Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697810632412.pdf (Malta)
L-ERBATAX-IL LEĠIŻLATURA P.L.

1362 Dokument imqiegħed fuq il-Mejda tal-Kamra tad-Deputati fis-Seduta Numru 90 tal-15 ta’ Frar 2023 mill-Ispeaker, l-Onor.

Anġlu Farrugia.

___________________________ Raymond Scicluna Skrivan tal-Kamra First Part of the 2023 Ordinary Session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe 23 – 27 January 2023 Strasbourg, France Hon Naomi Cachia, MP Hon Beppe Fenech Adami, MP Hon Romilda Baldacchino Zarb, MP Hon Cressida Galea, MP Hon Chris Said, MP Doc.
15665 26 January 2023 First part of the 2023 Ordinary Session (23-27 January 2023) Agenda1 1.
Adopted by the Assembly on 23 January 2023. https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Abbreviations Bur: Bureau of the Assembly Per: Standing Committee Pol: Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy Jur: Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights Soc: Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Mig: Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons Cult: Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media Ega: Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination Mon: Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee) Pro: Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs Cdh: Committee on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights SOC: Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group EPP/CD: Group of the European People's Party ALDE: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe EC/DA: European Conservatives Group and Democratic Alliance UEL: Group of the Unified European Left NR: Members not belonging to a political group Symbols 0 Presentation, statement ¹ Deadline for tabling documents 4 % Lists (speakers, questions) Votes Meetings outside the Chamber Joint Committee Thursday: 15:30-17:00 Bureau of the Assembly Monday: 08:00-09:00 Friday: 08:30-10:00 Committees Monday: 14:15-15:15 Tuesday: 08:30-10:00 Tuesday: 14:00-15:30 Wednesday: 14:00-15:30 Thursday: 08:30-10:00 Thursday: 14:00-15:30 Political groups Monday: 09:00-11:00 Monday: 17:30-19:00 Wednesday: 08:30-10:00 2 Monday 23 January 2023 Sitting No.
1 (11:00-13:15) 1.

Opening of the part-session 1.1.

Examination of the credentials 0 List of delegations: o (Doc.

15687) 1.2.

Election of the President of the Assembly (AS/Inf (2023) 03) 1.3.

Election of the Vice-Presidents of the Assembly (AS/Inf (2023) 01) 1.4.

Appointment of members of committees (Commissions (2023) 01 + Add.

1) 1.5.

Request(s) for current affairs debate or debate under urgent procedure 1.5.1.
Debate under urgent procedure: "Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine" 1.5.2.

Current affairs debate: "Recent tensions between Pristina and Belgrade" 1.5.3.

Debate under urgent procedure: "Attacks against public service workers" 1.5.4.
Current affairs debate: "How to improve the Council of Europe’s co-operation with civil society, as a way to strengthen and protect human rights, democracy and rule of law, including in Belarus and the Russian Federation" 1.5.5.

Current affairs debate: "Addressing the humanitarian consequences of the blockade of the Latchin corridor" 1.6.

Adoption of the agenda 1.7.

Approval of the minutes of the Standing Committee (Reykjavik, 25 November 2022) (AS/Per (2022) PV 02) Sitting No.

2 (15:30-17:30) 2.
2 (15:30-17:30) 2.

Debate 2.1.

Progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee 0 Presentation by: o Mr George KATROUGALOS (Greece, UEL), Rapporteur AS/Bur (Doc.

15685, Doc.

15685 Add.

1, Doc.

15685 Add.

2, Doc.

15685 Add.

3) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Monday 23 January, 12:00) 3.

Debate 3.1.
Debate 3.1.

Addressing the issue of Daesh foreign fighters and their families returning from Syria and other countries to the member States of the Council of Europe 0 Presentation by: o Mr Pieter OMTZIGT (Netherlands, EPP/CD), Rapporteur AS/Jur (Doc.

15591) o Mr Stefan SCHENNACH (Austria, SOC), Rapporteur for opinion AS/Soc (Doc.
15672) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Monday 23 January, 12:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Monday 23 January, 12:00) % Votes on a draft resolution and a draft recommendation (Doc.

15591) 3 Tuesday 24 January 2023 Sitting No.

3 (10:00-13:00) 4.

Elections (10:00-15:00) 4.1.

Judges to the European Court of Human Rights 0 List of candidates in respect of: o Denmark (Doc.

15685 Add.

2, Doc.

15670) o Iceland (Doc.

15685 Add.

2, Doc.

15671) 5.

Debate 5.1.


Conflict-related sexual violence 0 Presentation by: o Ms Petra BAYR (Austria, SOC), Rapporteur AS/Ega (Doc.

15677) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Monday 23 January, 16:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Monday 23 January, 16:00) % Vote on a draft resolution (Doc.

15677) 6.

Address (12:00-13:00) 6.1.


Ms Annalena BAERBOCK, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Germany Speech (12:00-12:20) Questions and replies (12:20-13:00) 4 Questions (deadline for registration: Monday 23 January, 16:00) Sitting No.

4 (15:30-20:00) 7.

Address (15:30-16:30) 7.1.

Communication from the Secretary General of the Council of Europe 0 Presentation by: o Ms Marija PEJČINOVIĆ BURIĆ 4 Questions (deadline for registration: Tuesday 24 January, 12:00) 8.

Debate 8.1.
Debate 8.1.

The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges 0 Presentation by: o Ms Fiona O'LOUGHLIN (Ireland, ALDE), Rapporteur AS/Pol (Doc.

15681, Doc.

15681 Add.)

4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Tuesday 24 January, 12:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Monday 23 January, 16:00) % Vote on a draft recommendation (Doc.

15681) 4 Wednesday 25 January 2023 Sitting No.

5 (10:00-13:00) 9.

Debate 9.1.


Environmental impact of armed conflicts 0 Presentation by: o Mr John HOWELL (United Kingdom, EC/DA), Rapporteur AS/Soc (Doc.

15674) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Tuesday 24 January, 19:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Tuesday 24 January, 10:30) % Votes on a draft resolution and a draft recommendation (Doc.

15674) 10.

Debate 10.1.


Contact tracing applications: ethical, cultural and educational challenges 0 Presentation by: o Mr Duncan BAKER (United Kingdom, EC/DA), Rapporteur AS/Cult (Doc.

15648) o Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN (Armenia, EPP/CD), Rapporteur for opinion AS/Jur (Doc.

15660) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Tuesday 24 January, 19:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Tuesday 24 January, 10:30) % Vote on a draft resolution (Doc.

15648) Sitting No.

6 (15:30-20:00) 11.


Current affairs debate 11.1.

Recent tensions between Pristina and Belgrade 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Wednesday 25 January, 12:00) 12.

Joint debate 12.1.

The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges 0 Presentation by: o Ms Zita GURMAI (Hungary, SOC), Rapporteur AS/Ega (Doc.

15673) 12.2.
15673) 12.2.

The role and responsibility of men and boys in stopping gender-based violence against women and girls 0 Presentation by: o Ms Petra STIENEN (Netherlands, ALDE), Rapporteur AS/Ega (Doc.

15678) 12.3.

Finding solutions for marital captivity 0 Presentation by: o Ms Margreet De BOER (Netherlands, SOC), Rapporteur AS/Ega (Doc.
15679) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Wednesday 25 January, 12:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Tuesday 24 January, 16:00) % Votes on a draft resolution and a draft recommendation (Doc.

15673) % Vote on a draft resolution (Doc.

15678) % Vote on a draft resolution (Doc.

15679) 5 Thursday 26 January 2023 Sitting No.

7 (10:00-13:00) 13.

Debate under urgent procedure 13.1.


Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine 0 Presentation by: o Mr Damien COTTIER (Switzerland, ALDE), Rapporteur AS/Jur (Doc.

15689) 0 Statement by: o Ms Oleksandra MATVIICHUK, Head of the Center for Civil Liberties, 2022 Nobel Peace Prize laureate 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Wednesday 25 January, 19:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Wednesday 25 January, 12:00) % Vote on a draft resolution (Doc.
15689) 14.

Address (12:00-13:00) 14.1.

Ms Katrín JAKOBSDÓTTIR, Prime Minister of Iceland2 Speech (12:00-12:20) Questions and replies (12:20-13:00) 4 Questions (deadline for registration: Wednesday 25 January, 19:00) Sitting No.

8 (17:00-20:00) 15.

Debate 15.1.

