Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:07:48
Good morning.
The sitting is open.
I remind members that they should insert their badge before taking the floor. As you begin your speech, dear colleagues, please press the microphone “request” button once only, wait a couple of seconds, and then start your speech.
The first item of business this morning is a debate under urgent procedure on “Opinion on a draft convention for the protection of the profession of lawyer” (Document 16094 and Document 16102) presented by Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN on behalf of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. We will then have a statement from The Right Honourable Lord HERMER, who is with us today and whom I met a couple of months ago in Venice.
Lord, I want to thank you for being with us and we are going to share your wise advice.
Lord HERMER is Attorney General for England and Wales and Advocate General for Northern Ireland.
In order to finish by 10:15 a.m., I will interrupt the list of speakers at about 10:14 a.m. to allow time for the reply and the vote.
I call now Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN, rapporteur.
Dear Vladimir, you know you have 7 minutes now, and 3 minutes at the end to reply to the debate.
You have the floor.
Thank you, Mister President.
Dear colleagues,
On 17 December 2024, the Committee of Ministers transmitted to the Assembly a draft Council of Europe convention for the protection of the profession of lawyers, prepared by the Committee of Experts on the Protection of Lawyers and the European Committee on Legal Co-operation.
We committed to giving our statutory opinion as soon as possible, but this doesn't mean that drafting was swift and straightforward.
This draft text is the culmination of the process that began in 2018 with the adoption by this Assembly of the Recommendation "The case for drafting a European Convention on the profession of lawyer".
I want to congratulate the Committee of Experts on the Protection of Lawyers and the European Committee on Legal Co-operation for their excellent work and for putting together an instrument that reconciles and differentiates between very different legal systems.
The draft convention provides structured legal protection for lawyers, ensuring they can practice their profession without fear of discrimination, improper hindrance or interference. This is critical not only for the safety and independence of lawyers but also for maintaining public confidence in the judiciary and the rule of law. It ensures that those tasked with defending our rights are adequately protected.
The need for this convention arises from a stark and unsettling reality. Lawyers, who are pivotal in upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice, are increasingly becoming targets of harassment, intimidation and sometimes even violence. This is not limited to any single country, region or legal system. It is a widespread issue that threatens the very foundations of our democratic societies.
Consider the cases of Vadim KOBZEV, Igor SERGUNIN and Alexei LIPSTER, who were arrested in October 2023 on charges on participation in an extremist organisation and convicted to five and half years imprisonment in a sham trial.
Maxim ZNAK, a prominent Belarusian lawyer, was sentenced to 10 years in a penal colony in September 2021 just because he contested the results of the election of Aleksandr LUKASHENKO.
These examples are emblematic in a broader crisis where lawyers face severe repercussions simply for fulfilling their professional duties. More than 1 700 lawyers have been prosecuted in Türkiye on vague charges related to terrorism following the 2016 coup attempt.
In the United Kingdom and Germany, lawyers have faced threats to their safety merely for their involvement in high-profile or politically sensitive cases.
These examples further underscore the urgent need for a robust, binding international instrument to protect lawyers wherever they may practise.
One of the key benefits of this draft convention is that it established standards that are farther-reaching than those existing in the current soft law instruments, including the Committee of Minsters' Recommendation on the freedom of exercise of the profession of lawyer. It introduces strong professional rights for lawyers, including the right to freely exercise their profession, choose their clients and communicate confidentially with them. It will protect not only licensed lawyers but also those unlawfully deprived of the right to practise. It will also apply to authorised representatives of applicants before international courts and human rights protection bodies, pragmatically safeguarding a wider range of legal offenders.
Furthermore, the convention established legal standards for the functioning of professional associations of lawyers as independent and self-governing bodies. This is particularly significant because such associations play a crucial role in defending the integrity of the legal profession and ensuring that the rights of their members are protected.
Perhaps most importantly, the convention provides for the establishment of a robust monitoring mechanism. The Group of Experts on the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer – GRAVO – will oversee the implementation, ensuring that its provisions are upheld, and any violation of systematic threats are properly addressed.
Colleagues, the only amendments which I decided to propose deal with reservation. Under international law, reservations are permitted unless prohibited by the treaty or when they would be incompatible with its object or purpose. The Committee of Experts on the Protection of Lawyers explicitly intended for the convention to be fully implemented without reservation, as highlighted in their meeting report from May 2024.
If we allow states to formulate reservations upon signing or ratifying the convention, it may weaken the overall impact of this critical instrument.
Members of this Assembly, this is imperative that we take this opportunity to improve the protection for one of the most vulnerable, yet vital components of our justice system. By approving this opinion, we make a resounding commitment to uphold human rights, democracy and the rule of law, and protect those who defend it.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:14:58
Thank you, Vladimir.
I would now like to welcome The Right Honourable Lord HERMER, who is, as I said earlier, Attorney General for England and Wales and Advocate General for Northern Ireland to make a statement.
Lord Hermer, you have the floor.
Attorney General for England and Wales and Advocate General for Northern Ireland
10:15:21
Thank you, President.
And may I congratulate you on your re-election.
It's an immense privilege to have the opportunity to address you all this morning and it's an honour to open this debate on the draft Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer.
And I understand the initial idea for this hugely important convention came from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and I say with great respect, it's an excellent example of where PACE, the Secretariat, and member state governments can work together to deliver important standards that we should all abide by.
For our part, the United Kingdom, and indeed the legal professions within the United Kingdom, welcome the finalisation of the proposed convention and we congratulate all of those involved for their careful and effective work that has led to this really significant achievement.
Now, when thinking about opening this debate on the genesis of this convention and the protection that it affords to lawyers, I couldn't help but be drawn to one of William Shakespeare's most famous lines. It's a line taken from Shakespeare's 1591 play, Henry VI Part 2. It's spoken by a character called Dick the Butcher, one of a group of rebels seeking to foment rebellion and overthrow the king and lawful government. And it reads this:
"The first thing we'll do, let's kill all the lawyers."
Now, at its most basic, that line has often been seen as criticism of lawyers. In Henry VI, the rebels were of the view that lawyers were upholding the status quo and the interests of a narrow section of society. That's not how I read it. I read those lines less as criticism of lawyers, but a recognition, even as early as 1591, of the importance of the role of independent lawyers as guardians of freedom and democratic values.
After all, it was the rebels in Henry VI who wanted to get rid of the lawyers.
This convention will rightly send a strong signal that the international community takes seriously the independence of the legal profession and the rights of lawyers to practice free of interference and harassment. And our collective legal systems work best in circumstances where advocates are able to take their own cases without fear or favour, and represent clients irrespective of their own views as to what the client did, whether it was morally right or morally wrong.
And this convention has a particular resonance for me, as I've worked with organisations for many years that seek to protect lawyers working in fragile environments outside of the Council of Europe. I've seen how lawyers themselves become targets, including assassinations, of many people known to organisations that I've worked with and supported.
But it's all too easy to think that those fragile environments only exist elsewhere, outside of the Council of Europe. But of course, these fragile environments exist far closer to home.
In the summer of last year, I visited Southport, a town some 17 miles north of Liverpool in England, following the tragic murders of three young girls at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class. During that visit, I met with police, prosecuting authorities, and the wider community devastated by the murders and the public disorder that rose around it. But I also met asylum advice lawyers, whose offices were targeted and then closed and boarded up during the violent disorder that followed the murders. Whilst their work was entirely unrelated to the events that took place in Southport, those lawyers were targeted precisely because of the advice they were giving and the clients they represented. And as a result of the actions of a small minority, those lawyers couldn't practice, they couldn't attend their offices, and those clients for whom their advice mattered so much were denied the rights and protections afforded by law.
So now, 430 years after Shakespeare's play, we recognise, cherish and protect the fundamental role that lawyers play in our society.
I would also, President, wish to take this opportunity to address PACE on the United Kingdom government's approach to the rule of law, and, within that, the European Convention on Human Rights and the crucial role of parliamentarians in upholding societies.
Can I at the outset reiterate the United Kingdom government's commitment to the values of democracy, of human rights, and of the rule of law, the core values that underpin this great organisation? And I am grateful for PACE's work in delivering this throughout Europe.
The rule of law for the United Kingdom government acts as our guiding principle. It provides the foundation for our economy, for our legal sector and for the freedoms which allow people to interact with each other in their day to day lives.
In October of last year, I had the honour of delivering a lecture in the name of Sir Thomas BINGHAM, one of our great post-war judges. In that lecture I drew on his well known conception of the rule of law, which recognises that international law is the rule of law writ large and that states must comply with their international law obligations.
There is one thing I think that everybody in this room will agree on and that is that we are living through uncertain and indeed challenging times, and, sadly, we are witnessing threats to the rule of law across several fronts in Europe, from democratic backsliding, disinformation, and the diminishing checks and balances on executive action.
And it is my view that our democracies need to take immediate steps to build and secure the rule of law's long-term resilience in the face of these threats, both known and unknown, in both our domestic and our international systems. We must proactively promote a rule-of-law culture of amongst the public, not least young people seeking to use it to rebuild trust in our democratic institutions by explaining how the rule of law serves all of us.
And as parliamentarians, we have a special duty to uphold and promote the rule of law in everything that we do.
This Assembly has been at the forefront globally of recognising that in democracies, national parliaments are important guarantors of the rule of law and human rights and have a crucial role to play in legitimating the institutions on which those fundamental values depend: ensuring that the checks and balances on executive action are meaningful, scrutinising draft laws to ensure they are compatible with the minimum requirements of the rule of law and human rights; monitoring the response of governments to court judgments, including the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in respect to the United Kingdom and others, to make sure they are implemented; discussing and deciding what the appropriate responses should be, designing institutions, such as the Parliamentary Human Rights Committees, which help national parliaments perform these important functions and ensure that there is meaningful and properly informed democratic debate about what these foundational commitments require.
So the story that we must all tell is how the rule of law matters, how it matters for growth, for jobs, for people's livelihoods, how it impacts upon the pound or the euro in their pocket and on the type of future that their and our children deserve to enjoy.
Governments that undermine or take a pick-and-mix approach to these values act in disservice to us all and incentivise a flourishing economy for all.
Now, I'm proud to say that, since taking office, this new United Kingdom government has taken steps to uphold our obligations and the international rules-based system. We've made plain our commitment to our cornerstone international institutions, including the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights, the International Criminal Court, and the International Court of Justice, taking positive steps to promote their importance and rebuild respect for them.
And as we approach the 35th anniversary of the Venice Commission, I commend it for its great work bringing us together and through constructive dialogue, addressing profound social changes such as globalisation and technological advancements, which can undermine democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
And turning, if I may, to the European Convention on Human Rights, this new United Kingdom government is fully committed to the convention and upholding the international human rights framework. As party to the convention, recommitted to it in the Reykjavík Declaration, the convention system is the cornerstone of the Council of Europe's protection of human rights.
In doing so, the convention underlines the importance of the principle of subsidiarity and the margin of appreciation for the implementation of the convention at the national level by the contracting parties.
And if I may, I'd like to be very clear. The new United Kingdom government will never withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights or refuse to comply with judgments of the Court or requests for interim measures given in respect of the United Kingdom.
The convention was opened for signature on 4 November 1950 in Rome. The United Kingdom signed it on this date and was the first state to ratify the convention in March of 1951. I was also reminded coming into this building this morning that two of the founding figures of the Council of Europe were British: Winston CHURCHILL and Ernest BEVIN.
And indeed, it is important to remember when we talk about the convention, and indeed the Treaty of London, that we remember the fundamental reasons why it came into existence and why it was needed, what it was that those founders wanted. Because the convention, arising as it did from the ashes of the Second World War, was a victory for certain basic values. Values that were the cornerstones not merely of Western civilisation, but of civilisation as such.
The purpose of the convention would be to protect those values, to prevent Europe returning to war, but also to protect the rights of individuals and to protect minorities against misrule by the majority.
So I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Council of Europe for all that it has done. And today I pay particular tribute for the work that it has done, standing in solidarity with Ukraine. And I am delighted that the Ukrainian delegation are with us this morning. Russia's unlawful war of aggression in Ukraine was a repudiation of the very rights and values this organisation was created to protect and defend. And we all stand shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine.
Finally, later this year, we will celebrate the 75th anniversary of the convention. And we will have an opportunity to celebrate the enormous contributions of the Council of Europe, which of course, celebrated its own 75th anniversary last year, and to take the opportunity together to reaffirm the core values of the organisation protecting human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
President, thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:29:56
I hope that I will express all members of this Parliamentary Assembly by saying that some of your words were like music to my ears, especially at these crucial times where we have to protect all principles that this Council of Europe is built for. I'm really glad and proud that you have connected the works of William Shakespeare with the works of this Parliamentary Assembly, especially today. And of course, I'm glad that the mission of extinguishing lawyers is not completed. Thank you so much for addressing the Parliamentary Assembly.
And now I will call for the debate. The first speakers on behalf of the political groups, on behalf of the European Conservatives Group. Sir Edward LEIGH has the floor.
United Kingdom, EC/DA, Spokesperson for the group
10:30:54
So, Mister President, it is true that since Shakespeare's time, we lawyers have had a bad reputation. But of course, we are essential to preserve the rule of law in a democratic society. And we see what's going on in Russia with the absurd, ridiculous and horrible persecution and imprisonment of the lawyers that represented Mr Alexei NAVALNY simply for representing him. So the rule of law is absolutely right. And in those terms I agree with everything that the Rt Hon Lord HERMER KC says.
But in looking to the Council of Europe and the convention, we've got to concentrate on what should be our core task, indeed, why we were founded in the late 1940s, early 1950s, to fight fascism and communism and totalitarianism. But we see the convention is often misused.
Now closer to home, the Rt Hon Lord HERMER KC is a very distinguished lawyer. We welcome him to his post, a distinguished private practice. It's very important that when people enter government from the private sector that they are of course fully transparent. Unfortunately, the new government has dropped the case against Mr Gerry ADAMS, a client of the Rt Hon Lord HERMER KC. I don't want to make any further comment about it. It just underlines the importance of transparency. And when lawyers from the private sector do enter government, they must recuse themselves from every case that they have been involved in in the private sector.
