To the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Human Affairs (LIBE), European Parliament

Brussels, 4 September 2014

Madam Chairperson,

Ladies and gentlemen members of the European Parliament,

Allow me to begin by thanking you, Madam Chairperson, for having invited a representative of the Council of Europe to today’s meeting of your committee devoted to fundamental rights. I am particularly alert to the fact of having been invited to this hearing along with Director General Françoise Le Bail and Mr Morten Kjaerum, Director of the Agency for Fundamental Rights. This clearly underlines the fact that your Committee considers the Council of Europe as an indispensable partner in the protection and promotion of human rights in Europe.

Before presenting the Report of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Mr Thorbjørn Jagland, I would like to place that report in its more general context.

The three Summits of Heads of State and Government of the member States of the Council of Europe (Vienna 1993, Strasbourg 1997 and Warsaw 2005) affirmed that the mission of the Council of Europe in the new European architecture is that of assuring the continent’s democratic security and stability; what was subsequently referred to as “soft security” or “deep security”. This mission is based on the legal acquis of the Council of Europe, an acquis which is either binding or recommendatory, and on the expertise that it has accumulated over its more than sixty years of existence.

The Council of Europe’s three large sectors of activity are first of all the elaboration of legal standards, principally conventions, followed by monitoring of the implementation of these standards and, finally, targeted co-operation activities with our member States. The 47 member States thus do not limit themselves to adopting new legal standards, they also accept that independent mechanisms examine the way in which they implement them. Where necessary, the Council of Europe offers to co-operate with the States in bringing their legal orders and practice into conformity with these standards. The interaction between these three sectors constitutes the specificity, the real added value of the Council of Europe.

It is precisely with a view to reinforcing the interaction between these three main sectors of activity that the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe asked the Secretary General to prepare a Report on the situation of democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Europe. This Report, of which you have received a copy, was presented to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, meeting at the foreign minister level, this 6th of May, in Vienna. The Report is not limited to enumerating the challenges and shortcomings identified by our monitoring bodies. It also sets out a number of recommendations and, furthermore, indicates what type of co-operation the Council of Europe could propose to the member States to meet the challenges and remedy the shortcomings that have been identified.

What methodology was used?

It is important to make clear that this Report does not in any way constitute a new form of monitoring. It is based entirely on the findings of the Council of Europe’s monitoring mechanisms and by certain of its consultative bodies. Accordingly, the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the supervision of their execution by the Committee of Ministers; the reports of the CPT (prevention of torture), of the European Committee of Social Rights (implementation of the European Social Charter), of ECRI (fight against racism and intolerance), of the Advisory Committee for the protection of persons belonging to national minorities, of the Committee on the minority languages Charter, of GRECO (fight against corruption), of MONEYVAL (fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism) and of the GRETA (fight against trafficking in human beings): all of these are taken into account. The work of our consultative committees – the Venice Commission (development of democracy through law), the CEPEJ (independence and efficiency of justice), the CCJE (European judges) and the CCPE (European prosecutors), as well as that of the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights – are also taken into consideration.

The Report does not list the challenges and problems for each country. It is instead structured by thematic category. It consists of five parts, divided unto eighteen chapters. Each chapter contains a part describing the current situation, mentioning also the activities of the Council of Europe and of the member States in the area in question. A final part and a last chapter deal with what the Council of Europe can or could do in areas subject to unresolved conflicts, such as Transnistria, South Ossetia or Abkhazia. At the end of each chapter, the main challenges and the recommendations for responding to them are set out.
There are thus no accusations made against States taken in isolation. It is in no way a question of “naming and shaming”. Instead, it is a matter of promoting a constructive dialogue with and between the member States, in order to find ways to address the challenges and shortcomings identified.

The challenges and shortcomings found in the greatest number of States are, in descending order:

• Discrimination against national minorities, in 39 member States;
• Prison over-crowding, leading to inhuman and degrading conditions of detention, in 30 countries.

One could also mention:

• Corruption;
• Ill-treatment by agents of law enforcement bodies;
• Social exclusion and discrimination suffered by Roma;
• Dysfunctioning of the judicial system (lack of independence and efficiency, including excessive length of judicial proceedings);
• Shortcomings in the protection of the rights of migrants and asylum seekers;
• Trafficking in human beings;
• Lack of freedom of expression and media freedom.

One could also add to that list serious violations of fundamental rights such as immunity against criminal prosecution resulting in impunity, racism, hate speech, and numerous forms of discrimination, notably against LGBT persons. One can thus observe, Madame Chairperson, that most of the areas identified are directly relevant for the work of your Committee.

What operational follow-up is going to be given to this Report?

I would note from the outset that during a recent debate on the matter, the 47 member States welcomed this Report and took a positive and encouraging position on the need to give operational follow-up to it. In addition, this autumn, the Secretary General will present concrete, specific proposals relating to the recommendations contained in the Report.