The progress of the Assembly's monitoring procedure (January-December 2022) 0 Presentation by: o Mr Piero FASSINO (Italy, SOC), Rapporteur AS/Mon (Doc.
15682) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Thursday 26 January, 12:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Wednesday 25 January, 17:30) % Vote on a draft resolution (Doc.

15682) 16.

Debate 16.1.

The honouring of obligations and commitments by the Republic of Moldova 0 Presentation by: o Mr Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ (Switzerland, SOC), Co-Rapporteur AS/Mon (Doc.

15680) o Ms Inese LĪBIŅA-EGNERE (Latvia), Co-Rapporteur AS/Mon (Doc.
15680) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Thursday 26 January, 12:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Wednesday 25 January, 17:30) % Vote on a draft resolution (Doc.

15680) 17.

Current affairs debate 17.1.

Addressing the humanitarian consequences of the blockade of the Latchin corridor 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Thursday 26 January, 12:00) 2.

The intervention by the Prime Minister will include the communication from the Committee of Ministers.
6 Friday 27 January 2023 Sitting No.

9 (10:00-13:00) 18.

Debate 18.1.

Emergence of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) and their necessary apprehension through European human rights law 0 Presentation by: o Mr Damien COTTIER (Switzerland, ALDE), Rapporteur AS/Jur (Doc.

15683) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Thursday 26 January, 19:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Thursday 26 January, 10:30) % Vote on a draft resolution (Doc.

15683) 19.

Debate 19.1.


Building the Open Council of Europe Academic Networks (OCEAN) 0 Presentation by: o Ms Marta GRANDE (Italy), Rapporteur AS/Cult (Doc.

15675) 4 List of speakers (deadline for registration: Thursday 26 January, 19:00) ¹ Amendments (deadline for tabling: Thursday 26 January, 10:30) % Vote on a draft resolution (Doc.

15675) 20.

Progress report (continued) 20.1.

Progress report of the Bureau and the Standing Committee (continued) 0 Addendum: o (Doc.

15685 Add.

4), Doc.

15685 Add.


5) 21.

Constitution of the Standing Committee 21.1.

Appointment of the members of the Standing Committee (Commissions (2023) 02) 22.
Closure of the part-session 7 2/8/23, 10:42 AM Tiny Kox, re-elected President, urges a stronger role for PACE as the ‘most relevant European Agora’ Tiny Kox, re-elected President, urges a stronger role for PACE as the ‘most relevant European Agora’ 23/01/2023 President | Session Tiny Kox, re-elected today for a second one-year term as President of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE), thanked members for their ongoing support this year, which – he said – “may be as challenging as last year”.
In a speech following his re-election, he underlined that last year the Council of Europe and its Assembly had taken unprecedented steps in reaction to Russia's unilateral war of aggression against Ukraine.

“The war has been dominating and will continue to dominate our agenda and activities – just as it dominates every single day for every single Ukrainian citizen.
As we speak, the Ukrainian people continue to suffer and die in this war, which should never have been started and must end as soon as possible.

This war should never become ‘normal’, and we must never take our attention away from it,” Mr Kox said.

The Assembly again held a moment of silence for all the victims of Russia’s aggression.

The President thanked PACE’s institutional counterparts for their “intense and fruitful” co-operation.
“May I ask all of you to continue this co- operation, as we are now on the #RoadToReykjavik towards the Fourth Summit of Heads of State and Government in May.

This takes place very much also at our request, to decide on the future of European multilateral co-operation and our place in Europe's political architecture,” he added.
Finally, he invited members of the Assembly to continue and intensify the Assembly’s role as “the most relevant European ‘Agora’, to find together sustainable answers to existential questions in dangerous times.
Much will be asked of us,” the President concluded, “and I am confident that together we can deliver.” Share Tweet Links  Speech by President  Voting result  Video https://pace.coe.int/en/news/8940 1/1 23 January 2023 / 23 janvier 2023 ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSEMBLY 23 January 2023 First part of the 2023 Ordinary Session ÉLECTION DU PRÉSIDENT DE L’ASSEMBLÉE 23 janvier 2023 Première partie de la Session ordinaire de 2023 Total number of members voting / Nombre total de membres votants Number of spoilt or blank ballot papers / Nombre de bulletins nuls ou blancs Absolute majority of the votes cast / Majorité absolue des suffrages exprimés Number of valid votes / Nombre de votes valides 223 4 110 219 The votes were cast as follows / Les suffrages ont été exprimés comme suit Mr Tiny KOX Mr Oleksandr MEREZHKO 175 44 Mr Tiny KOX having received the absolute majority of the votes cast is declared elected President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe for this Ordinary Session.
M. Tiny KOX ayant obtenu la majorité absolue des suffrages exprimés est déclaré élu Président de l'Assemblée parlementaire du Conseil de l'Europe pour cette Session ordinaire.
2/8/23, 11:58 AM PACE elects Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir judge to the European Court of Human Rights in respect of Iceland PACE elects Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir judge to the European Court of Human Rights in respect of Iceland 24/01/2023 Session | Election of Judges The Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) today elected Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir as judge to the European Court of Human Rights in respect of Iceland.
Ms Arnardóttir, having obtained an absolute majority of votes cast, is elected judge of the European Court of Human Rights for a term of office of nine years which shall commence not later than three months after her election.

Judges are elected by PACE from a list of three candidates nominated by each State which has ratified the European Convention on Human Rights.
Share Tweet Links  Voting result  List and curricula vitae of candidates submitted by the Government of Iceland  How are judges of the ECHR elected?
https://pace.coe.int/en/news/8947 1/1 24 January 2023 / 24 janvier 2023 ELECTION OF A JUDGE TO THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS FOR ICELAND 24 January 2023 First part of the 2023 Ordinary Session ÉLECTION D’UN JUGE À LA COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME AU TITRE DE L’ISLANDE 24 janvier 2023 Première partie de la Session ordinaire de 2023 Total number of members voting / Nombre total de membres votants Number of spoilt or blank ballot papers / Nombre de bulletins nuls ou blancs Absolute majority of the votes cast / Majorité absolue des suffrages exprimés Number of valid votes / Nombre de votes valides 186 2 93 184 The votes were cast as follows / Les suffrages ont été exprimés comme suit Ms Oddný Mjöll ARNARDÓTTIR Ms Dóra GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR Mr Páll ÞÓRHALLSSON 145 22 17 Ms Oddný Mjöll ARNARDÓTTIR, having obtained an absolute majority of votes cast, is elected judge of the European Court of Human Rights for a term of office of nine years which shall commence not later than three months after his election.
Mme Oddný Mjöll ARNARDÓTTIR, ayant obtenu une majorité absolue des suffrages exprimés, est élu juge à la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme ; son mandat de neuf ans commence au plus tard trois mois après son élection.

Doc.

15671 22 December 2022 Election of judges to the European Court of Human Rights List and curricula vitae of candidates submitted by the Government of Iceland Communication Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Doc.
15671 Communication Contents Page 1.

List and curricula vitae of candidates submitted by the Government of Iceland ....................................... 3 2.

Opinion on persons applying to be nominated by Iceland for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights (cf.
the advertisement of 22 June 2022 – Draft dated 15 September 2022) ......................5 Appendix 1 – Oddný Mjöll ARNARDÓTTIR ................................................................................................24 Appendix 2 – Dóra GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR .................................................................................................. 30 Appendix 3 – Páll ÞÓRHALLSSON ........................................................................................................... 38 2 Doc.
15671 Communication 1.

List and curricula vitae of candidates submitted by the Government of Iceland Extracts from the letter from the Prime Minister's Office, Reykjavik, Iceland, to Ms Despina Chatzivassiliou- Tsovilis Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly, 15 November 2022.
The Ministry of Justice received a letter from Iceland's Permanent Representative to the Council of Europe on 11 May 2021 requesting, with reference to a communication from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe of 6 May 2021, that Iceland commence preparation to nominate Iceland's judge at the European Court of Human Rights, as the term of appointment of the current judge will expire on 31 October 2022.
A request was submitted for Iceland to nominate three qualified candidates for prospective judges at the European Court of Human Rights and for Iceland' s nominations, together with a description of the procedure by which the candidates were selected, to be sent to the Parliamentary Assembly no later than 5 May 2022.
The Ministry of Justice furthermore received a letter from Iceland's Permanent Representative to the Council of Europe on 12 May 2021, referring to a letter from the Chair of the Advisory Panel of Experts on Candidates for Election as Judge to the ECHR (hereafter referred to as "the Advisory Panel"), dated the same day, requesting that the Advisory Panel be sent the names and curricula vitae of the candidates, together with information on the procedure by which the candidates were selected, at the latest by 5 February 2022.
Parliamentary elections were held in Iceland on 25 September 2021.