The Rt Hon Lord HERMER KC has no doubt also been instrumental in the quite disgraceful attempt by the British government to give away the Diego Garcia in Chagos, a vital military base, vital to NATO, to our American and British interests and transfer them to an imperial power, Mauritius. Letting down the Chagossians, who simply want to have self determination, all in the name of so-called international law. But the International Court of Justice binding was not binding in any sense. It was only... it was an opinion and we can and should ignore it.
Now in the time, the short time left to me, I want to reply to the Rt Hon Lord HERMER KC about his strong defence of the convention. The convention is being misused. And I would like to know how this present government is going to stop criminal gangs taking people, up to 40 000 people every year across the Channel in leaking boats, dozens dying every year. The moment we try and imprison these people or have any kind of deterrent or deport them, human rights lawyers, in the name of the convention, stop us doing anything. This criminal trade goes on. The fact is that the convention is being misused. The Court has gradually extended its competence to attack democratic governments like the United Kingdom government, who are simply trying to defend their people and prevent illegality.
So I put that challenge to the Rt Hon Lord HERMER KC and I welcome him to our debate.
Thank you very much.
(Light applause)
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:33:59
Thank you. I call now on behalf of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Ms Lesia VASYLENKO.
Ukraine, ALDE, Spokesperson for the group
10:34:08
Thank you, President, dear colleagues and friends of the Parliamentary Assembly,
It is an honour to thank, on behalf of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe group, our dear rapporteur Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN for his opinion on this draft convention.
The draft convention we see before us has taken in many proposals from this Parliamentary Assembly. It shall undoubtedly soon become the baseline for protecting the rights of human rights defenders across Europe and, I believe, also in other regions of the world.
The legal profession is one of the pillars of a just and democratic society. Lawyers ensure access to justice, protect fundamental rights and hold institutions accountable. It is with the help of lawyers that activists for human rights, democracy and various other causes make the world a better and safer place. It is through the work of lawyers that societies are reminded and harnessed back into respect for the rule of law.
However, in many parts of the world, legal professionals face increasing pressure, intimidation and even persecution for no other crime than merely doing their job. In Georgia, Belarus, Russia, in occupied territories of Ukraine, under the effective control of Russia, we have legal professionals fighting for the rights of human rights defenders and for people wishing to live in freedom from oppressive regimes. These lawyers are consequently marginalised, targeted and threatened by these very regimes. They are branded as enemies of the state. They are disbarred, they are thrown into prisons next to their own clients and they are simply unable to defend themselves. This is not right.
Lawyers must be able to work without fear. This convention provides a backbone for legal professionals to fall back on when their own rights are being breached and when they find themselves unable not only to defend their clients, but also to defend themselves.
This draft convention sends a clear message that no legal professional should be punished for upholding justice and for just doing his or her job. By adopting and implementing these provisions, and by supporting this report in full, as Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN has presented it to us, we are taking one step more towards a global society where the rule of law prevails and where legal professionals are protected rather than persecuted.
I would encourage the House, this Parliamentary Assembly, to support this report, this legal opinion in full.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:36:51
Thank you.
On behalf of the Group of the Unified European Left, Ms Laura CASTEL.
Thank you, dear Chair.
Firstly, I would like to thank the rapporteur for this important opinion.
This draft convention is very well needed, taking into account the increasing attacks targeting lawyers.
Dear colleagues,
Let me focus on an important point: this convention contains no specific provisions on the use of secret surveillance, including spyware such as Pegasus, against lawyers. And the contradiction between Article 6.3 (b), which obliges confidential communications with the clients or prospective clients, and the exclusion of this enormous risk posed by this modern secret surveillance tools, to practice, the profession of lawyer, without interference.
I do believe that this Assembly should follow the Recommendation 2258 (2023) and propose an addendum to include this matter in this convention. Otherwise, we are granting the impunity of secret services with the use of spyware, including the threats posed by new technologies.
This is paramount on the attorney-client relationship as a necessary guarantee for correct professional practice and due secrecy. If there is no relationship of trust, the professional practice is in danger or annulled.
In this addendum there should be expressed exclusions covering lawyers.
But, even in the future Europe Convention, that the Committee of Ministers is preparing, on the acquisition, use, sale and export of spyware, it should be included this exclusion of lawyers and journalists, regarding the possibility of using state espionage or monitoring services. These exclusions should be transferred to the companies or private contractors that assist secret services, police, or government agencies.
That is to say, dear members of the Committee of Ministers and dear colleagues, mass-surveillance measures should provide lists of exclusions.
That is to say, companies like NSO could not wash their hands. Because, from a compliance point of view, they should prefer that their products already have these exclusions included. This is the only way.
A huge numbers of Catalans have been targeted by Pegasus spyware, the biggest case in fact, and prominent lawyers have been infected. And dear colleagues, this practices occurred in a democracy, no matter if the government is conservative or socialist.
If we, as the Assembly of the Council of Europe, consider lawyers as human rights defenders, we, as well, as representatives of democracy, rule of law, and human rights should protect our defenders through real actions.
Thank you very much.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:40:19
Thank you. On behalf of the Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group, Mr Titus CORLĂŢEAN.
Romania, SOC, Spokesperson for the group
10:40:28
President, distinguished guests, colleagues,
On behalf of the Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group, I would like to express clear and substantial both political and legal support for the adoption of the convention for the protection of the profession of lawyer during the Luxembourg Presidency of the Committee of Ministers, and of course, for the adoption of a very good opinion drafted by our colleague, rapporteur Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN.
It's a good draft convention, that is true. It is a result of our specific request of the Assembly already in 2018, Recommendation 2121.
I don't want to insist on the important role of the lawyer, a crucial position in the administration of justice, in providing effective representation and necessary legal support and assistance within society and as a human rights defender. But I would like to underline that this draft convention is a good one because it provides guarantees for the professional rights of the lawyer, a structured legal protection of the profession and the right to practise, and a general protection against attacks, threats, harassment, abuse and intimidation. And indeed, it's the first-ever international treaty in this domain. It's a good framework convention, but it's not a perfect one, because just looking at paragraph 12 of the opinion of the rapporteur, we can see once again the lack of provisions concerning the use of secret surveillance, including spyware. But there is a possibility for management of this topic in the near future.
On the other hand, I would like to underline the fact that this convention will be in the position to provide concrete solutions to things that happened in previous years, especially in Central–Eastern European countries. There is an old heritage coming from the past Communist period that was transferred to modern days. And we saw several cases when some, at least some prosecutors adopted abusive conduct against lawyers going beyond the line that is defined by the law.
We also had in Romania, a famous case, the young lawyer Robert ROȘU, a case that I signalled, if you remember, in this Plenary, to the previous European Commissioner for Justice, Didier REYNDERS. And in the end, of course, the judges from the Supreme Court dismissed all the accusations from the prosecutors and underlined the abuses committed by the prosecutors.
Dear colleagues, public exposure of lawyers in handcuffs, and while the TV channels are broadcasting these things live, this is totally unacceptable.
Also, some of our Polish colleagues signalled the fact that in their country there were, for political reasons, situations when lawyers suffered abuses.
So, based on that, I tabled an amendment that was adopted by the Committee by a majority to cover things which are not explicitly covered by the current draft convention and I encourage you to support the adoption of this amendment.
This will not delay the adoption of the convention, because we already tabled one amendment and it will follow a fast track. I encourage the Luxembourg Presidency to convince the Committee of Ministers to adopt these amendments and to avoid the previous mistakes when the Committee rejected our amendments on the draft convention on artificial intelligence. And we saw just two months after that, how wrong the position of the Committee of Ministers was.
So I strongly support the adoption of the convention.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:44:05
Thank you. On behalf of the Group of the European People's Party, Ms Agnes Sirkka PRAMMER.
Luxembourg, EPP/CD, Spokesperson for the group
10:44:12
Dear colleagues,
This is a remarkable moment, because this European Convention will be a major first and a major step forward in the administration of justice, to ensure that justice is done.
As we know, the Council of Europe is an international institution based on the rule of law, democracy and human rights, so it is fitting that it should be at the origin of a convention on the protection of the legal profession, to which I wish to express my strong support.
I'm calling for it to be adopted here, as it will be a major step towards a common legal area.
It will be a major international instrument, the first international treaty in this field, as it will be open to signature by third countries and will be binding on the signatories.
I would like to thank and congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN, for his very pertinent opinion, in which he also highlighted the crucial role played by lawyers in the proper administration of justice.
We must therefore protect these human rights defenders in the exercise of their profession, as threats and attacks against them have unfortunately increased in recent years. However, it is clear that they must be able to exercise their profession without hindrance or fear of discrimination, in the interests of protecting the public and defending democratic values, and this new legal instrument will enable them to do so. It will enable them to express themselves freely, thereby protecting their independence.
I would also point to the civil and criminal immunity that will be granted to lawyers for their statements made in the exercise of their functions, as well as the transparent and impartial disciplinary procedures that constitute safeguards against interference by public or private actors, and the establishment of a monitoring mechanism that is so important for guaranteeing the effectiveness of the convention and which, in other areas, we sometimes sorely lack.
The Council of Europe and its Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights worked very quickly. Here again, the work of the rapporteur, Mr VARDANYAN, is to be commended. We also share his view that the text of the convention should expressly state that no reservations will be permitted. Indeed, reservations to certain provisions of the convention may render it devoid of substance, but such amendments must in no way delay the adoption of the draft European convention. On the contrary, it will be crucial for it to come into force as quickly as possible in the face of the upsurge in threats and violence against lawyers, which are unfortunately multiplying, as the survey responses from thousands of lawyers demonstrate.
Dear colleagues,
Can we be justifiably proud today of the adoption of the Convention and support the rapporteur's opinion? We will be strengthening the rule of law and safeguarding fundamental rights. This universal legal instrument with global reach will confirm the Council of Europe's role as a precursor and protector of human rights.
Thank you very much.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:47:42
Thank you Ms Agnes Sirkka PRAMMER is next.
Thank you, Mister President.
Human rights and the rule of law: that is what this Assembly is all about. Rightly so, because they are the foundation of our free democratic order. But even the best constitutional state does not go to the people and ask them whether their rights have actually been violated anywhere.
The link between people and their rights are the lawyers who enforce these rights against the state. As a young lawyer, you are full of enthusiasm. You've just learned what's possible, you've learned what's necessary and what's possible, and you want to put it into practice. You want to stand up for people's rights. You don't have a lot of sympathy for professional associations, for bodies that seem cumbersome, where you mostly see older gentlemen sitting and dealing with professional law, with things that are very distant to you. As a young lawyer, you're brave because you often don't even know who you're actually up against.
Here I would like to tell you a little personal story. I was working as a lawyer for people who applied for asylum in Austria at a time when the authorities had a kind of guideline from the government as to how many cases they had to decide negatively. It was at this point that I had an experience that shaped the rest of my career, because at that time, I was fined for a normal act of representation, for an application that I had made. A fine that I would have had to pay simply because I had represented my client properly, because I had raised my voice on his behalf and because I had demanded his rights on his behalf. And that happened in Austria. That's why it wasn't a big problem, because I lodged an appeal against it. Of course, it was granted, and of course, very clearly and with very clear words. But it showed me how important it is that this protection be there. That this protection be there for lawyers and that these bodies, in which hopefully soon not only older gentlemen will be involved in protecting the legal profession, are very important, essential.
That's why I think this Convention is particularly important and that it deals with precisely these two aspects: the protection of lawyers and the protection of the profession's own representation, because these two things are necessary in order to maintain the rule of law, which in turn is necessary in order to help people achieve their essential rights.
Thank you very much.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:50:48
Thank you.
Mr Yuriy KAMELCHUK is next.
(The badge is here. Yeah? Now it works.)
Thank you.
Mister President, dear colleagues,
I would like to say, and start with an expression of my sense of gratitude to Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN, the rapporteur of this dedicated work and this crucial issue.
The report before us outlines the urgent need to adopt the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer.
This initiative is not just about legal professionals. It's about safeguarding justice, upholding human rights and strengthening democratic institutions.
Without effective legal protection, the rule of law remains vulnerable to political pressure, repression and authoritarian expansion.
For Ukraine, this matter is of particular importance. Ukrainian lawyers, human rights defenders and legal professionals have been targeted, especially in the territories occupied by Russia. Many have been subjected to intimidation, arbitrary detention, disbarment and persecution simply for defending fundamental rights. Their work is essential for ensuring justice not only for political prisoners, but also for victims of Russian war crimes. Strengthening international mechanisms to protect lawyers is therefore an essential step toward reinforcing democratic values and accountability.
Ukrainian legal professionals operate under unprecedented risks defending civilians from politically motivated prosecutions, advocating for war crimes accountability, and representing victims of Russian aggressions.
This convention could provide critical legal tools for international advocacy, enabling stronger responses to threats, unlawful arrests, and pressure tactics used by authoritarian regimes.
Ukraine's judicial reforms are deeply intertwined with our European inspirations. By supporting this Convention, Ukraine reinforces its commitment to the rule of law, judicial independence, and fundamental rights.
The convention established clear protections against undue interference in legal practice, which aligns with Ukraine's broader European integration agenda.
The prosecution of lawyers in Russia, particularly those defending political dissidents, is a well documented problem. This Convention provides a legal instrument to challenge such practices at an international level. Ukraine can leverage this mechanism to expose Russian violations, hold perpetrators accountable, and support Russian lawyers defending political prisoners, including those who oppose the war against Ukraine.
Ukrainian lawyers play a pivotal role in documenting Russian war crimes, preparing legal cases, and supporting international prosecutions. They work on the front lines of justice, collecting evidence, defending victims, and challenging impunity.
Strengthening legal safeguards for these professionals is essential for ensuring justice and upholding international legal norms.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:54:06
Thank you.
Mr Paweł JABŁOŃSKI is next.
Thank you, Mister President.
Dear colleagues, I am a lawyer myself, and I can attest to that, lawyers are under attack. Lawyers are under political attack in Russia, in Belarus, but unfortunately not just there. Also in the countries that are members of this Assembly.
We shouldn't be taking anything for granted. And what is even more worrying, these attacks at times come from the political sides that claim to be safeguarding the rule of law.
