Public funds of member States must serve the rule of law, human rights and democratic security. Assistance that cannot be followed from appropriation to recipient, or independently assessed, fails to comply with those principles.
Experience in several member States shows that support relating to the Russian Federation and Belarus has been split across budget headings, agencies and classifications. Official development assistance databases therefore capture only part of the picture. Payments have continued under other headings. Data on implementing partners are often incomplete, unavailable or withheld. Evaluations are scarce, outdated or too aggregated to show who received the funds and what they achieved.
Across Europe, assistance connected with authoritarian or aggressive regimes has passed through implementing partners and “international co-operation” envelopes outside the most transparent reporting systems. After the Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine, and given Belarus’ role as an accomplice, such opacity is unacceptable. Funds that cannot be traced cannot be shown to have been kept clear of State-aligned structures.
The Parliamentary Assembly has consistently held that support for democracy, human rights and the rule of law must be accountable to the public. Opacity in the use of public money undermines that standard and public trust.
The Assembly should examine these shortcomings and prepare a report recommending common minimum standards, so that taxpayers can see where public money went, to whom and to what effect. Member States should be called on to publish complete records of all such support, irrespective of OECD Development Assistance Committee classification; to identify partners and end recipients except where a narrow security exemption applies; to evaluate results independently; and to halt assistance that cannot meet these standards, save tightly controlled support to independent civil society and victims of repression.