Under the new Presidential Decree of 28 November 2021, on the allocation of responsibilities among the ministries of Government Offices in Iceland, responsibility for human rights, including matters connected to the European Court of Human Rights, was transferred from the Ministry of Justice to the Prime Minister's Office.
The Prime Minister's Office received the above communications for appropriate response with a letter from the Ministry of Justice of 1 December 2021, with reference to the Presidential Decree.

On 21 December 2021 a notice was placed on the website of the Prime Minister's Office, inviting persons who wished to be nominated by Iceland as candidates for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights to submit an application no later than 14 January 2022.
Information on the ensuing domestic procedure (the advertisement procedure, the domestic evaluation committee, interviews etc.)

is provided in the letter, dated 15 March 2022 and was sent to the Parliamentary Assembly on 29 March 2022.

Three applications were received.

The evaluation committee's conclusion was that all three applicants were qualified for nomination by Iceland for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights.
The list with the names of the three persons nominated by Iceland as candidates for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights was sent to the Advisory Panel on 4 February 2022 along with their respective curriculum vitae.

The candidates, in alphabetical order, were: Ms Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, Judge of the Court of Appeal; Mr Jónas Þór Guðmundsson, Supreme Court attorney; Mr Stefán Geir Þórisson, Supreme Court attorney.
[…] Iceland's final nominations were submitted to the Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on 15 March 2022.

The Committee on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights met on 7 June 2022 where Iceland's nominations were discussed and interviews with the candidates took place.

Before the Committee made a decision on whether it would recommend the candidates, two of them, Mr Jónas Þór Guðmundsson and Mr Stefán Geir Þórisson, withdrew their applications.
A press release published on the website of the Prime Minister's Office on 22 June 2022, described the above course of events and stated that, in order for Iceland to submit a list of three candidates, applications would be invited again for the position.

It was also noted that the applicant who had not withdrawn her application, Ms Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, Judge of the Court of Appeal, would retain her place on the list […].
The names of the two persons nominated by Iceland to replace the absent candidates, in alphabetical order, are Ms Dóra Guðmundsdóttir, Senior Lawyer; and Mr Páll Þórhallsson, Director General at the Prime Minister's Office.
The process of their selection was as follows: On 22 June 2022, a notice was placed on the website of Prime Minister's Office, inviting persons who wished to be nominated by Iceland as candidates for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights to submit an application to the Prime Minister's Office no later than 8 August 2022.

The notice included information on the qualifications required to serve as a judge at the European Court of Human Rights, the 3 Doc.
15671 Communication necessary linguistic competence and terms of employment.

Furthermore, it stated that an evaluation committee would be appointed to assess candidates on the basis of the guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (CM (2012) 40).

Additional notices were published on the public website of the Government of Iceland, in the Legal Gazette and in the newspapers Fréttablaôiô, Morgunblaôiô and Viôskiptablaôiô.
A separate notice was also sent to all law schools in Iceland, to all courts of law through the Judicial Administration and to the Icelandic Bar Association.

The Prime Minister's Office also issued a general press release.

The notices of the open position were discussed in mainstream and Internet news media.

Two applications were received from the two respective candidates who have now been put forward by Iceland to replace the two candidates that withdrew their application.
A five-person evaluation committee to assess the eligibility was appointed on 16 August 2022, comprised of two women and three men, to evaluate the qualifications and eligibility of the candidates.

Nominations to the evaluation committee had been requested from the Supreme Court of Iceland, the Icelandic Bar Association, the Judicial Administration and the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.

The Prime Minister appointed the evaluation committee’s chair ex officia.
The evaluation committee was comprised of: Mr Porgeir Ôrlygsson (chair), former president of the Supreme Court; Dr Guômundur Alfreôsson, professor; Ms Anna Jóhannsdóttir, lawyer and ambassador; Mr Arnar Þór Stefánsson, attorney; and Ms Björg Thorarensen, Justice of the Supreme Court.

The evaluation committee met five times.

At its first meeting on 8 August 2022, the committee discussed the eligibility of its members with regard to possible grounds for disqualification.
The conclusion was that no connections existed which could give cause for disqualification.

On 19 August, all applicants were informed of the composition of the evaluation committee.

The applicants were invited for an interview on 9 September 2022, and on that day Ms Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Mr Páll Þórhallsson presented themselves for interviews on the premises of the Judicial Administration at Suôurlandsbraut 14.

The committee then met that same day following the interviews.
The committee met again on 12 August and again on 15 August.

The committee assessed whether the applicants met the eligibility requirements for nomination as candidates for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights, as prescribed in Article 21 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and qualifications for the office laid down in the Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe CM (2012) 40 of 29 March 2012.
Given that the applicant Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, who applied for nomination based on the advertisement on 21 December 2021, retains her place on the list, the committee did not consider it to be its task to include a reassessment of Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir eligibility.

Therefore, only the applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson were evaluated in this instance.
The evaluation committee also considered its role, based on the letter of appointment of 16 August 2022, to be limited to assessing whether the applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson meet the eligibility criteria laid down in Article 21 of the ECHR for persons nominated as judges, and assessing their suitability to take up such a position in accordance with the aforementioned guidelines of the Council of Europe CM (2012) 40 of 29 March 2012. lt follows that the evaluation committee's role is neither to rank the candidates nor to make a further comparison of their qualifications.
The questions presented to the applicants in the interviews aimed at determining how applicants fulfilled the requirements of Article 21 of the European Court of Human Rights, having regard to the aforementioned guidelines.

Their proficiency in the official languages of the Court was specifically examined.
The committee asked each applicant to sign a declaration, with reference to Article 21 of the European Convention on Human Rights, stating that they had not said, done or written anything which might harm the reputation of the Court, that they would not engage in any activity which was incompatible with the independence of judges at the European Court of Human Rights, their impartiality or the requirements made with regard to a full-time position as a judge at the Court and that they would not foreseeably be generally disqualified from hearing cases brought before the Court.
Both applicants signed this declaration.

All the applicants were sent by e-mail on September 12 a draft of the committee's opinion on candidates to be nominated by Iceland as judges of the ECHR, where they were given the opportunity to express their comments.

Comments and suggestions were received from all of the applicants and the committee reviewed them at its meeting on 15 September.

Changes were made to the committee's opinion as deemed necessary.
The committee's conclusion was that both applicants, Ms Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Mr Páll Þórhallsson, were qualified for nomination by Iceland for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights.

Iceland’s nominations were thereafter transmitted to the Advisory Panel for its opinion.

[…] 4 Doc.
[…] 4 Doc.

15671 Communication The names of the three persons nominated by Iceland in alphabetical order, are: – – – Ms Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, Judge of the Court of Appeal; Ms Dóra Guðmundsdóttir, Senior Lawyer; Mr Páll Þórhallsson, Director General at the Prime Minister's Office.

The respective curricula vitae of the three applicants are attached.
Any requests for further information or clarification should be directed to Ran Ingvarsdottir, Deputy Director, Prime Minister's Office at the e-mail address: ran.ingvarsdottir@for.is 2.

Opinion on persons applying to be nominated by Iceland for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights (cf.

the advertisement of 22 June 2022 – Draft dated 15 September 2022) 2.1.
The European Court of Human Rights and the Appointment of Judges to it The seat of a judge at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg will be vacant from 31 October 2022.

The court deals with cases referred to it by individuals and contracting States due to alleged violations of provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights or its annexes.

The treaty has been given legal effect in Iceland under Article 1 of Act No.

62/1994, on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The Court is composed of one judge from each state party to the Convention, cf.

Article 20 of the Convention.

Under Article 22 of the European Court of Human Rights, the judges of the European Court of Human Rights shall be elected by the Council of Europe by a majority of votes from a list of three persons nominated by the contracting State.

Pursuant to Article 23 the judge is to be elected for a nine-year term and may not be re- elected.
According to the second paragraph of Article 21 of the Convention, candidates must be younger than 65 years old on the day the Council requests a list of three persons, cf.

Article 22.