Just last year in Poland, many conservative lawyers, attorneys that represent members of political opposition have been subject to vicious attacks, political attacks by members of the ruling party and the media that support them. Their professional privilege was challenged. They have been threatened with criminal proceedings initiated against them.
In October, this Assembly has been voting on the case of Mr Marcin ROMANOWSKI. And since that time, with deep regret, I have to inform you, dear colleagues, that his attorney, Mr Bartosz LEWANDOWSKI, has been publicly attacked and threatened by members of the ruling party belonging to the Group of the European People's Party. He was threatened that he should be charged and indicted just for the fact that he's an attorney that rendered legal assistance to a member of the political opposition.
This is not the end, unfortunately, because many judges in Poland right now are being discriminated against. They are being removed from cases, forcibly transferred to special sections that are being created in the courts against their will, against the law. We could compare it to special penal military units. And these special sections are obviously excluded for adjudicating most cases.
Just yesterday, such section was created in one of the most important courts of the country, the Appellate Court of Warsaw. This is against the law. This is simply by virtue of administrative, politically-motivated decisions. And the reason is obvious. The government wants only the judges that they can politically trust.
This is a clear violation of judicial independence. This must be denounced.
This is just several examples, but there are many, many others. And these examples are proof that we should never be taking anything for granted. Even in democracies. The profession of lawyers, attorneys, prosecutors, judges must be protected, especially against those that proclaim themselves to be those in favour of the rule of law, of democracy, but breach these principles for political gains.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:56:41
Thank you. Mr Stéphane MAZARS is next.
Thank you, Mister Chairman.
Rapporteur,
Ladies and gentlemen,
In a democracy where the rule of law is a fundamental pillar, the protection of lawyers – referred to in my country, France, as "auxiliaires de justice" – is an absolute necessity.
Lawyers are the defenders of individual rights. They are also the guardians of justice, the guarantors of fairness and the protectors of fundamental freedoms. Lawyers play an essential role in guaranteeing everyone a fair trial, a principle enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Without a quality, independent defence, the accused may find himself alone in the face of the omnipotence of the State, which threatens the very balance of justice. As Robert BADINTER, former French Minister of Justice and a leading criminal lawyer who devoted his life to the great cause of abolishing the death penalty, has pointed out: "Defence is an act of courage, a fight for truth and justice". This fight can only be waged if lawyers are free to exercise their profession without fear of threats, reprisals, pressure or intimidation.
And yet, in several European countries – as you pointed out, my dear colleague Vladimir VARDANYAN, at the end of your excellent report, which we are examining today – we are witnessing worrying attacks on the rights of defence and the defenders themselves.
In Hungary, in Poland, particularly under the previous government, in Russia, and most recently to the detriment of NAVALNY's defenders, lawyers have been threatened, imprisoned or prevented from representing their clients, particularly in so-called sensitive political cases.
These attacks are not just violations of lawyers' rights: they are a direct threat to the rule of law and democracy themselves.
The universal scope of the protection of the rights of defence and defence lawyers is indeed an objective that the Council of Europe must set itself, as is expressly stated in the report we are examining. For it is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that tells us: "Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal". And lawyers are the architects of this right: without them, justice becomes a mockery, a parody, and democracy a sham.
Guaranteeing effective protection for lawyers, as the work carried out within our Assembly invites us to do, means protecting justice, protecting freedom and protecting democracy. The Council of Europe must be at the forefront of this battle to support those who, every day, defend the rights of all, sometimes at the risk of their own freedom or safety.
In conclusion, I welcome the finalisation of the draft convention on the protection of the legal profession by the committee of experts.
Let's make sure, dear colleagues, that this convention becomes a universal reality.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
10:59:49
Thank you. Next is Mr Tony VAUGHAN.
Thank you, Mister President.
Colleagues, every day, lawyers across Europe face mounting pressures simply for doing their jobs.
Last year, the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe published a report which heard from 15 000 lawyers across Europe. And the testimonies were shocking: physical attacks on lawyers in Sweden; criminal lawyers in Denmark warned to avoid certain areas because of the criminal defence work they were engaged in; immigration lawyers facing death threats, as Lord Herman referred to in the UK last summer; in Georgia, lawyers defending protesters have reported systematic persecution.
When lawyers are attacked, it is not just our profession that suffers. It's the journalist facing politically motivated prosecution. It's a small business owner challenging overreach by government. It's the person fearing torture if they are deported without due process.
Every attack on a lawyer is an attack on somebody's right of access to justice.
This convention is a shield to those who defend others. The monitoring mechanisms it creates, like the Group of Experts on the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer (GRAVO), give real teeth to investigate and respond when lawyers face threats. The urgent procedure means the authorities can act immediately when our colleagues are in danger. The moment we allow lawyers to be intimidated for who they represent, the minute that we allow lawyers to be identified with the causes of their clients, is the moment that we surrender the rule of law itself.
And I should say something about the attacks on the European Court itself for overreach, for activism. These kind of attacks play cheap politics with the rule of law. When you undermine the rule of law, you harm the individuals who need its help. Like the person Mr Paweł JABŁOŃSKI from Poland referred to earlier, who has told us about politically motivated prosecutions. It is those individuals who are harmed when you make cheap politics with the rule of law.
So I thank the rapporteur for his opinion, and I'm proud to be a new member of this Parliamentary Assembly which is putting forward this convention, so every person who needs someone to help them access justice can do so.
(Sounds of 'hear, hear' and light applause)
(Undelivered speech, Rules of Procedure Art. 31.2)
Dear Mister President,
Dear colleagues,
Let me start with a story.
It was 1 February 1945 when the so-called People’s Court was set up in Bulgaria by the Soviet-installed authorities. Thousands were convicted, including 2 730 sentenced to death and thousands of imprisonments. Very few attorneys had the courage to follow their professional duty and represent the accused before that politically-motivated Court. They served with honour, but later on they were harassed, deprived of the right to practice law, some of them were even prosecuted and imprisoned.
Eighty years later, Vadim Kobzev, Alexei Liptser, and Igor Sergunin, attorneys at law, defendants of Alexei Navalny were found guilty of participating in an "extremist organisation" by a Russian court and imprisoned.
All these horrible events occurred in authoritarian regimes. Unfortunately, we see oppression of lawyers even in democratic societies. In many parts of the world, lawyers face increasing risks, threats, harassment, and violence simply for performing their duties.
Therefore, we need a binding legislative tool to ensure proper protection of those who are called upon to uphold the rule of law, especially in cases when the mighty ones (states, public authorities, big corporations, propaganda) are abusing it.
The role of lawyers in society is indispensable. They act as the guardians of justice, the voice of the vulnerable, and the defenders of human rights. The attacks against lawyers not only undermine individual practitioners but also weaken the entire judicial system, eroding public trust in justice.
The draft Convention seeks to establish a binding international framework addressing these concerns. It proposes clear protections for lawyers, ensuring their independence, security, and ability to practice free from undue interference.
The right to a fair trial, access to legal representation, and the protection of human rights depend on the lawyers’ ability to work without fear or oppression. By endorsing this Convention, we reaffirm our commitment to justice, democracy, and the rule of law.
I want to congratulate the Committee of Ministers on putting forward this Convention. I’d like to thank Mr Vladimir Vardanyan for the excellent and speedy work and drafting the excellent opinion that we are discussing now.
Let us unite and support this vital initiative. The world must not turn a blind eye to the challenges faced by the legal profession. Protecting lawyers means protecting justice itself.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:02:17
Thank you.
Dear colleagues, I must now interrupt the list of speakers, the speeches of members on the speakers list who have been present during the debate but have not been able to speak may be given to the Table office for publication of the official report.
I remind colleagues that the typewritten text can be submitted electronically, if possible, no later than 4 hours after the list of speakers is interrupted.
I will now call Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN, rapporteur, to reply for 3 minutes.
Thank you, Mister President.
I would like also to express words of gratitude to Lord HERMER for the very interesting discussion, which actually led us to Shakespearean patience. And, frankly speaking, when usually a person asks me who I am, and what is my specialisation, I say, "I am guilty, I am a lawyer". Because actually being a lawyer in contemporary society is somehow stigmatised because yes, everybody understands perfectly well that it is complicated to live in a contemporary society without lawyers, but nobody usually considers them as somebody who is valuable for contemporary society.
But we should not consider lawyers are just lawyers because the lawyers are the guardians of the rule of law. It is impossible to have a democratic country which absolutely provides the rights and freedoms of human beings without providing and supporting or ensuring the rule of law.
I would like just to confess it's very complicated also to be a lawyer in politics. Because when there is a political decision, nobody takes into account the lawyers, even the lawyers who are in the ruling or opposition parties, because they consider actually lawyers as supporters of this process, but not full-fledged politicians. But then this is another story.
And I would like to address the very interesting issues which were raised here. The first is the issue of identification of the lawyer with the client. This is quite important topic and the convention is actually intended to prevent such manifestations. It is not necessary, it is dangerous and it should be prohibited to identify a lawyer with the client.
Plus, I would like just to say that it is quite important to create an atmosphere. There, the people in society should understand that even if a client is absolute evil, he or she should have the minimum rights to appear before the judiciary.
Here, we raise the issue of lawyers in authoritarian countries. I would like to emphasise that lawyers in authoritarian countries are the last hope for these societies to build a democratic rule of law state. And we all together should support them as guardians of the rule of law.
I would like to also address the issue of the misuse of convention, which was raised by Sir Edward LEIGH. You are not lawyers who are representing the interests of the clients. We are not, you know, the judges. We may represent their interests, but we should follow that the court wouldn't misuse a convention. And here we have a crucial responsibility because we are those who actually established the court and we elect the judges.
I would like to address the issue of spyware. I absolutely agree with you. But this issue should be regulated in the convention on spyware and we all do our best to find a solution to it.
And I would like to emphasise the importance of the establishment of the Group of Experts on the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer (GRAVO), which would be a real monitoring mechanism to identify and find all the necessary elements which should be reflected in their reports. And I'm very much looking forward to havinto the opportunity to work with the GRAVO because GRAVO would also submit relevant information to this Assembly and relevant committees would be able to be engaged in it.
Thank you so much for the speeches and thank you very much for the support.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:06:30
Thank you, Vladimir.
Lord Keen, would you like to take the floor as the chairperson of the Committee?
United Kingdom, EC/DA, Chairperson of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
11:06:39
Thank you, Mister President.
Could I begin by thanking Lord HERMER for his contribution to this debate?
I agree with everything he had to say, with one qualification. He referred to the commitment of the new United Kingdom government to the convention and the rule of Law. There is nothing new about the United Kingdom's commitment to the convention and the Rule of law. It has been there since 1951.
But despite Mr Tony VAUGHAN's observations, I think we can forgive Lord HERMER one party political point.
Mister President, as Chair of the Committee on Legal affairs and Human Rights, I am pleased to advise that our Committee unanimously adopted the draft opinion prepared by Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN.
Preparing for the adoption of this opinion, the Committee held a hearing with experts during its meeting in Yerevan in December last year. And indeed, on behalf of the Committee, I would extend my thanks to the Chair of the Committee of Experts on the Protection of Lawyers, Dr Christoph HENRICHS, the representative of the CCBE, Mr Laurent PETTITI, and the representative of the Armenian Bar Association, Mr Arnold VARDANYAN, for their contributions to our work.
I agree with the many speakers that the convention is indeed a very timely instrument.
Yesterday, the general rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders and whistleblowers, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS, presented his information note. He noted that lawyers in several states have come under increasing pressure. In Belarus, disbarments and punitive revocation of legal licenses have become routine. In Russia, the situation is equally worrying.
Mr Aleksey LADIN, a human rights lawyer known for defending Crimean political prisoners, was disbarred for "discrediting" the Russian military.
Mr Dmitriy TALANTOV, another prominent lawyer, was recently sentenced to seven years in prison for speaking out on social media against the Russian war on Ukraine.
As Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN rightly noted, attacks against lawyers are not limited only to Russia and Belarus, of course, and indeed, that was indicated by our speaker from Poland.
Lawyers are being targeted in various parts of the world. Their safety and freedom to practice independently and without fear are, of course, paramount to the integrity of our legal systems and the maintenance of the rule of law.
Colleagues, when lawyers unanimously agree on a text designed to protect lawyers, we should be confident that it is indeed a well drafted instrument.
I encourage you to support the draft opinion.
Thank you, Mister President.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:09:34
Thank you, Lord Keen.
(Light applause)
So the debate is closed. The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights has presented a draft opinion to which one amendment has been tabled.
And I remind you that speeches on amendments are limited to 30 seconds.
So I call Mr Titus CORLĂŢEAN to support Amendment 1. Titus, you have 30 seconds.
Colleagues,
With respect, I strongly invite you to approve this amendment that was approved by a majority in the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights.
It's an important amendment because when you see several cases that tend to to be a systemic problem, you need specific regulation, not general regulations. This is when we are speaking about disproportionate measures of force which could affect the prestige of the legal profession. The amendment is providing a solution.
Please vote for the amendment.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:10:29
Thank you, Titus. Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? Yes.
Yes, thank you, Mister Chairman.
Just a few words on the position of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, which is against this amendment.
Forgive me, but I think it's a detail, well, at least it's an example, a clarification which, in my opinion, doesn't belong in a framework convention, which is intended to have a general scope. That's the first argument.
Secondly, as has already been said, the aim of this convention is to be universal in scope. In other words, to ensure that as many European countries as possible sign up to this framework convention, and I think there may be some reluctance if this type of precision is included in the convention.
And thirdly, why only lawyers? Why not include politicians or other categories of citizens in this exception?
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:11:30
Thank you, Stéphane.
Lord Richard KEEN, what is the opinion of the Committee on the amendment?
United Kingdom, EC/DA, Chairperson of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
11:11:37
Mister President,
The Committee did agree to the amendment, but only by a narrow majority.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:11:45
So I shall now put the amendment to the vote.
The vote is open.
Ah, sorry, sorry. I forgot to ask the rapporteur.
Yes, Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN. Really sorry.
Thank you, Mister Chair,
Once again, if there is a political decision, lawyers are not heard. But this is a very important legal step.
I am against this amendment because it is already covered in the framework convention, first.