Whilst, as I have just recalled, the Report is founded on a thematic basis, its preparation has allowed the identification of at least three major challenges for each of the member States. These challenges have for several months been the subject of a confidential dialogue and will be addressed regularly, along with the accompanying recommendations, in the Secretary General’s bilateral contacts with the States concerned. Furthermore, these challenges must form the basis of future action plans for targeted co-operation activities on the ground. In reality, each State should ideally have an action plan to address the shortcomings relating to human rights, respect for the rule of law and democracy.

The preparation of this Report has also allowed the Council of Europe to take a critical look at itself and draw a certain number of lessons concerning, on the one hand, its capacity to assist member States in respecting the European Convention on Human Rights and other key instruments of our Organisation and, on the other, the functioning of its monitoring bodies, as well as our co-operation activities.

First of all, one cannot but remark that certain essential standards of the Council of Europe are not subject to any regular and systematic monitoring, as no specific mechanisms exist to that end. One could think in particular of prevention of violations of the rights of freedom of expression or freedom of assembly and association. It is true that the European Court of Human Rights very regularly rules on these two fundamental rights, but always after the event and not before. It is therefore a case of reflecting on the creation of a mechanism that could react quickly to urgent situations arising in one or several States, report to the Committee of Ministers and make concrete recommendations. A similar observation could be made in relation to serious threats to the rule of law or democracy, such as organised crime or terrorism.
It should also be recalled that several treaty-monitoring mechanisms should be able to react more rapidly and effectively to urgent situations, by allowing ad hoc visits, as is already the case for the CPT. By way of example, the CPT has conducted an ad hoc visit to Ukraine, at the height of the tensions in Maidan Square.

Early warning systems should also be developed in order to anticipate possible human rights violations. We are currently working on the establishment of such a system for threats against media freedom, in particular to the safety of journalists.

Finally, the monitoring mechanisms and other bodies should be able to operate in unresolved, “frozen” conflict zones, where there are problems of effective application of the rights guaranteed by our Conventions, notably the ECHR. In such situations, in order to avoid prejudicing any question concerning the status or recognition of the de facto authorities in these territories, the monitoring reports should be submitted directly to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, so that he can decide with the competent authorities on the most appropriate follow-up for better protection of individuals’ rights.

The preparation of the Report has also shown a need for new standards. Developments in science and new technologies in different fields, and the evolution of the information society, in particular, will require revision of certain of our instruments or adoption of new ones, in order to confront potential violations of human rights and the rule of law in these areas.

Finally, the preparatory work on the Report is going to allow our activities involving co-operation with and assistance to our member States to be planned and implemented in an even more strategic way.

In conclusion, Madam Chairperson, ladies and gentlemen members of the European Parliament, allow me to make some more comments of a more general nature.

The Council of Europe’s expertise in the areas covered by the Report is unique. I can thus only invite you to profit further from the detailed conclusions and recommendations of our monitoring bodies. Secretary General Jagland has likewise on several occasions pointed this out to different European Union bodies, in particular your Committee last November the 5th, when he encouraged the EU to base itself more on the abundance of information held by the Council of Europe: information that is objective and relevant, concerning shortcomings in each member State, including those of the European Union, in the fields of rule of law and human rights. This information is gathered and analysed by our independent monitoring bodies, according to well-established procedures, often flowing from convention obligations.

Last May the 6th, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Council of Europe recognised the “strategic” nature of the partnership between the European Union and the Council of Europe. They welcomed the initiatives taken by the European Union to consolidate its capacity to contribute to the protection of human rights and the rule of law, whilst underlining the need to avoid duplication and to ensure consistency and complementarity between its protection system and that of the Council of Europe.

The Committee of Ministers considered that the dialogue between the Council of Europe and the European Union in this field should lead to synergies, in full respect of the principles set out in the 2007 Memorandum of Understanding. This document envisages in particular that “the European Union regards the Council of Europe as the Europe-wide reference source for human rights [and] while preparing new initiatives in this field, the Council of Europe and the European Union institutions will draw on their respective expertise as appropriate through consultations.” Certain recent developments tend in this direction, which we welcome. I would in particular mention the reference to co-operation with the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe in the context of the recent “rule of law framework” adopted by the European Commission, the co-operation with the CEPEJ in the context of the annual “justice scoreboard” published by the Commission, as well as the discussions under way on the accession of the EU to GRECO, the Group of States against Corruption.

The Committee of Ministers furthermore reaffirmed its strong will to reinforce the system of human rights protection in Europe, of which the key-stone is the European Convention on Human Rights. The accession of the European Union to the Convention will reinforce consistency in pan-European protection of human rights. The support of the European Parliament and of your Committee is, in this respect, of the greatest importance.

It is the responsibility of the Council of Europe, with the full support of the European Union, to see to it that all our States undertake fully to respect the European Convention on Human Rights and other essential conventions of our Organisation for the protection of human rights and the rule of law in Europe.