The eligibility requirements of judges are discussed in Article 21 of the Convention.
The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has set guidelines CM (2012) 40 of 29 March 2012, on the selection of judges for the European Court of Human Rights Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers on the selection of candidates for the post of judge at the European Court of Human Rights).
In accordance with Chapter III of those Guidelines, on 21 December 2021, the Prime Minister’s Office published an advertisement inviting persons interested in being nominated by Iceland to the aforementioned list to serve as a judge at the European Court of Human Rights were given the opportunity to send their application to the Ministry no later than 14 January 2022.
The advertisement also stated that a committee would be appointed to evaluate the applications of those interested in being nominated as candidate.

The committee would deliver an opinion on the candidates and make a reasoned proposal as to which of them were considered the most qualified to be nominated.

The government’s nominations would be based on this proposal.
In response to the aforementioned advertisement, three persons applied to be nominated as judicial candidates by Iceland to the European Court of Human Rights: attorney Jónas Þór Guðmundsson, Court of Appeal judge Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir and attorney Stefán Geir Þórisson.
The committee which was to assess the eligibility of applicants was comprised of professor Ragnhildur Helgadóttir, who was appointed without nomination and served as chair; lawyer and ambassador Anna Jóhannsdóttir, nominated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; attorney Arnar Þór Stefánsson, nominated by the Icelandic Bar Association; Supreme Court Judge Björg Thorarensen, nominated by the Supreme Court of the Judicial Administration.
Iceland; and professor Dr Guðmundur Alfreðsson, nominated by of The committee's Terms of Reference were signed on 21 January 2022.
The evaluation committee's Terms of Reference requested that a draft of its reasoned conclusion be received by the Prime Minister's Office no later than 3 February 2022, and that the conclusion would then be presented to the Advisory Panel of Experts on Candidates for Election as Judge to the European Court of Human Rights, operating on behalf of the Council of Europe to assess whether the candidates nominated met the eligibility criteria laid down in Article 21 of the European Court of Human Rights.
The evaluation committee's Terms of Reference also stated that if the Advisory Panel requested further information or explanations regarding the candidates, the Prime Minister's Office would request information from the committee.

It also specified that the candidates that the committee proposed for nomination as judges should not be ranked among themselves and that they should not be subjected to further comparisons of qualifications.
If the Advisory Panel made no objections concerning the candidates, the evaluation committee would be notified of this and asked to send its final conclusion to the Prime Minister’s Office.

5 Doc.

15671 Communication On 3 February 2021 the evaluation committee delivered to the Prime Minister's Office its draft opinion on the eligibility of the three persons who had, in response to the advertisement of 21 December 2021, applied to be nominated by Iceland as judges at the European Court of Human Rights.
The conclusion of the evaluation committee was that all three candidates were eligible to be nominated by Iceland.

Since the number of applicants was equal to the number of seats to be filled and there was no need to select from the group based on a competency assessment, the committee only assessed whether the applicants met the general eligibility criteria.

The previously mentioned Council of Europe’s Advisory Panel of Experts did not make any comment on that assessment by the evaluation committee.
The Committee on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights met on 7 June 2022, where Iceland's nominations were discussed and interviews with candidates took place.

Before the committee made a decision on whether it would recommend the applicants, two of them, the attorneys Jónas Þór Guðmundsson and Stefán Geir Þórisson, withdrew their applications.
A press release published on the website of the Prime Minister's Office on 22 June 2022, described the above course of events and stated that, in order for Iceland to submit a list of three candidates, applications would be invited again for the position and the process expedited as much as possible.

It was also noted that the applicant who had not withdrawn her application would retain her place on the list.
That same day the Prime Minister’s Office published an advertisement on its website inviting persons interested in being nominated by Iceland to serve as judge at the ECtHR to send their application to the Ministry no later than 8 August 2022.

The advertisement also stated that a five- member committee would assess the applications received.
The committee would deliver an opinion on the candidates and make a reasoned proposal as to which of them were considered most qualified to be nominated; the government’s nominations would be based on this proposal.
In response to the advertisement of 22 June 2022, applications were received from two individuals to be nominated by Iceland as judges at the European Court of Human Rights, from Dóra Guðmundsdóttir, Senior Lawyer, UK Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, and Páll Þórhallsson, Office Director in the Prime Minister’s Office.

On 16 August 2022, the Prime Minister appointed a committee to assess the applications received in response to the advertisement of 22 June 2022.
The committee, hereafter referred to as “the evaluation committee” or “the committee”, was comprised of Þorgeir Örlygsson, former president of the Supreme Court, appointed to the committee without nomination and who would serve as its chair; Anna Jóhannsdóttir, lawyer and ambassador, nominated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; attorney Arnar Þór Stefánsson, nominated by the Icelandic Bar Association; Supreme Court Judge Björg Thorarensen, nominated by the Supreme Court of Iceland; and professor Dr Guðmundur Alfreðsson, nominated by of the Judicial Administration.
The committee's Terms of Reference, dated 16 August 2022, stated that in accordance with the Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers on the selection of candidates for the post of judge at the European Court of Human Rights, CM (2012) 40, the Prime Minister has decided to appoint a committee of five to assess the eligibility and qualifications of the candidates to be nominated.
It was also noted in the Terms of Reference that the applicant who had not withdrawn her application would retain her place on the list.

The Terms of Reference also stated that the committee was to follow good administrative practice and the rules that apply to the selection of judges at the European Court of Human Rights.

It was to invite all candidates for an interview and consult with the Advisory Panel of Experts on Candidates for Election as Judge to the European Court of Human Rights.
In other respects, the committee itself was to determine how it conducted its work and what information it deemed necessary to obtain beyond that which the applicants submitted themselves.
It was pointed out that, should the committee happen to obtain information which it considered to be to an applicant's disadvantage and which could affect the assessment of the applicant's qualifications, the committee should inform the applicant of its content and where it originated and give the applicant an opportunity to comment on this before the committee gave an opinion on the applicant's qualifications.
During its evaluation and before delivering its final result to the Minister, the committee should ensure the parties enjoyed their right to object, cf.

Article 13 of the Public Administration Act, No.

37/1993.
37/1993.

The above-mentioned Advisory Panel of Experts operating under the auspices of the Council of Europe, was established by a decision of the Council of Ministers of the Council of Europe (Resolution CM/Res of 10 November 2010) to follow up on the Declaration of the Interlaken Conference in February of that year (the High Level Conference on the Future of the European Court of Human Rights in Interlaken in February 2010).
The role of the Advisory Panel is to provide advice to the governments of the member States of the Council of Europe regarding whether candidates for appointment to the post of judge meet the requirements of paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the European Court of Human Rights.

The Advisory Panel consists of seven 6 Doc.


15671 Communication independent experts, who in most cases are former European Court of Human Rights judges or current or former judges of the Supreme Court or Constitutional Court of a member State.
The Advisory Panel bases its evaluation of the applicants on the documentation submitted to it by governments of member States and does not gather additional documentation; however, it can nevertheless direct specific questions to the member State for further information.

If the Advisory Panel considers all three candidates on the list of a particular government to meet the requirements to be elected as a judge at the ECtHR, the government is informed thereof.
If, in the opinion of the Advisory Panel, one or more of the applicants, does not satisfy the requirements, reasons for this are given in the Panel's written response to the government.

In such case, the government is expected to submit a new list, although it is not directly obliged to do so.

Once the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has received the government's list of candidates, the Advisory Panel submits to the Assembly its final written conclusion on the candidates.
The Parliamentary Assembly's Committee on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights interviews the candidates and sends its proposal to the Assembly.

A representative of the Advisory Panel, usually its chair, is invited to the meeting held by the committee to prepare interviews with the candidates, where the representative has the opportunity to explain the views of the Advisory Panel regarding the candidates.

2.2.
2.2.

Considerations on which the evaluation committee bases its assessment – Basis for assessment In view of what is stated in the evaluation committee’s letter of appointment of 16 August 2022, that the applicant Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, who applied for nomination in response to the advertisement of 21 December 2021, should retain her place on the list, the committee does not consider its role to include a reassessment of Oddný Arnardóttir's eligibility1.
Therefore, only the applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson will be evaluated.