Second, it addresses only specific cases and does not reflect the very logic of support of the the rights of the lawyers.
Imagine if the person for the domestic violence or for the killing of another lawyer was arrested. We said that he shouldn't be export with the handcuffs.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:12:40
Mister Vardanyan...
The problem is that, according to the rules, I shouldn't give you. So it was my mistake. Thank you so much to the Secretariat, Ms Despina CHATZIVASSILIOU for reminding me, she's more experienced in rules.
So since we are talking about rules, I think that we should have respected them. It is my fault.
So the last to be asked, that is, I will ask again Lord Richard KEEN who is the Chair, for the position of the Committee.
Can you please repeat the position of the committee Lord Richard KEEN?
United Kingdom, EC/DA, Chairperson of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
11:13:15
Thank you, Mister President.
The Committee agreed this amendment, but only by a narrow majority.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:13:21
Thank you. And then we come to my previous. Titus, there's no point of order. Okay, I can hear you.
President, colleagues.
10 to 7, according to our rules, is not a narrow majority.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:13:38
Okay, it's an old story, but it's math. I'm not good at math and I'm not going to comment on that.
So the vote is open now.
The vote is closed.
I call for the result to be displayed.
The amendment is rejected.
Now we will proceed to vote on the draft opinion contained in Document 16102 as amended. Note, it was not amended because the amendment is rejected, as it was at the beginning. I remind you that a two-thirds majority is required.
The vote is open.
The vote is closed.
I call for the result to be displayed.
It is adopted.
(Applause)
Thank you all.
For the record, I would like to mention that during the vote on the draft opinion, my intention was to vote in favour, and that I voted against by mistake.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:15:11
Colleagues,
The second item of business this morning is a debate under urgent procedure on “The urgent need for free and fair elections in Belarus”. You can find it in Document 16105 presented by Mr Ryszard PETRU on behalf of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy.
We will try to finish by 11:45 a.m., maybe a bit later because we started later. I will interrupt the list of speakers when we reach this time.
And I call the rapporteur to take the floor.
Mister Petru, you know that you have 7 minutes now, and 3 minutes later. So, whenever you're ready, please take the floor.
So, Mister Petru, please, let's start. We are a bit late.
Thank you, Mister President.
Dear colleagues, dear friends,
It is less than a 2-hour flight from Berlin; 2:30 from Athens or Rome; less than 3 from Paris and 4 from Madrid. This is how long it takes to the capital of Belarus, Minsk. It is not far.
It is not far, but at the same time it feels, looks so far away.
Belarus is in Europe. It was in Europe, it is in Europe, and it will be in Europe. Belarusian people showed their willingness to be a part of democratic European society in 2020, when Alexander LUKASHENKO lost, then stole the presidential race against Sviatlana TSIKHANOUSKAYA.
In the five years since, repressions in Belarus have only intensified, and the need for real free and fair elections has only become more urgent.
In this Assembly, we have regularly noted that free and fair elections form the foundation of democracy. Citizens must have the right to freely choose their representatives in an environment where freedoms of speech, freedom of assembly and association are protected.
In Belarus, these conditions are non-existent. Opposition figures are imprisoned or forced to leave the country, independent media are silenced, and political parties are dissolved.
Against the background of fear and repression, we watched last Sunday as a so-called Presidential election was held in Belarus that sought to give legitimacy to the 30-year autocratic rule of Alexander LUKASHENKO. It is clear that these elections cannot, under any circumstances, be considered either credible or legitimate.
It marks yet another chapter of LUKASHENKO’s autocratic rule, illustrated by the systematic dismantling of democratic institutions, the suppression of civil and political rights, and the dreadful imprisonment of over 1 200 political prisoners, 8 of them incommunicado.
Alexander LUKASHENKO during a recent interview was asked why his opponents were in prison or in exile. He gave the disarming answer: it was their choice, because they talked too much. It's hard to find a better self-summary of the despotic system of governance.
LUKASHENKO’s contempt for democratic norms is accompanied by his contempt for international law: LUKASHENKO’s support to Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine, the hosting of Russian nuclear weapons on the territory of Belarus and the continued weaponisation of migrants as a tool for hybrid war against my country Poland, against Lithuania, against Latvia. This all shows the threat posed to European security by a dishonest, autocratic regime.
On a personal note, when I was 17, I remember, in June 1989, unexpectedly communism collapsed. A year before, one could only dream of such a scenario. Tyrannies fall suddenly. But one has to help them to fall. Going back to 1989, I remember German Chancellor Helmut KOHL visiting Poland on 9 November, not expecting the Berlin Wall to fall during his visit. He suspended his visit and returned home on next day. I wish our Belarusian colleagues the same miracle to happen.
Of course, one can not just wait. I do believe if you work hard, if you do the right things, if you believe in universal values, your ideas will prevail. Sooner rather than later.
At the Parliamentary Assembly, we focus, rightly, on the democratic backsliding on our continent. And let us be clear: the threats to our democracies are real, present, and dangerous.
But at the same time, let us also pay attention to the Global Repression Regression in 2024: the fall of dictatorships in Syria, in Bangladesh. New pressures faced by the regimes in Iran, in Venezuela.
The thin line between continuation and collapse of these regimes grows ever thinner. And what thins that line further is our strong commitment to opposing these regimes by standing firm behind our values, by protecting the human rights of European citizens and promoting democracy and the rule of law.
Today we have with us in the Assembly a representative of the Belarusian delegation to the Council of Europe. They are sitting with us today. This is a new chapter in our Assembly, giving new hope to the whole democratic society.
It is a clear sign of the Assembly’s commitment to supporting a democratic future for Belarus.
It is a continuation of our solidarity with the Belarusian people.
It is a strong symbol of our solid support to the democratic voices of Belarus, led by Ms TSIKHANOUSKAYA.
So thank you, for your committent to democracy. I want to assure you that we share the same vision of a democratic future in an independent, sovereign, peaceful, and prosperous Belarus.
To sum up, dear colleagues, today, let us clearly reject these elections that took place last Sunday.
Let us continue to call for the unconditional release of the political prisoners.
Let us push for accountability for LUKASHENKO’s support to Russia’s illegal full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine, and for his crimes against the Belarusian people.
And let us work to support a democratic future for Belarus.
Жыве Беларусь! [Long live Belarus! - in Belarusian]
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:23:32
Thank you, Ryszard.
(Light applause)
Dear colleagues,
I am pleased to welcome for the first time the Belarusian democratic delegation. I will call Ms Anzhalika MELNIKAVA, who is the president of the Coordination Council and member of the representative delegation of Belarusian democratic forces, to speak for the first time in this Parliamentary Assembly.
Madam Melnikava, you have the floor.
on behalf of the Belarusian democratic delegation
11:24:04
Thank you.
Mister President, honourable members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe,
It is truly humbling to stand before you today, speaking on behalf of the Coordination Council of Belarus, the elected representative body of the Belarusian democratic forces.
Thank you for your decision to invite our delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe session. This is a crucial motivation for us and a clear signal of your support to all of us in our struggle for freedom.
I extend my greetings to all of you, as well as my Belarusian colleagues, including the head of our delegation, Ms Alexandra MAMAEVA, and the majority leader of the Coordination Council, Ambassador Pavel LATUSHKA.
The so-called election in Belarus was neither fear, free nor fair. It violated every single standard of democratic elections.
Today, there are over 1 200 political prisoners, at least seven of whom have been tortured to death.
Over the past years, all eleven opposition parties have been outlawed.
More than 1 800 NGOs and all independent media have been liquidated.
At least 300 000 Belarusians have been forced into exile.
All our citizens abroad are now deprived of their voting rights.
A climate of fear and terror has been deliberately created in my country.
In such a situation, the announced results of so called election cannot be recognised.
We call on you to reject this fraudulent election, refuse to acknowledge Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO's legitimacy and denounce the process as a sham.
Our delegation fully supports the Parliamentary Assembly's resolution calling for the urgent need for free and fair elections in Belarus. And I speak now of a joint position of the Coordination Council of Belarus, of the office of Ms Svetlana TIKHANOWSKA, of the United Transitional Cabinet and the majority of civil society organisations and Belarusian people inside of the country who continue to resist the regime.
Today, we are fighting to preserve the independence of our country, which is facing an existential threat from the Kremlin and the ideology of the Russian world.
Russia is actively implementing a strategy of non-military occupation of Belarus.
However, we understand that only a free nation can effectively resist threats for its sovereignty. It is impossible to imagine a free people ruled by a criminal.
This is why one of our key priorities is holding Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO accountable. He continues to commit crimes against humanity, against Belarusians, as well as war crimes and aggression against Ukraine.
Democracy will prevail only when justice is served. The Belarusian people are a European nation. Our history and culture are an integral part of Europe's historical heritage. But it's equally important for us to be a part of Europe's future.
We are grateful for your solidarity and will continue our struggle for freedom, human rights and democracy.
Thank you, "long live Belarus" (spoken in Belarusian).
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:27:28
Thank you, Anzhelika.
And in the debate, I will ask first Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK, who is going to speak on behalf of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe.
Ukraine, ALDE, Spokesperson for the group
11:27:42
Thank you, Mister President.
Dear friends from Belarus.
Dear Richard, you did a great job. And on behalf of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), I would have to acknowledge that we will truly support this resolution.
Let's be honest, it wasn't an election. You can't even put "election" in quotes. It was a reappointment for the seventh time that LUKASHENKO did to himself.
And let's be honest, no resolution will call new elections. It will not happen until the Kremlin regime resides. Because Belarus is totally controlled, – diplomatically, economically – by the Russian Federation.
LUKASHENKO gave in the sovereignty of its own country, and betrayed his own people to be in power for so long. That was his price. You truly know that LUKASHENKO gave also the territory to use for the aggression against Ukraine. And he has to be punished as well. And he also is responsible for the forced disappearances of Ukrainian children. For these last three years, more than 2 000 Ukrainian children were transported, were transferred, to Belarusian territory for these re-educational camps.
We do hope that we will see, not just this delegation, but we will see a democratic Belarus as a member of the Council of Europe. But for this, we need to help Ukraine to beat Russia and then Belarus will be a democratic country and will be part of our community.
Another thing I would like to underline, it's very important to understand what's happening with the identity of the Belarusian people. Belarus "government" in quotes, the Belarus state machine, is actually responsible for targeting the Belarusian identity because they want to be in this part of the Russian world, Russkiy Mir, and all those who speak the Belarusian language are called oppositioners just because they know Belarusian. It's very suspicious to speak the Belarusian language or to have and use the culture of Belarus.
So I urge member states to help protect Belarusian identity. At least for those who reside in your countries in the member states. And also to help them to avoid transnational repressions. Because the LUKASHENKO regime is trying to use Interpol and other tools to actually punish people and have them deported to Belarus.
I truly wish you luck. It was the work in this Assembly. Ukraine is with us. ALDE is with you and "long live Belarus" [spoken in Belarusian].
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:30:51
Thank you, Miss Kravchuk.
And now I ask Mr Paul GAVAN to take the floor on behalf of the Group of the Unified European Left.
Please, Mister Gavan.
Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
I want to commend the rapporteur for this report and its very clear call for free elections in Belarus. It's a call that every political group here should endorse.
There is no doubt that the last election held in 2020 was not free or fair. And that was before the constitutional changes in 2022 to allow LUKASHENKO to join the ranks of ALIYEV and PUTIN and effectively become presidents for life. The Venice Commission has spoken clearly on this issue.
The election this week is no different. Indeed, the refusal to allow election observation of any kind tells its own story, just as it did with Azerbaijan.
The figure of half a million Belarusians who have had to leave the country due to political persecution is shocking. And of course, we must show solidarity and support to these people.
It's also important to recognise and support Belarusian democratic forces. This was recognised in the Reykjavík Declaration made by this institution in May 2023.
Increasing dialogue and solidarity with the opposition is very important.
Paragraph 20 sets out a clear set of calls to what the Belarus regime needs to do. And again, the Group of the Unified European Left are happy to endorse these calls. They represent a roadmap to a better democratic future.
It's particularly pertinent to call out the continuing existence of the death penalty. This really is an affront to human rights. And there should, of course, be an immediate moratorium on the death penalty.
Just one note of caution from our group, and it is that the future of Belarus should be determined solely by the people of Belarus, and the country should never be allowed to be up for grabs for international cowboy capitalists looking to make a quick buck through the wholesale capture of key assets and national wealth.
The future of Belarus belongs to the people of Belarus.
Thank you.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:33:02
Thank you, Mister Gavan.
And the next on the list is Ms Bisera KOSTADINOVSKA-STOJCHEVSKA, who will be speaking on behalf of the Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group. Please, Madam.
North Macedonia, SOC, Spokesperson for the group
11:33:13
Thank you, Madam President.
Free, fair and democratic are no adjectives that can be added to the election process held this month in Belarus, where Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO, faced with a make believe four counter-candidates, won his seventh mandate to rule the country that is neither free, nor democratic.
Thanks to the constitutional changes adopted in 2022, he's been in power for 31 years. These changes that the Venice Commission strongly oppose, stating that they violate international principles. What happened in the 31 year long regime?
1.5 million people have left Belarus; exiled journalists; people living in a grey zone; strong and unquestionable partnership with Russia; no independent media; strong censorship; out of the mind penalties – people put to prison for a comment on social media; full participation and support of the atrocities in Ukraine; keeping company with blacklisted people; more than 1 200 political prisoners; not allowing oppositional figures to even submit a candidacy in an electoral process; exiled or imprisoned oppositional leaders; and in general, unseen repression and erosion of human rights.
The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) was excluded ten days prior to the election this month. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe was not even invited.
Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO himself has stated, better a dictatorship in Belarus than democracy as in Ukraine.
Hence his unconditional love for the person who first congratulated him on his seventh mandate: Mr Vladimir PUTIN.
What happened in the first 24 hours of this new seventh mandate? The Ministry of Information of Belarus sent a letter to Google with a request to pay attention of the alleged breaking of the law by independent Belarusian media outlets who work from exile.
Who was the first to know this? Mr Konstantin PRIDYBAYLO, a Russian propagandist.
Mind you, these independent media outlets are depicted by the Belarus court – his court – as extremist formations. Censorship at its finest.
