-- The speech was given in Italian --

It gives me immense pleasure to be here, at home in Italy, representing the Council of Europe as its Deputy Secretary General.

The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms was signed here in Rome on 4 November 1950, some 65 years ago, and I would like to thank the organisers for giving us the opportunity to celebrate this anniversary.

The adoption of this Treaty was Europe’s way of guaranteeing the political and civil liberties that had been written into the Universal Declaration of Human Rights two years earlier. Indeed, it was a way to ensure the common understanding of the rights and freedoms upon which, as stated in the Declaration, freedom, justice and peace depend.

In the last 65 years the Convention has achieved a great deal.

It has rid us of the death penalty and outlawed torture.

It has enshrined fundamental freedoms in the legal systems of 47 countries. Liberties such as freedom of expression, assembly, thought and religion, as well as the right to privacy, fair trial and equality before the law.

The Convention has become a glue which continues to bind our continent together – despite our many differences and the historical and political rivalries between our states.

It has become the basis for a common European legal space, built on shared standards.

And, crucially, it has been a milestone in international law. For the first time ever, under this Treaty, Europe’s states accepted that an independent, supranational body would tie them to their international obligations. Namely the European Court of Human Rights, based in Strasbourg set up to help create the common understanding at the heart of the aspirations of the Universal Declaration.

The Court is a remarkable achievement – and it shows what is possible when leaders are willing to put guarded nationalism to one side for the sake of our common good.

When governments fail to meet their obligations under the Convention, the Court guarantees the right of individual petition. In other words, any one of Europe’s 820

million citizens who feels that their rights have been infringed – any individual or any

group of individuals can bring their complaint to Strasbourg,  to obtain redress, not only for themselves but also for all others suffering the same violation.

The Court is, as Pope Francis described it when he visited us last year, ‘Europe’s

conscience’ with regard to human rights. Our Convention system and our Court is indeed extremely precious and the Convention must guide all our societies.

And we are an example for the rest of the world. The Court is in fact the most effective mechanism for the implementation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Such a profound commitment to universal values, to the rights of every individual, and to restraining excessive use of state power was certainly possible in the aftermath of the Second World War.

It is perhaps more difficult to imagine such a system being invented today, if it did not already exist.

But luckily it does exist and, despite being 65 years old, the Convention system is today more relevant than ever – continuing to anchor Europe to our shared values through periods of conflict, crisis and change.

Just look at what is going on around us today.

We are facing a new and dangerous terror threat. Men and women, with guns and bombs, in the hearts of our cities, attacking us from within.

Governments are, rightly, trying to respond quickly, making sure that our security services have the tools they need to keep citizens safe.

But how do we ensure that, in the process, we do not sacrifice the freedoms and democratic principles on which European stability is built?

How do we avoid repeating the mistakes that we saw following September 11th, when grave human rights abuses were conducted in the name of national security during the hunt for Al Qaeda – even though such acts only served to tarnish our reputation, discredit our democracies, and provide a boost to extremists looking for new recruits?

We avoid this trap – the trap of choosing security over liberty, which is a false choice - by ensuring that the steps governments take respect the principles of the Convention and the case law of the Court. The Convention requirements are practical guides for legislators, policy-makers and officials of all kinds, which keep our responses to security threats grounded in respect and proportionality. They prevent us from being provoked into abandoning the principles upon which our legitimacy is built and engaging dangerous never ending retaliation.

The refugee crisis is another case in point.

In the face of unprecedented migration flows, with thousands and thousands of people crossing our borders, the Convention is an anchor. It reminds us that many members of our own families have been refugees – and that no matter the pressures and difficulties – any individual arriving in our territories must have a right to basic standards of treatment. Shelter, sanitation, medical help and so on.

At the height of the crisis our Secretary General was able to invoke the Convention in order to remind states of these obligations, which was extremely important in the midst of the chaos and political uncertainty. And now, as we are hearing increasing reports of ill-treatment of migrants and refugees in Europe, for example attacks on homes for asylum seekers or the excessive use of force by police at borders, I am certain that we will need to lean on the Convention again in order to reassert the fundamental value our civilization attaches to dignity and human life so as to protect the rights of refugees and address these extremely troubling developments.

The continued relevance of the Convention system is being underscored every day.

Does that mean the system is perfect?

[No, it does not. It was not that long ago that our Court was being overwhelmed by big numbers of complaints which had never been adequately dealt with in our member states. We have overseen a number of important reforms to the Court’s working methods to address this problem and, thankfully, we are now on top of the backlog. At the beginning of 2012, there were 151,600 pending applications before the Court.

By January 2015, at 69,750 this figure had been cut by more than half. But, of course, there is still work to do and you will know that we still have a backlog of repetitive cases which show continuing structural problems in our member states and a large number of priority cases which still have to be dealt with. But what is most important is that we have a clear strategy for safeguarding the Convention for future generations. And this is precisely what our Secretary General, Thorbjørn Jagland – who is very sorry he cannot be here today – has put in place.

Under Secretary General Jagland, we have become much more focused on embedding the Convention into national life.  International treaties and institutions are hugely important. But they have limits. And we give the principles and ambitions enshrined in the Convention the greatest chance of success by bringing them as close as possible to people. By sowing these rights and liberties into the culture and institutional fabric of our member states.

This was also the original intention. Strasbourg was never meant to act as a kind of lone policeman. Responsibility for implementing the Convention falls first and foremost with national authorities. Our Court is only meant to step in when domestic systems fail.

So we are working more closely than ever with our members to develop national safeguards for human rights based on the principle of shared responsibility

In the past few years, many high-level Conferences were devoted to improving the functioning of the Court and of the Convention system and we witness positive results.

Let me give you one example. The adoption of Protocol 16 to the European Convention on Human Rights.  This Protocol introduces the possibility for the highest national courts to ask the European Court for an advisory opinion.

This will certainly strengthen the national implementation of the Convention by increasing the dialogue between the European Court in Strasbourg and domestic courts.

I do not want to enter into more details as prominent speakers will later speak about both the historical importance of the Convention and the case-law of the Court but let me add one point: the implementation of Court judgments is crucial for the whole system and is also a concern for all of us. It is not for nothing that supervision of implementation is the joint responsibility of our member Governments. We in Strasbourg are extremely proud of what we do. We are extremely proud of what has been achieved over the last 65 years. But for the sake of the next 65 years, we are committed to embedding the Convention better into national life. The right balance is national authorities acting as the primary guarantors, supported by an efficient and well-functioning Court and backed by a politically effective Council of Europe to ensure the common understanding on which our safety and prosperity rests.

It is a cause to which I and many devote ourselves – and it is the vision which guides us for the future.

Above all else, the Council of Europe and the European Convention of Human Rights remain a triumph for individual freedom and common values among nations.

Long may it be so. Thank you.