Their eligibility will be assessed on the same basis as those who applied for nomination according to the advertisement on 21 December 2021.
The committee also considers that its role, based on the letter of appointment of 16 August 2022, is limited to assessing whether the applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson meet the eligibility criteria laid down in Article 21 of the ECHR for persons nominated as judges, and assessing their suitability to take up such a position in accordance with the aforementioned guidelines of the Council of Europe CM (2012) 40 of 29 March 2012.
It follows that the committee's role is neither to rank the candidates according to their qualifications nor to make a comparison of their qualifications.

The general eligibility criteria for judges at the European Court of Human Rights are specified in Art.

21 of the ECHR, which states: 1.

2.

3.

The judges shall be of high moral character and must either possess the qualifications required for appointment to high judicial office or be jurisconsults of recognised competence.
The judges shall sit on the Court in their individual capacity.

During their term of office the judges shall not engage in any activity which is incompatible with their independence, impartiality or with the demands of a full-time office.

All questions arising from the application of this paragraph shall be decided by the Court.
It follows from the above that the eligibility of applicants to serve as a judge at the ECtHR can be assessed based on two types of considerations: on the one hand, by an assessment of whether the applicant fulfils requirements on eligibility to hold a high judicial office in his/her home country and, on the other hand, according to an assessment of whether the applicant is considered a jurisconsult of recognised competence.

According to Article 1 of Act No.


56/2016, on the Courts, the Supreme Court of Iceland is the highest court of the state and according to Article 2. of the Act the Court of Appeal is the appeal court for the entire country.

A person who serves as a judge at the Court of Appeal is therefore generally considered to hold a higher judicial position in the meaning of Article 21 of the European Court of Human Rights.

It follows that regarding the former consideration, i.e.
whether the applicant meets the requirements for eligibility to hold a high judicial office, the committee considers that the applicant should, as appropriate in each case, be evaluated in the manner provided for in Article 13 or Article 21 of Act No.

56/2016, on the Courts.

For the assessment on Ms Oddný Arnardóttir's eligibility see extract from the Opinion of 3 February 2022 at the end 1. of this Opinion.

7 Doc.
7 Doc.

15671 Communication Article 13 of the Act discusses the eligibility requirements of Supreme Court judges and Article 21 the eligibility requirements of judges of the Court of Appeal.
The requirements in both Articles are the same except that Point 7 of the second paragraph of Article 13 of the Act makes it a condition that an applicant for the post of Supreme Court Judge has served as judge of the Court of Appeal, District Court Judge or professor of law for at least three years, while Point 7 of the second paragraph of Article 21 of the Act sets the condition that an applicant must have served as District Court Judge, professor or assistant professor of law for at least three years.
Apart from this, the requirements are that the applicant: 1) has reached the age of 35; 2) has Icelandic citizenship; 3) is mentally and physically fit enough to hold office; 4) is legally competent and has never been deprived of custody of his/her estate; 5) has neither received a prison sentence for a criminal act committed after reaching the age of 18 years, nor conducted him-/herself in any manner which could undermine the trust that judges must enjoy in general; 6) has completed a professional degree or undergraduate course together with a master's degree in law, 7) has worked for at least three years as an attorney qualified to make representation before the Supreme Court, chief of police, District Commissioner, prosecutor, permanent secretary of a ministry, office director in a ministry dealing with judicial and procedural affairs or as parliamentary ombudsman, or has for a period of equal length served in another similar position conferring comparable legal experience.
8) is considered to be qualified to hold the position in light of his/her career and legal knowledge.

With regard to the requirement of the second paragraph of Article 13 and the second paragraph of Article 21 of the Act on the Courts, it be noted that these provisions have a model in the second paragraph of Article 4, of the previous Act on the Courts, No.

15/1998.

Concerning the requirement of Point 7 of the second paragraph of Article 4 of Act No.
15/1998, the Explanatory Notes accompanying the bill, which would become the Act, state regarding Article 4 that the point was intended to expand somewhat the rules regarding the kind of work experience candidates for Supreme Court judges would have had to acquire to satisfy the requirements to be appointed to office.

Point 4 of the first paragraph of Article 5 of Act No.
75/1973, which then applied to this, stipulated that a judge had to have held one of the positions listed there for at least three years.

An exhaustive list of this kind was thought to be undesirable, in that it might exclude candidates who had solid work experience, but not in any of the areas listed there.
It was therefore proposed in the conclusion of Point 7 of Article 4 of the bill, to add to the list in the Act that the requirement of work experience could be satisfied through other similar work which provided comparable legal work experience as that listed there.
Pursuant to Article 11 of the Act on the Courts, the Minister of Justice appoints five persons and an equal number of alternates to examine the qualifications of applicants for the office of Supreme Court Judge, Court of Appeal Judge, District Court Judge, as well as judge at the Court for Re-opened Cases.

Article 12 of the Act states that the evaluation committee shall provide the minister with a written and reasoned opinion on candidates for judicial office.
The evaluation committee’s opinion is to decide which applicant is most qualified for the position and it may rank two or more candidates as equal.

In other respects, the minister sets more detailed rules for the work of the committee.

These Rules, currently No.

970/2020, discuss in Article 4 the considerations on which the committee is to base its assessment.
The Article reads as follows: “The evaluation committee's opinion shall decide which applicant or applicants are the most qualified for appointment to the judicial office in question.

The evaluation committee shall take care to be consistent in its assessment to ensure non-discrimination.
Its conclusion is to be based on an overall assessment, using objective considerations, of the merit of applicants having regard to their education and experience, integrity, competence and efficiency in their work, as described in detail in part here below: 1.

2.

3.
2.

3.

Education, career and scholarly expertise In assessing education, career and scholarly expertise the evaluation committee shall bear in mind that it is desirable for an applicant to have diverse work experience in the legal field, such as experience of judicial work, litigation or other work as attorneys, work in public administration or scholarship.

The basic assumption shall be that an applicant must possess general and broad legal expertise and education.
Another consideration is whether the applicant has pursued postgraduate studies.

Additional employment and involvement in associations and organisations The Evaluation Committee should also consider an applicant's additional work, such as work on complaint committees or other related functions that are useful for prospective judges.

Finally, extensive participation in associations or organisations may be considered.
General competence In assessing general competence, consideration should be given to whether applicants have shown independence, impartiality, initiative and efficiency in their work and whether they easily distinguish key points from issues of secondary importance.

It is desirable that they have management experience.

Applicants must have a good command of Icelandic and be able to express themselves readily both orally and in writing.

8 Doc.

15671 Communication 4.

5.


Specific qualifications It is important for applicants to have a good command of civil and criminal procedure and be able to comply with statutory provisions on the drafting of judgments and write them in proper language.

They must be able to preside over court sessions with authority and fairness and deal with the cases entrusted to them both promptly and confidently.
Mental capacity Applicants must be able to get along well with others, both colleagues and others with whom they interact.
Applicants are required to have a good reputation, both in their previous positions and outside of work, and their personal discipline should be in no way deficient.” The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has elaborated on the conditions in Article 21 of the ECHR in more detail in the aforementioned Guidelines CM (2012) 40, which were also accompanied by an Explanatory Memorandum.

Section II of the Guidelines discusses considerations when selecting candidates for a position as judge.
Point 1 of Section II of the Guidelines reiterates the requirement that candidates for the post of judge should be of high moral character, cf.

also paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR.

In consideration of the explanations of this provision, the committee considers that the conduct of the candidates must indisputably accord with the trust and respect that the European Court of Human Rights must be shown.
Point 2 of the Guidelines requires candidates to possess either the qualifications required for appointment to high judicial office.

or to be jurisconsults of recognised competence, cf.

also paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR.


With regard to Point 2, the evaluation committee notes that the Advisory Panel of Experts issued a publication in October 2020 with information on its role in the selection of candidates and minimum qualifications set: The Advisory Panel of Experts on Candidates for Election as Judge to the European Court of Human Rights – A short guide on the Panel´s role and the minimum qualifications required of a candidate.
With regard to the explanations of the requirements in paragraph 1 of Article 21 of ECHR, that judges at the Human Rights Court must either meet the requirements for eligibility to hold high judicial office or be jurisconsults of recognised competence, the guidelines state that this does not, of course, exclude candidates who meet both conditions.
It is also pointed out there that when governments of member States of the Council of Europe put forward lists with the names of candidates and thereafter the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe elects judges they are obliged to ensure that candidates are of mature professional experience and possess unquestionable qualifications for the exercise of a high judicial function on the international plane.
In the opinion of the Advisory Panel, these conditions reflect in the broadest sense a requirement of professional experience of long duration at a high level.