To end, let me cite what was the reply of Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO to Mr Steve ROSENBERG, a BBC reporter covering the elections, asking him on what account these elections were considered democratic, given the fact that his political counterparts were in prison? Laughing, he said, "my counterparts are either in exile or in prison. Prison is for people who talk too much. But yet you are still here".
Thank you.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:36:01
Thank you so much.
Now I ask Ms Ingjerd Schie SCHOU to take the floor on behalf of the Group of the European People's Party.
Please, Madam Schou.
Norway, EPP/CD, Spokesperson for the group
11:36:10
Thank you, Madam President.
I would like to start with recalling our resolution of last January, "A Democratic Future for Belarus", in which we agreed to allow regular participation of a representative delegation of the Belarusian democratic forces in the work of our Parliamentary Assembly. Today, a year later, we have the first ever Belarusian delegation present in the hemicycle and included in our work. Words matter, Madam President, but they matter more when they are followed up by action.
Your presence today, your participation in our work, is a result of your hard work and our unwavering support of your dedication and work for a democratic future for Belarus. I wish you a warm welcome.
President,
On Monday, you labelled the presidential election in Belarus as a shame and bogus. This was not an exaggeration. The level of repression was unprecedented. There were severe restrictions to political participation for opponents of their regime, arbitrary detention and torture, and mass human rights violations.
Today, more than 1 200 political prisoners are still deprived of their freedom. Among them are Mr Ales BIALIATSKI, 2002 Nobel Peace Prize laureate and the first winner of our Václav Havel Prize in 2013, and representatives of civil society organisation Viasna, also 2022 Nobel Peace Prize winners.
Free and fair elections cannot be held in a context like this. In fact, it deprives the so-called elections of any kind of legitimacy.
I therefore totally agree with the draft resolution in encouraging all member States to reject the legitimacy of the so-called presidential elections.
Madam President,
It is important that both the Parliamentary Assembly and the Council of Europe as a whole stay visible and strong in its support of the democratic opposition forces. It is important that we continue to support the tireless efforts of the Belarusian democratic forces, led by Ms Sviatlana TSIKHANOUSKAYA, and the independent Belarusian civil society, both inside and outside Belarus.
These are truly impressive, strong and courageous people that do not give up their fights for freedom and democracy. They deserve our support.
Thank you, Madam President.
(Light applause)
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:39:16
Thank you, Madam Schou.
And now I ask Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO to take the floor on behalf of the European Conservatives Group and Democratic Alliance.
Please, sir.
Ukraine, EC/DA, Spokesperson for the group
11:39:26
Thank you. Thank you very much.
Dear colleagues,
Do you know that LUKASHENKO likes animals? Yeah, he likes animals. And he has a lot. He has cows. He even milks his cows. He doesn't milk just 10 million Belarusians. He also milks his cows. He has horses. He likes dogs the most. His favourite one is a white Spitz, a very beautiful white Spitz, Umka. Umka translates to "clever". Why I'm telling you this? Yeah, LUKASHENKO is a nice man. He likes animals. Unfortunately, he doesn't like people because he beats people, he kills people, he rapes people, he broke slaves of people.
But why am I talking about his animals and his pets? Because the best assertion and review on these elections gave Umka, his wonderful white spitz. There is a video when LUKASHENKO is entering the so-called polling station, and he was with his Umka, his dog, and his dog pissed on the ballot box.
It's better than a session, than an Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) decision, and even better than our resolution because it says everything about these so-called elections.
So, that's the best. It's a really clever dog. And it's really funny, but it's not. Why? Because Belarus, in reality, is an occupied state and LUKASHENKO is no more than a puppet in the hands of PUTIN. PUTIN could even change him for Umka, for example, for this white Spitz. He is maybe even cleverer than LUKASHENKO. LUKASHENKO is there because PUTIN allows him to still be there.
And what for? PUTIN needs Belarus, and that's already important for everybody who is sitting here and for all the millions of people who are living on our continent. Because Belarus today is a bridgehead, a foothold for PUTIN.
When we are adopting new resolutions. Yeah, a lot of resolutions in Belarus. But what's happening there? Now there are nuclear weapons in Belarus, now there are ballistic missiles, this so-called oreshnik in Belarus. What's next? North Koreans in Belarus? This is a danger for everybody on this continent, and we can't just make resolutions on this.
We finally need to do something with this. First of all, to help those Belarusians who are fighting, the Kalinovski regiment and other volunteers in Ukraine, other Belarusians who are ready to fight against this regime. We need to help them, we need to train them, we need to give all the support we can, because in other cases, one day LUKASHENKO or his white Spitz Umka will push a button, and the missiles will fly on European cities. We need to stop it.
Thank you.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:42:38
Thank you, Mister Goncharenko.
And in the debate I call next Ms Petra BAYR.
Please, Miss.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
There are many important and good reasons why it is important to have free and fair elections in Belarus. Probably the most important reason of all is to establish the rule of law. The rule of law that allows free trade unions to operate, for example.
Last week I met with the chairman of the Belarusian Congress of Democratic Trade Unions, Alyaksandr. He was imprisoned; he escaped. There is no freedom of assembly. Those who want to represent people and fight for their rights are thrown into prison. It is important because of this to finally give women the opportunity to live a life free from violence, to live a life that is humane, that can be reconciled with human rights.
I just want to mention a few things that women are not currently experiencing in Belarus. There is forced labour for women and for girls who are either in prisons or in closed institutions from the age of 11. Eleven years old, and they get one to ten euros a month for it. There are absolutely disproportionate punishments. For example, mere membership in an opposition organisation carries the same penalty as rape. The state punishes victims of domestic violence who go to the police for protection by taking away their children, and the women who want to report violence against themselves to the police then have to pay money, then have to pay a fine to get their children back.
State media publish so-called execution lists, where terrorists are described, including 29 women's rights activists, who Lukashenko and his regime consider to be terrorists.
The situation of women in prisons is fatal. They are threatened with degrading treatment, dehumanising punishment and sexual violence. And the list goes on and on.
You can find it in the shadow report on CEDAW, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. All these rights that women would have, that trade unions would have, will only want to be fulfilled and can only be fulfilled if there is a post-Lukashenko regime.
Finally, the fact that there are self-appointed so-called election observers who are in Putin's sphere of influence, in this Russkiy Mir, as it was first called, who are calling these elections, and I quote, "a real opportunity for the Belarusian people to determine the future of their country", is above all a disgrace for the party from which these people come. Specifically, a former FPÖ politician, Mr Dietrich KOPS. This party is also represented here in this House. Shame on you.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:45:57
Thank you, Madam Bayr.
The next speaker is Ms Saara-Sofia SIRÉN, please, Madam.
Thank you, Madam President.
We all know what is the foundation of democracy. It's free and fair election. And that is something the so-called elections seen in Belarus last week were absolutely not.
I am deeply worried about the situation in Belarus. The democratic situation is only getting worse. The opposition is significantly repressed by the current regime. The number of political prisoners is growing. People are dying in prisons. There are ongoing reports of torture and other human rights violations. Hundreds of thousands of people have been forced to flee their country.
This morning I met with the Belarusian opposition and I heard that Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO has even started attacking Belarusian people living in exile through punishing their families still living in Belarus.
Authorities are trying to force many to return, including by halting passport renewals at Belarusian consulates abroad.
Lithuania has taken right steps to take action together with the International Criminal Court.
It is our job here in the Council of Europe to support democracy and human rights.
We need to support and cooperate with the Belarusian democratic forces. This is the only way for the possibility for a democratic future in the country.
It is right that the Belarusian opposition is included in our work here. I strongly support this cooperation.
There is a large number of Belarusian people wanting to see Belarus as part of our European family. This institution represents the European values and freedom.
I would also like to take a moment to express my joy also at the involvement of a youth representative in the Belarusian delegation here with us today. The youth hold the key to our future and therefore their involvement is crucial. It is important that we together support them in their work for a democratic, safe, and free Belarus in the future.
Finland has strongly supported the democratic forces of Belarus in order to give tools to build a real democracy once the day comes.
People of Belarus deserve free elections. They deserve to vote without fear. They deserve to live in freedom and a possibility to build a country based on fundamental values.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:49:05
Thank you, Madam.
(Light applause)
And our next speaker is Mr Paweł JABŁOŃSKI.
Please, Sir.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, dear colleagues,
But first of all, let me welcome our Belarusian colleagues. Great to be here with you. Thank you very much for what you have been doing. We commend you for your bravery, for your courage, for your relentless fight in the name of your people. Many of you have been subject to persecution, to torture, imprisonment, forced exile. But nonetheless, you have been fighting. And you are here. You are representing the Belarusian people.
Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO – let it be said very clearly in this Parliamentary Assembly – Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO is not the president of Belarus. He's a usurper. He's a dictator. And he was rejected by the people of Belarus in 2020. Since then, he's usurping power. He's not representing his people.
And I want to express my gratitude also to every member of this Parliamentary Assembly, to all the governments across Europe that support Belarusian civil society. In Poland, we have accepted hundreds of thousands of Belarusian refugees who found their second home in our country. And we continue to support them. We continue to support freedom of speech, freedom of expression in Belarus. We must continue to do so.
I'm very happy today that we agree on a cross-party basis with colleagues from various political groups. And I urge you, I urge you all, colleagues, to continue, to continue to support Belarusian people, to continue to support freedom of speech in Belarus, especially Belsat TV in Poland, [it is] of utmost importance that we provide Belarusian people with the means to know what is the real situation there.
Let us not forget that there are still over a thousand political prisoners in Belarus, amongst them Polish nationals, including Mr Andrzej POCZOBUT, a brave journalist, very brave people. We should do everything in our power to have them freed.
I fully agree with Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO. We must not only speak, we must also act. This resolution today is very important, but it cannot be our last step. We must do more.
Our duty, first and foremost, is to safeguard human rights, to safeguard international law and the crimes of the Belarusian regime, the crimes of Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO, of his subordinates, must be persecuted.
I urge you, dear colleagues, to continue the work and to commence work in order to prepare a detailed investigation into the crimes of Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO and his subordinates. We should be doing this as this Parliamentary Assembly. This is our duty. If we want international law to be observed, we want human rights to be protected, we must do everything in our power so that these crimes are prosecuted and that the perpetrators, Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO in the first place, are brought to justice.
Thank you very much.
(Applause)
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:52:12
Thank you, sir.
And the next on the list is Mr Claude KERN.
"You have the floor, sir" [spoken in French].
Thank you, Madam President.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Last Sunday, without any suspense, Lukashenko, in power since 1994, announced that he had been re-elected President of Belarus with over 87% of the vote. The man who describes his country as a "brutal democracy" has subjected civil society to unprecedented repression. In fact, there is nothing democratic about the regime in place; this election in no way corresponds to democratic standards, nor does it have any legitimacy.
We must express this forcefully here, and I thank our colleague Mr Ryszard PETRU for proposing a resolution clearly condemning not only the sham election of 26 January 2025, but also the LUKASHENKO regime and its practices. Belarus is today an instrument in the hands of the Russian President, who used its territory to invade Ukraine in 2022. Belarus has contributed to the hybrid war waged against Europe by using migrants to destabilise Poland. This is something we have denounced in this Assembly.
Belarus, which has always refused to abolish the death penalty, is today one of the most repressive regimes, both within its borders and in its transnational activities. Despite some skilfully orchestrated releases in recent months, opponents are muzzled, in exile or in prison. I have a special thought for the thousands of Belarusians who have been forced to flee the country, and for the more than 1 200 political prisoners still held by the regime.
At the initiative of the France-Belarus Interparliamentary Friendship Group, a number of senators sponsored political prisoners in 2023 to show them the support of the French Senate. The resolution we are examining this morning underlines the particularly harsh nature of their conditions of detention.
These prisoners are sometimes unable to communicate with the outside world for an indefinite period, as was the case for Maria KOLESNIKOVA for many months. They are subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, violence of various kinds, and repressive measures that violate all the values we defend in this house.
The resolution we will be adopting this morning is a beacon of hope for them. We have not forgotten them, and we vigorously support them. May our position keep the flame of hope alive in their hearts.
Finally, I am delighted that our Assembly is welcoming a delegation from the democratic forces of Belarus this morning. My hope is that Belarus will have a democratic future, allowing its people to express themselves without fear of reprisals.
Thank you all very much.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:55:13
"Thank you, Mister Kern" [spoken in French].
And now I ask Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS to take the floor.
Please, sir.
"Thank you, Madam President" (spoken in French).
First, we have real fighting democrats on the balcony. I remember in 1993, when I was started to be, but we have them here. That is a huge step forward that we agree, friends, with the structural changes. And they have their office here, they will be observing our work. And I invite to structuralise until the end and to have them in the committees. So welcome, welcome.
Secondly, we have just [had a] hybrid attack from Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO's side who represent actually a Josef STALIN type-regime in the middle of Europe. Well, the hybrid attack was based on the illegal immigrants [who were] seduced and brought to the Polish-Lithuanian-Latvian border and sent to our side and behind [it] was the Belarusian army. That is the hybrid attack against the European Union, against the countries who are inside of Europe.
So secondly, Belarusian culture was annihilated during Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO's regime during [over the] last more than 20 years, more than 300 to 400 schools in Belarusian language were cancelled and instead Russian schools [were] established, with the ideology from Mr Josef STALIN's time, the fake ideology, against Europe ideology, against human rights ideology.
Thirdly, Lithuania started the process. I'm asking you. Thank you. I'm asking you to follow the Lithuanian example and bring an appeal to the international court system and start legal procedures, legal procedures against Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO's regime. Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO's regime is a criminal regime which should be under procedures and juridical co-operation with him should be stopped at all possible levels.
Fourth, I would like to remember the aeroplane issue, the Athens-Vilnius aeroplane was hijacked. International organisations declared, after huge investigations, that it was a terror attack in the name of the official Mr Alexander LUKASHENKO's regime. That was calculated under international law as a terror attack against international order.
Last, we would like to have the party system here linked to the Belarusian party system. Belarusians have parties, and Mr Mikola STATKEVICH should be linked to the social democrats, and we should take care of him and the christian democrats of Europe should take care of the Belarusian christian democrats. We have party responsibilities to make our auspices in everyday activities.
