March, the Bureau authorised the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media to meet in Tbilissi on 25 September 2018.
The Standing Committee:
On 15 March, the Bureau took note of the letter from one of the Turkish Cypriot political parties (the Republican Turkish Party) informing the President of the Assembly of the name of one of the "elected representatives of the Turkish Cypriot community" entitled to sit in the Assembly in 2018, namely Mr Armağan Candan.
The Assembly is invited to ratify this Bureau decision.
Chairperson: Mr Viorel Riceard BADEA, Romania (EPP/CD)
Group of the European People’s Party (EPP/CD)
Substitute
Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group (SOC)
Substitutes
European Conservatives Group (EC)
Substitute
Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE)
Substitute
Group of the Unified European Left (UEL)
Free Democrats Group (FDG)
Rapporteur of Monitoring Committee
Venice Commission
Secretariat
Chairperson: Mr Jonas GUNNARSSON (SOC, Sweden)
Group of the European People’s Party (EPP/CD)
Substitutes
Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group (SOC)
Substitutes
European Conservatives Group (EC)
Substitutes
Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE)
Substitutes
Group of the Unified European Left (UEL)
Substitutes
Free Democrats Group (FDG)
Substitutes
Co-rapporteurs AS/MON (ex officio)
Secretariat
|
Interpretation into one of the working languages during committee meetings will need to be confirmed 21 calendar days before the meeting. Expected savings: € 40 000 (5% of the expenses for 2017) |
|
The length of committee documents will be limited, in particular explanatory memoranda and information documents. Minutes of committee meetings will in principle be limited to five pages. Expected savings: € 40 000 |
|
Whenever possible, committees are invited to hold fewer meetings in 2018. Expected savings: € 45 000 (3 meetings in Paris less) + € 250 000 (if only English/French interpretation for meetings outside Strasbourg/Paris) |
|
For committee meetings outside Strasbourg, participants will be asked to bring their own files. Expected savings: € 15 000 |
|
Fact-finding visits by rapporteurs will in principle be limited to one per report, two in the case of the Monitoring Committee. Expected savings: € 15 000 |
|
Co-operation activities of the Assembly are to be reduced. Expected savings: € 145 000 |
|
Body |
who represents the Assembly |
reference |
2018 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
I. Council of Europe bodies |
|||
|
European Commission for Democracy through Law Venice Commission |
Representatives of the Assembly appointed by the Bureau to attend the sessions of the Commission |
Article 2.4 of the Venice Commission Statute (Res CM (2002) 3) |
Members: Ms Kyriakides, EPP/CD appointment by the President Mr Vlasenko – EPP/CD (AS/Jur) Substitute: Mme Rojhan Gustafsson – SOC (AS/Jur) |
|
Council on Democratic Elections of the Venice Commission |
Representatives of AS/Pol, AS/Jur and AS/Mon approved by the Bureau of the Assembly |
Bureau decision of 10 March 2003 |
Members: Lord Balfe – EC (AS/Jur) Mr Cozmanziuc – EPP/CD (AS/Pol) Mr Kox – UEL (AS/Mon) Substitutes: Ms Beselia – SOC (AS/Jur) Mr Xuclà – ALDE (AS/Pol) |
|
European Centre for Global Interdependence and Solidarity North-South Centre |
Two members of the Executive Council – appointed by the Bureau of the Assembly |
Article 4.2 (b) of the North-South Centre revised Statute (Res CM (2011) 6) |
Members: Ms Günay – EC (AS/Soc) Mr Leite Ramos – EPP/CD (AS/Cult) Substitutes: Mr Gonçalves – EPP/CD (AS/Cult) Mr Schennach – SOC (AS/Soc) |
|
European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance ECRI |
Representatives of the Assembly appointed by the Bureau (representatives of the following three committees: AS/Pol, AS/Ega and AS/Cult) |
Article 5 of the ECRI Statute (Res CM (2002) 8) |
Members: Mr Sorre – NR (AS/Cult) Mr Corlăţean – SOC (AS/Pol) Mr Thiéry – ALDE (AS/Ega) Substitute: Mr Davies – EC (AS/Ega) |
|
Group of States against Corruption GRECO |
A representative of the Assembly appointed by the Bureau |
CM decision of 717th meeting in 2000 in accordance with Article 7.2 of the Statute of the GRECO |
Member: Mr Logvynskyi- EPP/CD (AS/Jur) Substitute: Ms Sotnyk – ALDE (AS/Jur) |
|
Committee for Works of Art |
Two members appointed by the Bureau of the Assembly (at present AS/Cult Committee member and Museum Prize rapporteur) |
CM decision of 482nd meeting in 1992 |
Members: Lady Eccles – EC (AS/Cult) Ms Gambaro – FDG (AS/Cult) |
|
MONEYVAL |
A representative of the Assembly appointed by the Bureau |
Article 4.1 of Resolution CM/Res (2010) 12 |
Member: Mr Corlăţean – SOC (AS/Jur) Substitute: Mr van de Ven – ALDE (AS/Jur) |
|
Council of Europe Convention on Offences relating to Cultural Property |
A representative of the Assembly appointed by the Bureau |
STCE n°221 CM(2017)32, Chapter V, Article 23.1 |
Mr Schennach – SOC (AS/Cult) |
|
II.Other |
|||
|
EUROPA NOSTRA Pan-European Federation for Heritage |
One member (and substitute) to be nominated by the Assembly – to attend the Federation Council meetings as observer |
Article 21.4 of the Statute of Europa Nostra |
Mr Gryffroy – NR (AS/Cult) |
The visionary statesmen who rebuilt Europe from the ruins of the Second World War understood the importance of making states share responsibility for human rights. The system they designed, that of the European Convention on Human Rights, ensures that all States Parties protect the uniformly defined rights of everyone within their jurisdictions, with harmonised national protection mechanisms and a common European control mechanism. The effectiveness of the overall system depends on the proper functioning of each of its constituent elements. This in turn depends primarily on the attitude and conduct of the States Parties.