Knowledge of human rights is only one, albeit an important, component of the overall assessment carried out by the Advisory Panel.
Point 2 of the Advisory Panel's guidelines also states that although the two requirements in paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Convention differ and are worded as alternative (“either... or”), it could nevertheless happen that the Advisory Panel may consider it sufficient to combine elements covered by each individual requirement alone.
This means that even if a candidate does not meet one of the requirements if that condition is considered alone, a combination of judicial experience, on the one hand, and academic experience or other relevant legal experience, on the other hand, in an overall assessment can justify the selection of a candidate, usually on the basis that the candidate is a “jurisconsult of recognised competence”.
The Advisory Panel’s guide states that the requirement of eligibility for appointment to high judicial office applies to judges in the Supreme Court or Constitutional Court of the respective state, but not to judges of a court of first instance in the state unless they meet the requirement of jurisconsult.
The requirement probably also applies to judges at the appeal court level, provided that they have “mature professional experience” and a strong CV in other respects, for example, with an impressive list of scholarly publications.

On the other hand, the Advisory Panel is of the opinion that the fact that a judge has sat on the highest national court does not in itself mean that such person is automatically considered to satisfy the requirements for judges at the European Court of Human Rights.
As far as the condition of being a “jurisconsult of recognised competence” is concerned, the instructions state that this is rather an antiquated term for an expert in law.

It refers to a person who has extensive knowledge of the law but is not necessarily a practising lawyer or judge.

The qualifying phrase, that the person is "of recognised competence", refers to something that is above and beyond legal expertise, even a great deal of expertise.
In anticipation of the establishment of the Advisory Panel, the then president of the ECtHR, Jean- Paul Costa, gave the definition that in order to be considered a jurisconsult of recognised competence, the person must have extensive experience of legal work and/or in teaching law.
Extensive experience in teaching law would generally entail the publication of significant academic works, and one important factor providing an indication of such extensive experience is the length of time a candidate has held the relevant position.

9 Doc.
9 Doc.

15671 Communication Following on from this, the guide states that the Advisory Panel considers that the condition of "recognised competence" is met when the person in question has been a professor at a university of standing for many years and has published important works, including writings concerning rules on the protection of human rights and their relationship with the constitutional functions of States.
The guide states that the selection of persons other than academics can be considered, e.g.

active attorneys, prosecutors, ombudsmen, diplomats, legal advisors of governmental and non- governmental organisations and legal professionals in the public and private sectors in general.

This is especially true when they have, during their career, their work acquired professional intimacy with issues related to human rights and the functioning of courts.
It is always a condition, however, that they possess the mature professional experience expected of “jurisconsult of recognised competence”.

Most, if not all, of the candidates that the Advisory Panel did not consider to satisfy the requirement of “jurisconsults of recognised competence” were in fact excellent academics or experts learned in the law, and without any doubt in good standing with their professional peers.
Nevertheless, they were at relatively early stages in their careers and had not yet acquired the necessary length or breadth of experience.

In this regard, it must be kept in mind that paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR concerns the selection of international judges, whose role it is to adjudicate in complex and sensitive cases brought against States, and not the selection of qualified experts, for example, for an intergovernmental committee.
Furthermore, the Advisory Panel’s guide also states that, although experience in the field of the Convention law or rules relevant to it, is a very material factor in the evaluation carried out, it is nevertheless possible to acquire the ability to judge issues on the basis of the ECHR in many other ways than by working with such issues on a day-to-day basis.
A person who has been a professor in European law or international law, for example, would generally be considered qualified to judge issues that fall under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, even if the person has not specialised in human rights or fundamental rights.

The same would apply to a professor of constitutional law.

However, professors in these and other disciplines would need to have engagement with issues related to human rights during their professional career.
Finally the guide states on this aspect that the Advisory Panel may also take into account whether a candidate has, in addition to academic experience (or other experience not considered academic) advised on or appeared in cases involving human rights law or constitutional issues, or been a member of national or international supervisory bodies in the field of human rights.
Point 3 of the guidelines makes the requirement that a candidate must, as an absolute minimum, be proficient in one official language of the Council of Europe, English or French, and should also possess at least a passive knowledge of the other.

In the committee’s estimation, this condition requires a good command of either English or French, not least legal language, and that candidates for the post of judge must be able to speak and write that language and conduct a legal debate in it.
With regard to the other language, the Panel is of the opinion that the candidate must be able to read and understand it and have sufficient knowledge to be able to play a full part in the work of the Court.

Point 4 of the guidelines requires candidates to have knowledge of national and international law.

Practical legal experience is also considered desirable.
The explanatory notes on this criteria state that even though this criterion does not take precedence over Article 21 of the ECHR, extensive expertise in these areas is an indirect requirement to be appointed as candidate and the choice between persons who are otherwise on an equal footing could be based on this.

To the extent that assessment of these points is not part of the assessment provided for in Articles 13 and 21 of the Act on the Courts, No.
50/2016, it is sufficient for the evaluation committee to describe how it considers the candidates to meet these conditions, as the committee does not consider its role to include a comparison of the qualifications of those who the committee has deemed eligible to be nominated as candidates.

Point 5 of the guidelines sets a requirement concerning the age of candidates.
In relation to this point, it is worth mentioning that the rule that the term of office of judges expires when they reach the age of 70 has been repealed from the Convention.

This was done by Annex 15 to the Convention, which was enacted in Iceland with Act No.

118/2015.

Applicants for judicial positions at the ECtHR must now, cf.

Paragraph 2 of Art.

21 of the Convention, be younger than 65 years old on the day the Council requests a list of three persons, cf.

further Art.

22 of the Convention.


Point 6 of the guidelines sets the requirement that judges do not undertake any work that is incompatible with the independence and objectivity of the Court or with the demands of a full- time office.

Point 7 stresses that a candidate should not be nominated if this would foreseeably result in frequent or long- lasting recusals and the need to appoint an ad hoc judge.

Point 8 states that the list should generally include candidates of both genders.

10 Doc.
10 Doc.

15671 Communication The evaluation committee believes that, in addition to an assessment based on the above- mentioned points, it is authorised to consider whether the applicant has otherwise acquired a reputation as a jurisconsult of recognised competence, cf.

Point 2 of the Guidelines.


It should also be borne in mind that when assessing the suitability of persons applying to be nominated by Iceland as judges at the ECtHR, it should be taken into account that the Convention imposes certain obligations of confidentiality and loyalty on the governments of the participating countries.
As a result contracting States must only nominate judges for the European Court of Human Rights who have the ability to work in an international environment, are competent to actively participate in the handling of cases and influence their resolution, and are otherwise entitled to enjoy, on the basis of their work and conduct, the undisputed trust and respect which must be shown to the Court.

2.3.
2.3.

Applicants and procedure of the evaluation committee As previously described, the committee that was to evaluate applications received in response to the advertisement of the Prime Minister's Office of 22 June 2022 was appointed on 16 August 2022.
The deadline for applications expired on 8 August 2022, and, as mentioned above, applications were received from the two previously mentioned applicants, namely Dóra Guðmundsdóttir, Senior Lawyer, UK Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, and Páll Þórhallsson, Office Director in the Prime Minister's Office.

They submitted information on their career on the forms prepared by the Council of Europe for candidates as judges.
The committee held its first meeting on 18 August 2022, where a decision was taken on the eligibility of the committee members.

The conclusion was that there were no grounds for disqualification.

On 19 August, the applicants were informed of the persons who had been appointed to the evaluation committee.

At its meeting on 18 August 2022, the committee prepared a schedule for its work and discussed individual issues that would need to be addressed in its opinion.
The committee held interviews with the applicants on 9 September 2022, when both applicants presented themselves for an interview at the National Courts Administration, Suðurlandsbraut 14, Reykjavík.

The committee met directly after the interviews and then again on 12 and 15 September.

At the last-mentioned meeting it completed its final review.
As stated, the evaluation committee held four meetings as well as the interviews to prepare its opinion, which it bases on the existing applications, the documentation accompanying the applications and interviews with the applicants.

In accordance with previous practice, the committee requested that the applicants sign a statement with reference to Article 21 of the ECHR, cf.

Act No.
Act No.