And lastly, I would like to say that I am proud of having Ms Sviatlana TSIKHANOUSKAYA in Vilnius. I am proud of having Mr Pavel LATUSHKA in Warsaw. We will be going forward, integrating our friends in our structures, giving them even our small souvenirs like our passports which are printed here in the Council of Europe.
Thank you.
(Light applause)
(Undelivered speech, Rules of Procedure Art. 31.2)
First of all, I would like to thank my colleague Mr Ryszard PETRU for his initiative and congratulate him on his comprehensive presentation of both the internal situation in Belarus and the fate and problems of those Belarusians who are engaged in opposition activities or are simply trying to organize their lives outside of Belarus.
The resolution rightly calls on, that Łukashenka never be called president – neither in speech nor in writing. Belarus does not have a president. It has a gloomy, nepotistic and cruel dictator – and that is exactly, how he should be called.
There are officially almost 1,300 political prisoners in Belarusian prisons (although this number is probably underestimated). Even Catholic priests are persecuted. Few people know that Belarus ranks second in the world – after Nicaragua – in terms of the number of imprisoned Catholic priests.
From time to time, Łukashenka tries to convince the West to ease the sanctions. He promises gradual democratization and releases a hundred or 200 people from prison. It is always an attempt at cynical trading. While some are released, others are arrested. We are not allowed to participate in such trading.
Finally, I would like to express my highest respect to all Belarusians who oppose Łukashenka's dictatorship at home and abroad, and especially to those - like Polish journalist Andrzej Poczobut - who have been imprisoned for many years and refuse to ask Łukashenka for pardon..
Dear Belarusian friends! At the Earth's pole, the polar night lasts a long six months, but then the day always comes. Such a day will come for Belarus too - thanks to your struggle and our solidarity and support.
Speech not pronounced (Rules of Procedure, Art. 31.2), only available in French
(Undelivered speech, Rules of Procedure Art. 31.2)
Dear colleagues,
Only a few days ago, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe’s General Rapporteur for a Democratic Belarus, Mr. Ryszard Petru, warned that the 26 January 2025 elections in the country “were set to be a sham.”
The General Rapporteur’s prediction was entirely on target.
Media coverage of this past Sunday’s elections in Belarus have - once again - revealed that President Alyaksandr Lukashenka is incapable of allowing an election to be held in accordance with international free and fair election principles.
His track-record in this regard is regrettably impeccable, as this Assembly knows too well.
In this alarming context, I applaud the Council of Europe’s multiple ongoing efforts to support Belarusian civil society and democratic forces abroad, especially young people, independent media, and human rights defenders.
From across the Atlantic, Canada is also making every effort to support Belarusian democratic opposition groups and civil society.
Canada has repeatedly expressed concern about gross and systematic human rights violations in the country as well as the targeted violence against peaceful protestors, opposition members, journalists, and human rights defenders.
In 2024, the Government of Canada welcomed representatives of Belarusian democratic groups to Ottawa on two occasions, including opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya in April.
The Government of Canada also held strategic consultations with representatives of opposition groups and civil society in late November 2024, issuing a joint statement on the general human rights situation and deficit of democracy in Belarus.
Among other issues, the joint statement expressed grave concern about “the continued lack of respect of the will of the Belarusian people,” particularly in the run-up to the 2025 presidential elections.
Since Belarus’ fraudulent presidential elections in 2020 and its crackdown on opposition groups and civil society, Canada has also continued to hit the Belarusian regime hard with multiple rounds of sanctions.
In addition, following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Canada has stepped up its punitive measures against Belarus for its complicity in this war of aggression.
In doing so, it has targeted government and financial elites, oligarchs and their family members, as well as entities involved in Belarus’ key industrial and financial sectors.
In conclusion, Canada reaffirms its commitment to a free and democratic Belarus and condemns the sham presidential elections from earlier this week.
Thank you.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
11:59:12
Thank you, Mister Zingeris.
Dear colleagues,
I must now interrupt the list of speakers. The speeches of members on the speakers list who have been present during the debate but have not been able to speak may be given to the Table Office for publication in the Official Report. I remind colleagues that the type-written texts can be submitted, electronically if possible, no later than four hours after the list of speakers is interrupted.
Now I call Mr Ryszard PETRU, rapporteur, to reply.
You have 3 minutes, sir.
Thank you very much.
First of all, I want to say that I was really moved when our colleague Ms Anzhelika MELNIKAVA was speaking here on behalf of Belarus. This is really historical and this is very important. It opens a new chapter, not only in our Assembly, but also, I hope, that in the democratic forces for Belarus.
Secondly, I thank you very much for this debate. It's important. It's important that we reacted so quickly to the sham elections that took place last Sunday.
And last, it's important to separate Belarus topic from the Russians one. Of course they are connected, but on the other hand they are very different.
And today we fight for a free and prosperous Belarus, which is very important.
Let me conclude this debate, and we have to be aware of what is at stake.
At the heart of democracy lies the principle that governments derive their legitimacy from the people. It is a fundamental necessity for human rights, for progress, and for justice.
Yet in Belarus, this principle has been consistently violated.
The elections are neither free nor fair, and the voices of the people are silenced through intimidation, censorship, and state violence.
The consequences of the sham elections are not just political, they are deeply human.
Opposition leaders are exiled or imprisoned, and citizens live under constant fear.
The international community has condemned these abuses, but words alone are not enough and there are many people who said that today during the debate. Concrete actions, diplomatic pressure, sanctions, and support for civil society, are crucial to ensure that democracy is not just a distant hope but a present reality.
The struggle for democracy in Belarus is not just the struggle of the Belarusian democratic forces with us today, it is ours as well.
It is a test of our commitment to justice and the rule of law.
If we believe in the power of the people, we must stand with them.
Ladies and gentlemen, democracy is not a privilege, it is a right.
Today, we reaffirm our unwavering demand for free and fair elections in Belarus. And the people of Belarus deserve nothing less.
Thank you very much for the debate and hopefully we will accept the resolution soon.
Thank you.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:02:19
Thank you, Mister rapporteur.
And now I have to ask Mister Chairperson of the Committee, Mister Bouyx, whether he wishes to speak.
France, ALDE, Chairperson of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy
12:02:34
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Mr Rapporteur, dear Ryszard,
Ladies and gentlemen,
I take the floor on behalf of the Committee as we bring this debate to a close.
I would like to express my deepest gratitude for today's discussions. Our commitment to a democratic future for the people of Belarus is clear, unwavering and ongoing.
I warmly thank the delegation representing the democratic forces of Belarus for being with us today, and I congratulate them for their work and courage in the face of brutal and inhuman repression.
I welcome the proposals in the resolution, which received unanimous – and I do mean unanimous – support from the members of the Political Affairs and Democracy Committee. It reinforces and underlines our unequivocal rejection of last Sunday's so-called elections conducted by the LUKASHENKO regime.
My thanks and appreciation also go to our general rapporteur for a democratic Belarus, Mr Ryszard PETRU, for his continuous work, support and unfailing support in the situation in Belarus too.
Thank you, Mister Zingeris, I know you have been deeply involved in this issue.
Our gratitude goes without saying, but we mustn't ignore the seriousness of the subject at hand. I recall the widespread repression carried out by the LUKASHENKO regime, which led to the arbitrary detention of tens of thousands of peaceful demonstrators after the fraudulent elections of 2020, and which continues to this day, as you pointed out, Mister Rapporteur, in flagrant violation of international law and democratic standards.
I reiterate the Assembly's firm condemnation of this repression, and we demand – and I do mean demand – the immediate and unconditional release of the 1 200 political prisoners.
What's more, the Lukashenko regime's involvement in Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the weaponisation of migratory flows have shown that the LUKASHENKO regime also represents a threat to international peace and security – and this has been very well said here in our debates.
To honour its obligations under international law, the actions of the LUKASHENKO regime must cease.
In conclusion, I once again express my gratitude and urge everyone present to support the resolution that embodies our demand for free and fair elections in Belarus.
Thank you for your support.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:05:12
Thank you, Mister Bouyx.
The debate is closed.
And now we move to the voting.
Dear colleagues, the Committee on Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy has presented a draft resolution to which two amendments have been tabled.
I understand that the Chairperson of the Committee wishes to propose to the Assembly that Amendments 1 and 2 to the draft resolution which were unanimously approved be declared as approved.
Is that so, Mister Bouyx?
France, ALDE, Chairperson of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy
12:05:42
That's right.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:05:44
Thank you.
If no one objects, I will consider the amendments to be approved.
Is there an objection?
If there is, we will need to verify that the objection has the required support of 10 people.
Please, could those who object raise their hands? I see no objection.
So Amendments 1 and 2 to the draft resolution are therefore approved and will not be called.
So we will now proceed to vote on the draft resolution contained in Document 16105. A simple majority is required.
The vote is open, dear colleagues.
The vote is closed.
And I call for the result to be displayed.
The draft resolution in Document 16105 is adopted.
Congratulations, Mister rapporteur.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:07:35
Dear colleagues, the final item of business this morning is a debate under urgent procedure on European commitment to a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.
It is Document 16106, presented by Ms Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI on behalf of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy.
In order to finish by 1 p.m. I will interrupt the list of speakers at about 12:35 p.m. to allow time for the reply and the vote.
Order, please.
Dear colleagues. Emanuelis. Mister Zingeris. Dear Emanuelis.
Colleagues.
We have already started the next item.
Ms Kumpula-Natri, you have 5 minutes now and 3 at the end.
Thank you, President.
Dear colleagues, it is an honour to present you this urgent report on the European commitment to a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.
In a rapidly evolving geopolitical situation, Ukraine needs us more than ever. The full-scale war has been going on for nearly three years, but Ukraine has been under attack for 11 years, and we hope peace is on the horizon, but not at any cost.
We are standing in the critical juncture for Ukraine and Europe and I want to underline that our unity will determine the fate of Ukraine.
It is critical that we and the European leaders stand united with Ukraine and maximise our support.
Our unity holds keys to a just and lasting peace for Ukraine, which is indispensable for the security and stability of Europe and beyond.
The Assembly has passed numerous resolutions where we clearly and unequivocally condemned Russia's full-scale war of aggression on Ukraine, which constitutes a blatant violation of Ukraine's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.
We need to underline that any peace negotiation must involve Ukraine and respect its right to determine its own future.
It is Ukraine's sovereign right to apply for membership in any international organisation and I strongly support the proposed amendment in this regard, including EU membership.
Let me also insist that any peace deal must be based on the principles of international law, human rights, rule of law, and democracy.
Lasting peace is only possible with accountability of the aggressor. Russia should abandon its imperial ambitions and stop interfering with sovereign nations affair.
The Register of Damages is an important first step to ensure accountability. Now we need to move forward with the Compensation Fund and Claims Commission and a special tribunal.
I was happy to hear from our Secretary General of the European Council in this plenary hall on Tuesday that things are progressing.
We welcome his commitment to use knowledge, experience, and political will of the Council of Europe for the establishment of a special tribunal to prosecute Russian and Belarusian leaders for crimes of aggression.
In this Draft Resolution I also make reference to Volodymyr ZELENSKYY's peace through strength and to the importance of a robust defence capacity, and I repeat our European will to remain resolute and united to secure Ukraine's future.
We are a human rights organisation. We must stand with Ukrainians. We do not forget any Ukrainian. I call for the immediate return of prisoners of war, unlawfully detained civilians, and deported children. And more of those helping in these inhumane deportations must be individually sanctioned.
Ukraine needs more humanitarian assistance and I want to extend my special gratitude towards the tireless fight of Ukraine's brave nation, their strength and solidarity.
But I also want to take here the opportunity and raise the role of the NGOs, civilians, and volunteers in Ukraine, but also across the world who are working tirelessly to support Ukrainian society to survive, the individuals to survive the winter, birth, their everyday life. NGOs role for humanitarian aid in Ukraine is worth of thanks and support.
This urgent resolution underlined that we must enhance our political, economical, and military support to Ukraine. We also need to strengthen the current sanctions regime against Russia. Sanctions are functioning. We do not want to finance the killing machinery of Vladimir PUTIN nor let the core technology to helping bombing homes and critical infrastructure in Ukraine.
Here I would also like to mention targeted individual sanctions on all the military leadership and elite and those who have been involved in these activities contributing to the horrors of war.
In the light of the recent events in my home sea, the Baltic Sea, I want in this resolution also mentioned the need to better counter the Russian shadow fleet. Not only does it allow Russia to get its oil to revert markets, but sanctioned vessels are in such bad shape that we live in the risk for ecological catastrophe in the vulnerable Baltic Sea.
Let me also say a few words on reconstruction. When the day comes, we are ready to help with infrastructure, restoration of environment, and removal of war debris, support the displaced persons, as well as promote democratic institutions, human rights, and rule of law.
This Assembly commends Ukraine for its achievements in implementing the Council of Europe action plan, resilience, recovery, and reconstruction, and its progress in the European Union access and progress despite of brutal war.
Let me reaffirm my unwavering resolve to support peace, justice, and rule of law in an independent Ukraine and across the continent.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:14:24
Thank you.
Dear colleagues,
Before I open the debate, I just want you to know that at the gallery there are people coming from Ukraine. Among them there are many who were captured and kept by the Russian troops. I had the opportunity to talk to them earlier in my office – I'm talking about the people from Ukraine. The Russian troops did not respect the Geneva Convention. There's a journalist who was captured, a soldier and others. Among them there is a young woman, she's 26, Lenya. When she was captured, she was 24. My daughter is 24. And this is not the only reason that I was moved, but because of the stories that she has told me.
I call you all in this debate, which has the accurate title of "European commitment to a just and lasting peace in Ukraine", in these days, where many people around the world are talking about peace in Ukraine, to have in my mind, in our minds, what these people have suffered [for the past] three years.
I open now the debate calling Mr Paul GAVAN on behalf of the Group of the Unified European Left.
Paul.
Thank you, Mister President,
I want to start on behalf of the Group of the Unified European Left with a clear statement, that Mr Vladimir PUTIN’s illegal invasion of Ukraine was wrong and should not have happened. Indeed, we’ve made this point on several occasions in this Parliamentary Assembly.