On 12-13 April 2018, in Copenhagen, the Danish chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers will hold a High Level Conference on the European Human Rights system in the future Europe. A first draft declaration was issued on 5 February 2018. Whilst this draft contains welcome expressions of commitment to the Convention system, its negative tenor risks undermining human rights protection in Europe. As detailed in the attached comments, the draft declaration puts into question:
The Committee of Ministers should continue to focus on the main challenges to the Convention system, namely the Court’s case-load and its principal cause, which is inadequate national implementation of the Convention in many States.Note
The visionary statesmen who rebuilt Europe from the ruins of the Second World War understood the importance of making states share responsibility for human rights.Note The system they designed, that of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention), ensures that all States Parties protect the uniformly defined rights of everyone within their jurisdictions, with harmonised national protection mechanisms and a common European control mechanism. These essential goals are achieved through a primary obligation on States Parties to respect the rights of everyone within their jurisdiction (article 1) and provide remedies for violations (article 13); under the supervision of an independent European Court of Human Rights (the Court) (article 19), competent in all matters of interpretation and application of the Convention (article 32), adjudicating on cases brought by states (article 33) or individuals claiming to be victims (article 34) on a subsidiary basis, following exhaustion of domestic remedies (article 35); with the States Parties bound to implement the judgments of the Court, under the collective supervision of the Committee of Ministers (article 46). The effectiveness of the overall system depends on the proper functioning of each of these constituent elements, which in turn depends primarily on the attitude and conduct of the States Parties, whose joint creation this system was and to whose overall advantage it operates.
On 12-13 April 2018, in Copenhagen, the Danish chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers will hold a High Level Conference on the European Human Rights system in the future Europe. A first draft declaration was issued on 5 February 2018. Whilst this draft contains welcome expressions of commitment to and support for the Convention system, its negative tenor and much of its content risk damaging the system’s core structure and undermining human rights protection in Europe.
One of the purposes of the Convention is to establish a catalogue of universal human rights, derived from the 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights, for special, regional protection according to uniform interpretation and application. Certain provisions of the draft Copenhagen Declaration, however, may undermine this universality, allowing for rights to be relativized by reference to national considerations,Note including the vagaries of political interest and influence,Note and permitting incoherent implementation of the Convention across States Parties.Note
Uniform interpretation and application of Convention rights and collective enforcement of decisions on complaints hinge upon the Court’s role as an independent judicial decision-making body. Several provisions of the draft declaration are inconsistent with proper respect for the Court’s judicial function,Note in particular that it decides cases on the basis of submissions made by parties to proceedings and the applicable law, and not of political views expressed by various loosely defined actors in other fora.Note The proper way for a non-respondent State or any other actor to seek to influence the Court’s judicial decision-making is through the existing possibility of third-party intervention.
The draft declaration appears to suggest limitations on the jurisdiction of the Court that are inconsistent with the provisions of the Convention. Through repeatedly highlighting one aspect of subsidiarity, the draft declaration gives the impression that the Court’s role should be essentially deferential, or even subordinate to that of national authorities.Note It also purports to state as legal fact an unduly limited approach to definition of Convention rights, with the apparent intent to restrict the Court’s exercise of its interpretative jurisdiction.Note The States Parties should scrupulously respect the Court’s supervisory jurisdiction over application and interpretation of the Convention.
Several provisions of the draft declaration seek to place particular restrictions on the Court’s jurisdiction in relation to certain types of case. This is especially so in relation to immigration and asylum cases, whereas there is nothing in the Convention to suggest they should be given special treatment; indeed, such an approach may encourage or facilitate discriminatory treatment at national level, which is prohibited under article 13.Note The draft declaration even appears to suggest that inter-state cases, which historically have addressed some of the most serious and widespread violations, and cases arising from conflicts between States Parties, despite the maintenance of peace being a core concern of the Convention,Note should no longer be dealt with by the Court.Note In other respects, the draft declaration appears inconsistent, at one point implying that widespread, structural or systemic problems are ‘core business’ for the Court,Note whilst at another suggesting that the Court is inherently unable to provide individual justice in such cases.Note
If the Court’s judgments are not respected by the States Parties, the Convention control mechanism becomes ineffective and the Convention system loses most of its added value. States have accepted an unconditional obligation to implement Court judgments, yet the draft declaration seems to make this core principle subject to their ‘acceptance’ by national actors, including the governments that represent the state in the Convention system.Note National authorities must implement Court judgments as a matter of basic respect for the rule of law, including the principle pacta sunt servanda (‘agreements must be kept’).
The Committee notes that the forthcoming Copenhagen Conference forms part of a series, beginning at Interlaken (2010) and continuing at Izmir (2011), Brighton (2012) and Brussels (2015). Until now, the main focus of the resulting declarations has been the Court’s case-load and its principal cause, which is inadequate national implementation of the Convention in many States. These should remain the targets of inter-governmental work, which should build on the many expert reports adopted over the past eight years by promoting implementation of their recommendations, conducting co-operation activities that address the main weaknesses found in Court judgments and ensuring that the Court is sufficiently resourced to discharge its function, including through an extraordinary injection of funds to allow it to absorb its backlog of applications.