62/1994, to the effect that the person in question had not said, done or written anything that could damage the reputation of the Court; that the person in question would not take part in any activity which is incompatible with the independence of a judge of the European Court of Human Rights, his/her impartiality or the demands of a full-time office; and that the person in question would not in general be foreseeably ineligible to sit on cases handled by the Court.
Each applicant also declared that they were mentally and physically fit to hold the position, were legally competent and had never been deprived of the right to manage their own estate, nor had they been convicted of a criminal action considered disgraceful in the public opinion, or conducted themselves in a manner which would undermine the trust which judges generally must enjoy, cf.

provisions of Articles 13 and 21 of Act No.

50/2016, on the Courts.

Both applicants signed a statement to this effect.


The applicants, including Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, were sent a draft of the evaluation committee's opinion on 12 September 2022 and given the opportunity to comment on the draft.

Comments and suggestions were received from all applicants and the committee took decisions on these at its meeting on 15 September 2022.

Modifications were made to the committee's opinion as deemed necessary.

2.4.
2.4.

General Information on the applicants The following gives an account of the education and work experience of the candidates, while the assessment and conclusions of the qualification committee is provided in the next section.2 2.4.1.

Dóra Guðmundsdóttir Dóra Guðmundsdóttir was born on 15 July 1965 and is therefore 57 years old.

She began studying philosophy at the University of Iceland, then completed a master's degree in law at the same school in 1990.
In her master's thesis, she examined judicial review power, comparing the power of Icelandic courts and courts in other Nordic countries to assess whether laws were compatible with the constitution.

Her thesis also 2.

See Section 2.6 for a presentation of Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir.

11 Doc.

15671 Communication discussed theories about the role of courts in this connection.
In 1992-1993, Dóra studied European law and the internal market, international human rights protection, procedural rules – rules of evidence, intellectual property rights and law and ethics at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark.

In 1993-94, she studied and obtained a master's degree in European methodology at the European Academy of Legal Theory in Brussels, Belgium with emphasis on legal methodology, the European legal system and European human rights protection.
Her final thesis dealt with comparative construction and references to European “consensus" (The methodology of consensus in the jurisprudence of the ECHR).

In 1994- 95, she studied at the University of British Columbia in Canada, focusing on international law, international human rights protection, law and society, legal methodology and artificial intelligence and in critical analysis, earning a master's degree (LL.M).
Her final thesis dealt with the methodology of the European Court of Human Rights and criticism directed at it at the time.

(Problems of Legitimacy regarding the European Convention on Human Rights: Formalism, fuzziness or lack of theory?).

Dóra was admitted to the bar in Iceland as a District Court attorney in 1999 and was a Registered European Lawyer in the United Kingdom in 2018-2020.

From 1990 to 1992, Dóra was a judges’ associate at Reykjavík City Court.
There she presided over the Court and exercised judicial authority in cases in absentia as well as cases where a defence was presented.

She assisted Court judges in a large number of cases, including cases where the protection of human rights was tested, e.g.

cases concerning access to personal information i medical records, and freedom of expression cases where the provisions of the Icelandic Constitution were tested in libel suits.
In 1995-1996, Dóra was an assistant lawyer at the Registry of the EFTA Court in Luxembourg and from 1996 to 1999 she was an assistant judge (référendaire) at the same court.

During that time, she worked on case preparation, including case reports where the Icelandic judge was the reporter.
She prepared and wrote drafts of the judgments and opinions of the court in cases concerning various areas of EEA law, for example company law, state aid, free movement and the state's liability for damages under the EEA Agreement (case E-9/1997, Erla María Sveinbjörnsdóttir).

She was appointed ad hoc judge at the EFTA Court in 2001, nominated by Iceland.

As the appointment was renewed for another three years in 2004, she served as ad hoc judge until 2007.
She was summoned as ad hoc judge in case E-1/02 EFTA Surveillance Authority v. Norway, which concerned the legitimacy under EEA law of reserving academic positions exclusively for females at the University of Oslo.

From 2000 to 2017, Dóra was an adjunct professor and expert at the University of Iceland and the University of Bifröst.

She taught European law and EEA law in a master's programme in Icelandic and English and organized courses and study materials.
She has also prepared a number of courses and lectures on European law and EEA law, including courses and materials intended for judges and attorneys.

After Dóra concluded her work for the EFTA Court, she worked as a freelance expert in the field of European and EEA law.

During this time, she wrote opinions on and worked on cases in the aforementioned field, in some cases testing the ECHR.

Her clients were both private and public entities (the Icelandic state).
She was, among other things, on the litigation team of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the case E-16/11, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (Icesave), worked on the preparation of arguments before the EFTA Court and worked for the Attorney General's Office in preparing written and oral arguments in case E-15/12, Wahl, which concerned a request for an advisory opinion from the EFTA Court on rules on foreigners and the right to enter the country.
In addition, she has given opinions and worked on applications to the ECtHR, for example regarding the application of the Union of University Graduates against the Icelandic state concerning an alleged violation of freedom of association and other projects where rights and human rights have been tested.
Among other things, she has worked for the Ministry of the Interior on drafting legislation to amend the Act on Foreign Nationals regarding the status of asylum seekers and international protection, in order to adapt Icelandic legislation to EU directives on the status of asylum seekers, and drafted an opinion for the Ministry of Education on religious education in Icelandic compulsory schools and the impact of the ECtHR's judgment in Folgerø and Others v. Norway, No.
15472/02, ECtHR (Grand Chamber), 29 June 2007.

Dóra has worked as a lawyer for the UK Government Legal Department since 2017, from 2017 to 2019 as a lawyer and since 2019 as senior lawyer.

During that time, she worked for the Department for Exiting the European Union (2017-2019), and subsequently in the Cabinet Office Europe Legal Advisors (2019-2022) and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office since 2022.
Dóra represents the United Kingdom at the European Court of Justice (UK Agent) and in that role has plead cases and prepared pleadings with clients and their counsels.
Recent cases concerning topics related to human rights have dealt with personal data protection and intellectual property rights, including a preliminary ruling case on personal data protection against Facebook which tested standard contractual terms, supervisory powers of the authorities and the protection of personal data in the transfer of data to the United States (EU-US privacy shield) (Case C-311/18 12 Doc.
15671 Communication Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland Ltd and Maximillian Schrems).

Also a preliminary ruling case where the legality of data gathering and data transfer by security authorities was tested (Case C-623/17 Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs).

That case tested whether the rules of the European Union on personal data protection applied to this activity, as well as whether an exemption on the grounds of national security should apply.
Dóra's main work in the Department for Exiting the European Union and at the Cabinet Office Europe Legal Advisers has been as a consultant, in which capacity she has given a legal opinion on a number of issues related to the UK's Withdrawal Agreement with the European Union.

She has given an opinion on matters concerning agreements between the UK and the EU regarding the UK withdrawal and the drafting of the withdrawal agreement and later the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland.
As well as other areas of European Union law, the subject areas cover energy, climate and environment, including provisions of free trade agreements where States undertake not to deviate from or reduce environmental protection and the protection of workers.

She has also given an opinion, for instance, on provisions concerning migration and on compatibility with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules concerning supervision of plant and animal health etc.
In addition, she has given an opinion on matters concerning the protection of human rights, e.g.

with regard to the UK's contribution to funding for refugees under agreements with Turkey and on specific provisions of the Withdrawal Agreement on citizen's rights.
Furthermore, she has given advice and opinions and worked on legislation and the preparation of parliamentary proceedings for both the UK House of Commons and the House of Lords, and worked on the preparation of arguments concerning the Protocol in cases where the UK is the defendant.
During her career, Dóra has researched the development of human rights protection and methodology used in national law, as well as researching and publishing material on European constitutional law and human rights protection.

She has published in both Icelandic and English.


In an article published in the Icelandic journal Tímarit lögfræðinga in 1994 (“Um lögtöku Mannréttindasáttmála Evrópu og beitingu í íslenskum rétti”) [On the enactment of the European Convention on Human Rights and its application under Icelandic law], she explained the influence of prevailing ideas on methodology.
The article was published when ECHR was enacted and discussed the effects of enacting the Convention through general legislation and not by amendment to constitutional provisions or with legislation equivalent to the constitution.

The article also contains an overview of ECtHR methodology and the interpretation and clarification of provisions of the Convention.

Dóra's research has mainly focused on European integration and European culture.
She has conducted research and published articles on the fundamentals of European law and EEA law and the impact of these legal systems on the law of member States, including the role of member State courts and co-operation between international courts and member State courts.