Let me also state that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine must be respected.
It is also true to say that there were real provocations on the part of the West in the years preceding this illegal invasion.
There are many points in this report that I support, including the condemnation of Russia’s invasion, and especially the overriding call for a just and lasting peace in Ukraine. But many parts of the report in effect call for a further doubling down on military support and sanctions, calls for more of the same. And the problem with this approach is that it ignores the horrendous and ever-increasing death toll in this conflict.
How many lives have been lost in this war? A report from the Wall Street Journal last September citing intelligence sources suggested that the number of Ukrainians and Russians killed or wounded had reached one million at that time. The truth is we will only find out the real rate of casualties when the conflict is over.
And each week we know the casualties are increasing.
The UN Refugee Agency, in addition, estimates that 6.7 million Ukrainians have fled the country, while another four million have been internally displaced.
Whilst there are important references to peace summits in the draft resolution and key topics to be negotiated, what is missing from this report is a clear call for an immediate ceasefire. This is what is needed and it is needed now. The alternative is to keep throwing thousands and thousands of more young Ukrainian lives into this furnace of war which has been stuck in a horrendous stalemate for two years now.
The escalation of the conflict through the use of direct missile attacks on Russian cities and the introduction by Russia of inter-continental ballistic missiles should be seen as a warning sign to the whole world.
The priority has to be an intervention to bring about a ceasefire. Diplomacy and dialogue, not further military escalation, are the only viable paths to a peaceful settlement in the region. I believe it is a tragedy that the potential of a peace settlement from the Istanbul talks of 2022 was effectively not taken up.
For this reason, the absence of a clear call for an immediate ceasefire, the Group of the Unified European Left are not in a position to support this resolution.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:18:26
Thank you, Paul.
Mr Piero FASSINO on behalf of the Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group.
"Thank you Mister President," [in English].
"I will speak in Italian" [in English].
I would like to thank my colleague Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI for the report which I agree with, of course.
We have now reached the third anniversary of a devastating war. The President urged us not to forget the terrible suffering that the Ukrainian people have endured. And everyone agrees that after three years of war the time has come to reach peace, and I think we all share that wish. However, what do we mean by peace? Because that is the real issue.
Moscow's position comes with very stringent conditions. Moscow does not intend in the slightest to return the annexed territories of the Donbass and Crimea. Moscow insists on Ukraine's non-accession to any international organisation. Moscow refers to the need for a change of political direction in Ukraine.
In short, conditions that shape more of a surrender than a peace. That would pave the way to an unjust peace. The fact is, we can't accept an unjust peace, there is a measure that cannot be ignored. And if peace is to be made on the conditions that are set by Putin, not only is it not a just peace, it risks being a very unjust peace. And I believe that the ambiguity of the U.S. administration, which evokes a Korean solution, with an armistice partition along the line of the de facto conflict, but that is not a peace solution, in fact it is a solution that is a harbinger of further conflict, must also cause concern.
That is why I believe that we must strive for a just peace, as has been recalled, which means defending and affirming Ukraine's full sovereignty, the freedom for Ukraine to choose which international organisations to join and how to define its international positioning and placement, that no obstacles be placed in the way of Ukraine's participation in the European Union, that there be compensation in the agreements for the destruction and devastation that has been suffered, and that there be the return of abducted children and all political prisoners.
To support Ukraine is to support this peace. Support it in all ways, including militarily. I want to be clear, I don't think anyone thinks that the final solution can be entrusted to weapons. I don't think anyone thinks that there can be a peace based on weapons. But it is necessary for Ukraine to go to the negotiating table, which will open sooner or later, under the best possible conditions. And supporting Ukraine in every way, including militarily, means ensuring that Ukraine can go to the negotiating table with, let's say, sustainable relations and therefore able to make its case.
For this, the support of all of Europe is decisive, and the support of the European Council as well is decisive, support for all measures, starting with the sanctions that have been adopted so far, give course to the Damage Register, work for the establishment of the Criminal Court because there is no peace if there is no justice, work to encourage and support every action that restores to Ukraine the possibility of development on the basis of the resilience plan that the Council of Europe has already evaluated.
And finally, full support for the initiative that the Secretary General of the Council of Europe takes.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:22:41
Ms Belén HOYO on behalf of the Group of the European People's Party.
Is Belén here?
Let us go with Lord Richard KEEN on behalf of the European Conservatives Group.
United Kingdom, EC/DA, Spokesperson for the group
12:23:01
Thank you, Mister President.
Thank you, colleagues.
The Treaties of Westphalia in 1648, which are sometimes referred to as the Peace of Westphalia, established the international law principle of state sovereignty. The Peace of Westphalia was based upon the concept of coexisting sovereign states and the recognition of a sovereign state's right to decide its own face and future.
What is perhaps less well known is that it established the precedent for peace reached by diplomatic congress and guaranteed by a third party. That came after 30 years of war that devastated Europe.
The prospect of a further 30 years of war in Europe is appalling. But let us remember there is a precedent.
Ukraine is the victim of a war of aggression that has devastated much of the state and at present leaves Crimea and much of the Donbass unlawfully occupied by Russia.
That war cannot continue indefinitely, but equally, it cannot be the subject of a simple ceasefire.
If we ensure that Ukraine is at its strongest militarily, economically, and politically, then proposals for a cessation of hostilities will make sense even to the aggressor.
But any such proposal can only make sense to Ukraine if it is subject to a clear and unambiguous guarantee, whether that involves NATO, Europe, United States, or others.
In such circumstances, occupied land might have to remain in the hands of the aggressor, although recognised by all civilised nations as part of the Ukrainian state.
A similar situation occurred within the Baltic states after 1945, when the Soviet occupation of the three republics was not recognised internationally. The Baltic states were able to resume their territorial integrity as independent nation states after 1991. It is a reminder that all despotisms eventually fail.
Colleagues, if we do not do all in our power, both politically and economically, to enable Ukraine to secure a just peace, then the prospects for the whole of Europe will be grim.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:25:54
Thank you, Lord Keen.
On behalf of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, Baroness Sal Brinton. You have the floor.
United Kingdom, ALDE, Spokesperson for the group
12:26:04
Mister President,
Next month is the third anniversary of PUTIN's illegal invasion of Ukraine.
The bravery and determination of the Ukrainian people and the leadership of President ZELENSKYY continue to be outstanding. And there is no doubt that the Russian Federation has violated international law and the Charter of the United Nations.
PUTIN's troops have attacked civilians, hospitals, schools and infrastructure. PUTIN has also had to go to Iran for weapons and North Korea for troops. And these alone show that Russia is struggling.
But dear colleagues, on the other side of the balance sheet is Ukraine, a nation that knows what it wants and should have the right to protect its ancient sovereignty, take up its place at the heart of Europe and join the European and NATO.
Now, we European nations have come to their aid recognising these undoubted rights and helping where we can. And we hope that President TRUMP restores the non-defence aid support from the United States of America.
Dear colleagues, peace can only be built through strength and the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe believes that we must continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine providing defence assistance as well as humanitarian, infrastructure and civil support too.
But it is more than that. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) stands for the rule of law, for human rights, and protecting true democracy. And so this is our battle too.
In downtown Vilnius, it is impossible to miss the sign that the liberal mayor of Vilnius put on his highest city building, "Vladimir PUTIN. The Hague awaits". It does. Accountability will come to the Russian Federation and to PUTIN in particular. He even boasts that he has removed 700 000 children from Ukraine. But abduction and abduction of children in war is a heinous war crime.
PACE members' solidarity with Ukraine is strengthened because now we are all learning from Ukraine ourselves. The United Kingdom forces have been helping Ukraine in training its military. But members of our military tell me that now Ukraine is the country that has the practical experience of managing a 21st-century war. Yes, the trenches echo the First World War, but also the use of drones, AI and disinformation.
So, dear colleagues, Ukraine will not be free until PUTIN is held to account, all Ukrainian land is returned, displaced people and prisoners of war are returned, and above all, Ukrainian children, now in Russia, are returned. Because only then will Ukraine have a lasting peace. And we in PACE all have our role to play to make that happen.
Please support the resolution.
Thank you.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:29:06
Thank you.
(Light applause)
The next speaker is Ms Saara-Sofia SIRÉN.
Mister President,
Ukraine needs our full support against the Russian aggression which has been ongoing already over ten years since 2014 and only escalated soon, already three years ago.
Continued support is vital for Ukraine to uphold human rights, the rule of law and democracy, which are crucial for recovery and stability not only in Ukraine, but in Europe as a whole. European countries need to remain united and strong in our support for Ukraine, as the outcome of the war will affect our own security and freedom and the future of our continent.
Ukraine is fighting for the values that we here share. There is hope for just peace, peace through strength. The coming months are crucial.
Just today, the President of Finland, Mr Alexander STUBB, said that we are talking about a time frame of three to six months, aiming first for a ceasefire and possible peace negotiations after that. It is clear that peace needs to be just and for this, Ukraine needs more support.
There is also a need for accountability for the Russian Federation's actions, including establishing a special tribunal for war crimes. Those who commit wrongdoings must be held accountable for their actions. There needs to be more and more effective sanctions against Russia and Russian individuals, as well as their allies.
The security situation in Europe is currently very uncertain and concerning. We need to enhance our efforts to strengthen our security. This means continuing and strengthening support for Ukraine and it also means investments in our own defence and European defence industries.
It is important that the rapporteur in her speech especially mentioned the Russian shadow fleet. It causes a growing security and environmental threat in the Baltic Sea.
I want to underline the importance of recognising human rights violations in Ukraine, especially concerning children. There is a call for increased assistance for Ukrainian children. I would also like to thank the rapporteur for her commitment and work in supporting the safe return of Ukrainian missing children forcibly taken from their parents.
This work is very important.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:32:19
Thank you.
Mr Rostyslav TISTYK is next.
Dear colleagues, today I address you during a time when the largest war in eight decades is unfolding on the European continent.
For three years now, Ukraine has been heroically resisting for the full-scale aggression of the Russia Federation. And this struggle is not only about our survival, but also about the shared future of Europe.
During this time, Russia has suffered losses of approximately more than 800 000 personnel, nearly 10 000 tanks, 20 000 armoured combat vehicles and 22 000 artillery systems.
At the same time, the Ukrainian defence industry has demonstrated significant progress.
As of 2025, Ukrainian produces over a third of the weapons used by its armed forces, with a projected production capacity of 30-35 billion dollars.
However, this war is not a problem just for Ukrainians. Its consequences are already being felt worldwide, especially in Europe.
This energy crisis, the disruption to food supply chains, and migration challenges are only part of the trial we face.
But the greatest threat lies elsewhere. If Ukraine is defeated, it will set a precedent for the destruction of the rules-based international order.
At the same time, Ukrainian success will strengthen Europe. Together, we have already achieved a great deal. The EU has provided Ukrainians with over 35 billion euros in assistance, including humanitarian, military, and financial support.
Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians have found refuge in your countries. And this has not only saved lives, but also made stronger solidarity between our peoples.
Yet we must understand that achieving a just and lasting peace requires continuing determination.
Firstly, holding perpetrators accountable. International tribunals must serve as tools of justice to punish those who have committed crimes against humanity.
Secondly, supporting Ukraine we call for increased sanction pressure on Russia, greater military assistance, and the establishment of long-term financial mechanisms for Ukrainian recovery.
And thirdly, integration of Ukraine into the European Community. Ukraine has proven that its place is in Europe. We expect progress in Ukrainian EU accession process as this will send a powerful signal of support not only to Ukrainian people but to the entire world.
Peace in Ukraine is a cornerstone of stability and security in Ukraine and of course in Europe. Our collective task is to ensure that the aggressor cannot achieve its goals.
Ukraine's victory will mean the protection of European values, the rules of law, and democratic principles that underpin our shared future.
Thank you for your attention.
Greece, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:35:40
Thank you.
(Light applause)
Ms Lesia VASYLENKO, you have the floor.
President, dear colleagues, dear rapporteur,
On behalf of the people of Ukraine, let me thank you for the time and efforts this Parliamentary Assembly dedicates to the issue of peace in Ukraine.
Until peace – peace through victory, that is – is achieved, this Parliamentary Assembly needs to continue debating. Its committees and all the other bodies need to continue holding brainstorming sessions as to how we can accelerate this peace and this victory.
The report is very clear and concise, calling on countries to double up on economic sanctions, to do more to investigate, identify and put a stop to sanction circumvention, to make sure that Ukraine gets all the humanitarian aid and the military aid necessary to ensure it can continue standing, and fighting, and to harmonise rules, laws and efforts on Russia's frozen assets, and the compensation that is due to be paid out to all the victims in Ukraine.
Rest assured, dear colleagues, that millions of Ukrainians will applaud the adoption of this report today. Millions more will be watching and waiting for your governments to take action on every single point in this report.
A special thanks to our colleague Mr George PAPANDREOU who today in the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy made sure that a special mention was made in the report for the prisoners of war, for the deported children, and for the civilians who suffer in Russian prisons.
As our president has mentioned, today with us we have survivors of Russian captivity, Ukrainians who have not only lived through the hell of Russian prisons and tortures, but who have found the strength to come here and speak to you, colleagues, about what they have been through. Please find the time to come to our side event and to talk to these Ukrainians in the gallery.
The report comes at a very critical time, calling for Europe to stand united behind Ukraine, while a change of power is taking place across the Atlantic. This means that international aid has been stalled in Ukraine. This is why Ukraine needs Europe's solidarity and action now more than ever.
Alone, none of us stand a chance against Russia and the axis of evil that it has formed around it with China, Iran and North Korea. But together, we can topple once and for all the terrorists, aggressors and oppressors out there.
Europe, we have a choice to make today. We can be strong and united, or we can be divided and irrelevant.
I say that history will rememeber that when the moment came, Europe stood strong and united, stood for peace through strength. Europe stood, and Europe won.
Thank you.
(Light applause)
Speech not pronounced (Rules of Procedure, Art. 31.2), only available in French
Speech not pronounced (Rules of Procedure, Art. 31.2), only available in French
Speech not pronounced (Rules of Procedure, Art. 31.2), only available in French
(Undelivered speech, Rules of Procedure Art. 31.2)
Dear colleagues, today we are discussing justice and peace in the context of Russia’s war against Ukraine. The war that has been ongoing for 10 years, 3 of them is full scale invasion. It takes lives, destroys families, and threatens the future of our country and Europe. We, Ukrainians, desire the just and lasting peace the most. But for that, we need real security guarantees to be sure that Russia will not launch a new wave of aggression, and that we won’t be forced to become refugees again, endure missiles attacks, lose more of our people: civilians and militants.
For us, joining NATO is the best guarantee of security. We have already experienced that other written documents are just a substitute for real protection. Appropriate security guarantees are the matter of life and death for our children, our families, and future generations.
In PACE we often talk about the children protection. But as a mother, I cannot understand why the world of adults has still not protected these children. Since the start of full-scale aggression, over 600 children have been killed, thousands have been forcibly deported or abducted by Russian forces. Children who have died, who have become orphans, who have been illegally deported — these are not just numbers. These are tragedies that directly affect every family that lived peacefully before Russia and Putin invaded Ukraine. Behind each of these numbers stands a human story, human sorrow.
Our country shields the rest of Europe from the terrible treat we have to defend from. The security of the entire continent is on the line. We cannot allow the fall of Europe. We must act for just peace and real security, because our children should not know the horrors of war.
Thank you!
(Undelivered speech, Rules of Procedure Art. 31.2)
Honourable colleagues,
There are over 1.4 million Canadians of Ukrainian descent.
They represent the third-largest Ukrainian diaspora in the world and are an integral part of communities across Canada.
That’s why, when Russia launched its illegal and barbaric full-scale invasion of Ukraine, we felt it deeply.
It was personal.
And we responded.
Since February 2022, Canada has committed over $19.5 billion in total assistance to Ukraine, including $4.5 billion in military support.
Today’s debate centers on Europe’s commitment to a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.
As a Canadian, I can’t speak directly to that.
But I can assure you that Canada’s commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is unwavering.
In fact, that’s the language used in in our bilateral security co-operation agreement, which also clearly states Canada’s support for Ukraine’s NATO membership.
To quote the agreement: “Bilateral security commitments are not a replacement for Ukraine’s future NATO membership but complement and support it.”
As we approach three years of this horrific war of aggression, and in the face of such uncertainty, I want to reiterate what I shared with our Ukrainian friends earlier this week:
In Canada, support for Ukraine is not a partisan issue. We will always have your back.
For as long as it takes.
Slava Ukraini!
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:38:49
Thank you.
Dear colleagues, I must now interrupt the list of speakers. The speeches of members on the speakers list who have been present during the debate but have not been able to speak may be given to the Table Office for publication in the Official Report. I remind colleagues that the type-written texts can be submitted, electronically if possible, no later than four hours after the list of speakers is interrupted.
Now I call Ms Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI, rapporteur, to reply.
You have 3 minutes, Madam.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
I want to thank colleagues for the support previously on this work and today in this plenary and I really plea for everyone to take the right side of history and remain committed to helping Ukraine.
This House calls for democracy, the rule of law and respect for international law and it is not to make one side surrender to give up on these core principles that this House stands for.
We are, unfortunately, seeing the case that if we reduce the amount of military equipment in Ukraine, it means that more missiles come through the skies to the infrastructure to really kill the innocent. So that's why I understand that this House of peace, unfortunately, needs to speak about the military equipment. Even though there are even more organisations, more countries and governments to do that.
So not everything fits in in this resolution if something is not mentioned. But I really am happy to see this strong support. The times are evolving. We all hope to see peace negotiations and a stronger Ukraine to find a solution.
Make Ukraine to be proud of its own future and build it based on the democratic will of the nation.
Thank you very much.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:40:51
Thank you, Madam rapporteur.
Now I have to ask the Chairperson of the Committee.
Mister Bouyx, do you wish to speak?
You have 3 minutes.
France, ALDE, Chairperson of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy
12:41:05
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Dear colleagues,
On behalf of the Political Affairs and Democracy Committee, I would first like to thank Ms Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI for the excellent work she has done to complete this excellent report in such a short space of time. I would also like to thank the colleagues who have just spoken, for all the comments they have brought to the debate.
We all wish there had been no need for another urgent debate on a just and lasting peace in Ukraine, but the fact that we are here again today demonstrates the firm and unconditional support of this Assembly for the Ukrainian people in their struggle for their territory, for their independence and for their freedom.
The Statute of the Council of Europe reminds us that peace-building, based on justice and international co-operation, is vital to the preservation of human society and civilisation. We must never forget this pursuit in our deliberations, to ensure that the role we play as members of this Assembly and as members of our national parliaments really does make a difference.
The President of the Assembly, Mr Theodoros ROUSOPOULOS, has already expressed the hope that the rule of law will prevail over the reign of force and that a lasting peace, based on justice and accountability, will return to our member state, Ukraine; and the President of the European Court of Human Rights, Mr Marko BOŠNJAK, two days ago, has already reminded us of these words.
The report we are about to adopt is precisely along these lines. A just and lasting peace in Ukraine will only be possible if the principles of international law are respected and prevail over brute force. This is a sine qua non in the face of Russia's flagrant violations of international law.
The establishment of a just and lasting peace in Ukraine would have a profound impact on security, not only on our European continent, but also on a global scale. To achieve this, the report calls for renewed political, economic, humanitarian and military support for Ukraine, to meet its current and future needs in terms of rebuilding the country and its path towards membership of the European Union.
The report also reiterates the Assembly's call to Council of Europe member states, relevant European institutions and international partners to adopt measures to ensure accountability. These include - and this has been reiterated here once again - the creation of a special tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine, the establishment of a comprehensive compensation mechanism, the transfer to it of assets frozen by the Russian state, and the strengthening of the sanctions regime.
Allow me to stress the urgency of taking these measures, as the report indicates, in view of the rapidly changing geopolitical environment. Today, we renew our determination to stand united in defence of our principles and in the search for a just and lasting peace for Ukraine.
I would like once again to congratulate Ms Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI on behalf of the Political Affairs and Democracy Committee, for her excellent work.
Thank you for your attention.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:44:35
The debate is closed.
And now we move to voting.
The Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy has presented a draft resolution to which 10 amendments have been tabled.
I remind you that speeches on amendments are limited to 30 seconds.
I understand that the Chairperson of the Committee wishes to propose to the Assembly that Amendments 8, 6, 9, 1 and 4 to the draft resolution, which were unanimously approved by the Committee, be declared as definitively approved.
Is that so, Mister Bouyx? [He answers "yes" in French].
If no one objects I will consider the amendments to be approved. Are there any objections? If there is, we will need to verify that the objection has the required support of 10 people.
Please could those who object raise their hands.
I see no objections, so amendments 8, 6, 9, 1 and 4 to the draft resolution are therefore approved and will not be called.
I understand that the Chairperson of the Committee wishes to propose to the Assembly that Amendment 5 to the draft resolution, which was rejected by the Committee with a two-thirds majority, be declared as definitively rejected.
Is that so, Mister Bouyx?
France, ALDE, Chairperson of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy
12:45:59
Yes.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:46:01
Thank you so much.
If no one objects, I will consider the amendment to be rejected.
Is there an objection?
If there is, we will need to verify that the objection has the required support of 10 people.
Please, could those who object raise their hands?
I see no objection.
So Amendment 5 to the draft resolution is therefore rejected and will not be called.
I have received an oral amendment from Ms Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI which reads as follows: In paragraph 4, after the words "15 and 16 June 2024", add the words "based on the Ukrainian peace formula".
The President may accept an oral amendment on the grounds of promoting clarity, accuracy, or conciliation, and if there is no opposition from 10 or more members to it being debated.
In my opinion, the oral amendment meets the criteria of rule 34.7(a).
Is there any opposition to the amendment being debated? I see no opposition.
I therefore call Ms Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI to support the oral amendment.
You have 30 seconds, Madam rapporteur.
Yes, thank you.
I think it is very fair to name it and to spell it out as this was an urgency, it was also due to the time constraints that it was missing, so very important.
And we have had it before in our resolutions.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:47:37
Thank you so much, Madam.
Does anyone wish to speak against the oral amendment? I see no one.
The Committee unanimously accepted this amendment.
I shall now put the oral amendment to the vote.
The vote is open.
The vote is closed.
I call for the result to be displayed.
The oral amendment is agreed.
I call Mr Oleksandr MEREZHKO to support Amendment no 10. You have 30 seconds, Mister Merezhko.
It seems he is not here. Ok, Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, please.
Thank you. Thank you very much.
This is a very important Amendment 10, which recognises that Vladimir PUTIN shall be held accountable for numerous acts of terror that have been committed against the civilian population. PUTIN is a terrorist. We need to call a spade a spade. We need to tell the truth. And PUTIN should be held liable for what he did against humanity and against Ukrainians.
Thank you.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:49:13
Thank you.
Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?
I see no one.
The Committee has not been able to consider the amendment, so I will give the floor to the rapporteur.
As the wording now is in line with the previous text that the Parliamentary Assembly has stated, Russia is a state sponsor of terrorism. So I can accept this formulation.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:49:46
Thank you, Madam rapporteur.
I shall now put the amendment to the vote.
The vote is open.
The vote is closed.
I call for the result to be displayed.
I see that Amendment 10 is agreed.
I call Mr Oleksii Goncharenko to support Amendment 2. You have 30 seconds, Mister Goncharenko.
Thank you very much. Dear colleagues,
This is a very important amendment, because it's saying the most important thing.
Oh sorry, excuse me.
Thank you very much.
Dear colleagues,
This is very a important amendment, because we can, with you, accept hundreds of resolutions, thousands of resolutions, millions of resolutions.
Unfortunately, against Mr Vladimir PUTIN, against dictators, it doesn't work. They can't be stopped by papers and by resolutions. They only can be stopped by force.
So this resolution is saying that the European member States should prepare themselves, invest in their defense and be able to stop the evil.
Thank you.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:51:01
Thank you, Oleksii.
Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?
I see no one.
What is the opinion of the Committee on the amendment?
Please, Mister Bouyx.
France, ALDE, Chairperson of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy
12:51:21
Thank you, Madam President.
This amendment was adopted by a large majority.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:51:27
"Thank you Mister Bouyx [spoken in French].
I shall now put the amendment to the vote.
The vote is open.
The vote is closed.
I call for the result to be displayed.
Amendment 2 is agreed.
I call Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO to support Amendment 3. You have 30 seconds, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you very much.
This is a very important Amendment too, because we are speaking about targeted sanctions and not just against PUTIN being a terrorist. PUTIN should be liquidated. It's clear everything about this.
But the question is, what about those who are around him? They should take their responsibility. These so-called elites, these Russian tycoons, these Russian people who are just in PUTIN's pockets and who are investing and earning huge money on blood. So this is about this. Please support.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:52:42
Thank you, Mister Goncharenko.
I have been informed that Mr George PAPANDREOU wishes to propose an oral sub-amendment to Amendment 3 as follows:
After the words "benefit from the war" add "or are involved in the deportation, forcible transfer, and unjustifiable delay in the repatriation of Ukrainian children, civilians, and prisoners of war."
In my opinion, the oral sub-amendment is in order under our rules.
However, do 10 or more members object to the oral sub-amendment being debated?
I see no one.
Does anyone wish to speak against the oral sub-amendment?
I see no one.
The Committee unanimously accepted this oral sub-amendment.
I will now put the oral sub-amendment to the vote.
The vote is open.
The vote is closed.
And I call for the result to be displayed.
The sub-amendment is agreed.
We will now consider the main amendment.
Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?
I see no one.
The Committee unanimously accepted the amendment as amended.
I shall now put the amendment as amended to the vote.
The vote is open.
The vote is closed.
And I call for the result to be displayed.
Amendment 3, as amended, is agreed.
I call Ms Olena KHOMENKO to support Amendment 7.
You have 30 seconds, Madam Khomenko.
Amendment 7, Madam Khomenko.
Excuse me, Madam President.
Amendment 7 speaks for itself.
We propose to add "other economic actors" because not only secondary sanctions should be applied against third countries, facilitating sanctions circumvention, but also economic actors who are involved in this. This is very obvious.
Thank you, Madam President.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:55:36
Sorry. Thank you, Madam Khomenko.
Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment? I see no one.
What is the opinion of the Committee on the amendment? Please, Mister Bouyx.
France, ALDE, Chairperson of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy
12:55:48
It was approved by a large majority, Madam Chairman.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:55:51
"Thank you" [spoken in French].
I shall now put the amendment to the vote.
The vote is open.
The vote is closed.
I call for the result to be displayed.
Amendment 7 is agreed.
Dear colleagues,
I have received an oral amendment from Ms Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI which reads as follows:
"At the beginning of paragraph 10.5, replace the word "continue negotiations" with "finalise negotiations".
The President may accept an oral amendment on the grounds of promoting clarity, accuracy or conciliation and if there is not opposition from 10 or more members to it being debated.
In my opinion the oral amendment meets the criteria of Rule 34.7.a. Is there any opposition to the amendment being debated? I see no one. That is the case, we will therefore proceed to the next amendment. Sorry, that is not the case. I therefore call Ms KUMPULA-NATRI to support the oral amendment. You have 30 seconds, Madam.
Thank you.
As also our Secretary General here confirmed, this organisation, the Council of Europe, is ready to establish and is willing to finalise – the political will, knowledge and experience are there and we need them, so it improves and better describes the will of today that we want to finalise and establish a special tribunal to make criminals accountable.
Armenia, EPP/CD, President of the Assembly
12:57:42
Thank you so much.
Does anyone wish to speak against the oral amendment?
I see no one.
The Committee unanimously accepted this oral amendment.
I shall now put the oral amendment to the vote.
The vote is open.
The vote is closed.
I call for the result to be displayed.
The oral amendment is agreed.
Dear colleagues, we will now proceed to vote on the draft resolution contained in Document 16106. A simple majority is required.
The vote is open.
The vote is closed.
I call for the result to be displayed.
The draft resolution in Document 16106 is adopted.
Congratulations, Madam rapporteur.
Dear colleagues, the Assembly will hold its next public sitting this afternoon at 4 p.m. with the Agenda approved on Monday.
The sitting is adjourned.