In her research and academic work, she has focused on studying the structure of the European Union and the EEA Agreement as independent legal systems.
She has studied the role of the courts (especially the role of the European Court of Justice and Court of Human Rights) and examined legal methodology and reasoning as well as consultation theories as the basis for the methodology of both courts.
She published, for example, an article on the role of the member States' courts in implementing EU and EEA law and their basis for this role in 2000 (“Getur dómstólum borið skylda til...?” Um hlutverk dómstóla aðildarríkja við framkvæmd réttar Evrópusambandsins og dómstóla samningsaðila við beitingu EES-réttar”) [Can courts have an obligation to...?

On the role of the courts of member States in the implementation of European Union law and the courts of contracting parties in the application of EEA law].
She also researched the non-discrimination principle of EU law, both the prohibition of discrimination based on nationality (Jafnræðisreglan og áhrif hennar á lagareglur um frjálsa för innan Evrópska efnahagssvæðisins) [The principle of non-discrimination and its effect on rules on free movement within the EEA] and the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of status in other respects, including sexual orientation (Rammatilskipun Evrópusambandsins í íslenskum rétti: mismunun á grundvelli kynhneigðar) [Framework Directive of the European Union in Icelandic law: discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation].
She has furthermore studied basic constitutional principles and the role of the courts in implementing and complementing constitutional provisions.

For example, she wrote an article following judgments by the Supreme Court of Iceland in the so-called Organisation of the Disabled cases, which dealt with the interpretation of the human rights provisions of the Icelandic Constitution by the courts.
She has studied the concept of citizenship in EU law and its origin in EU rules on the free movement of persons, and has also studied human rights protection in the context of EU citizenship.

In an article published in the Common Market Law Review in 2015, she further discussed theories of judicial consultation and cooperation in an integrated legal system.

13 Doc.
13 Doc.

15671 Communication In recent years, Dóra has once again studied the provisions of the ECHR and the case law of the Court and compared it with the methodology of the European Court of Justice.

She has examined theories of margin of appreciation in both legal systems and has researched and published the results of research on the interpretation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in a respected European journal.
She took part in a research project with Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir on theories of margin of appreciation and the publication of the results of a comparative study analysing the judicial practice of both courts.

In an article in 2017 on the practice of the ECtHR (Mannréttindadómstóllinn.

Nálægðarreglan og fullveldi samningsaðila) [European Court of Human Rights.
Subsidiarity and sovereignty of contracting States], she further examined the effect of the principle of subsidiarity and theories of the limited power of the courts to review legislation.

During her career, Dóra has worked on the publication of legal works and texts, peer-reviewed articles and other material, supervised and evaluated the work of master's students in law in various legal fields, especially EU law, EEA law and human rights.
She has lived and worked in Iceland and Europe, most recently in the UK, for more than 25 years.

2.4.2.

Páll Þórhallsson Páll Þórhallsson was born on 24 September 1964 and is therefore 57 years old.

He obtained an intermediate examination (Zwischenprüfung) in 1987 after studying political science and philosophy for four semesters at the universities of Heidelberg and Munich.
In 1995 he graduated with a BA degree in philosophy and political science from the University of Iceland, where his final thesis was entitled "Hinn dyggðum prýddi blaðamaður” [The virtuous journalist].

That same year, he graduated with a candidate's degree in law from the University of Iceland, where his final thesis was entitled: “Tjáningarfrelsi og æruvernd.

Íslenskar réttarreglur um meiðyrði í ljósi 10. gr.

Mannréttindasáttmála Evrópu” [Freedom of expression and protection of repute.
Icelandic legal rules on libel in light of Article 10 of the ECHR].

In 1996, Páll was admitted to the bar as District Court attorney and in 1998 he graduated with a master's degree (Diplôme d'études approfondies) in comparative human rights law from Robert Schuman University in Strasbourg, where his final thesis was entitled "Innleiðing Mannréttindasáttmála Evrópu í íslenskan rétt” [Transposing the European Convention on Human Rights into Icelandic law].
From 1987 to 1995, Páll worked as a journalist on the Icelandic daily Morgunblaðið, writing foreign news, commentary and discussion of court cases.

He continued to work at the newspaper as a freelancer until 2005, often covering events in Iceland from the perspective of the Council of Europe and human rights.

From 1988 to 1989 he was a board member and the latter year chairman of the Association of Icelandic Students Abroad and in 1990 he was chairman of the Icelandic Youth Association.
From 1995 to 1997, he was an associate in the legal firm A&P Lögmenn, where his main tasks were the preparation of documents for submission to the court and court representation on behalf of clients, both in civil cases, criminal cases and cases related to administrative law.

Quite a number of cases concerned basic human rights such as freedom of expression, privacy and property rights.
From 1999 to 2005, Páll worked as an expert at the communications directorate, DG II, of the Council of Europe Secretariat.

There he was the secretary of expert committees in the field of legislation on the Internet, copyright and related rights.

He also worked on co-operation programs in the South Caucasus and was responsible for the department's website.

In addition, he temporarily acted as the head of the department when the Director General retired.
Páll participated in the formulation of the principles of freedom of expression and various cooperation projects in the member States.

He organised a number of courses in Armenia and Azerbaijan, which were then new member States, to increase awareness of the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly freedom of expression.

Furthermore, he organised larger events such as a conference in Warsaw on the human rights aspects of Internet legislation and a ministerial meeting on media freedom in Kiev.
Between 2005 and 2009, Páll was a lawyer at the Prime Minister's Office.

He was secretary of the constitutional committee and the expert committee that assisted it.

He also worked on the simplification of laws and regulations, as well as providing legal advice to the Prime Minister.

From 2006 to 2008 he chaired the committee on simplification of the legal framework and in 2009 he was a member of the committee appointed to negotiate with the British and the Dutch on the Icesave issue.
From 2009 to 2013, he was a member of a working group and later a coordination committee on ethics in public administration and also a member of a legal group in connection with Iceland's application for EU membership.

In 2005-2006 he was secretary of the Complaints Committee on Information Affairs, which resolves disputes between the administration and individuals regarding access to data.

In 2014, Páll was elected by Alþingi to sit on a committee to assess the qualifications of judge candidates.
In 2019, he prepared instructions for ministries on their dealings with the Attorney General’s Office, which represents the state in civil litigation.

From 2005 to 14 Doc.

15671 Communication 2019, he was a part-time expert at the University of Reykjavík, where he taught Icelandic and European media law, enactment of legislation and constitutional law.

He was responsible for approx.


20 complete semester courses, especially at master's level, and for a first-year course in constitutional law for four consecutive years.

He also supervised a large number of master's and bachelor's theses.

From 2009 to 2019, Páll was Director of the Legislative Affairs Office in the Prime Minister's Office.

There he directed a team of up to 12 employees, lawyers and specialists in Icelandic.

There he worked on "improved legislation", i.e.


quality control of legislation and promotion of quality legislative practices.

The office’s responsibilities also included constitutional reform, administration of public lands, administrative law and information law, extensive international cooperation on "improved legislation" (OECD) and ethics in the public service, and measures to deal with corruption (OECD and the Council of Europe).
In 2015 and 2016, he was also the head of the cultural heritage office for two extended periods.

From 2008 to 2019, he was a board member of the Icelandic Bar Association.

From 2010 to 2014, he was director of the Government Offices’ School (the first one), which handles the training of ministry employees.

In 2012, he was a member of a group of experts tasked by Alþingi's Constitutional and Supervisory Committee with preparing a bill for a new constitution based on the work of the Constitutional Council.
From 2015 to 2019, he was chairman of the Ministerial Consultation Forum on Legislative Affairs, and from 2016 to 2018, a member of the board of the OECD Committee on Law and Regulation.

In the years 2014 to 2016, he was chairman of a constitutional committee, where all political parties in Alþingi were represented.

Its work led to a bill that the Prime Minister submitted to Parliament on resources, environmental protection and referenda.
Between 2007 and 2022, Páll was Iceland's alternate representative in GRECO.

There he represented Iceland in the Third Evaluation Round (Transparency of party funding) and the Fifth Evaluation Round (Preventing corruption and promoting integrity in central governments (top executive functions) and law enforcement agencies).

He was also a representative in the evaluation team for Norway in the Third Evaluation Round.

In 2020, he chaired the government's co-ordination team for Covid-19 border screening.
In 2021, he was the chairman of a group of experts to evaluate the sale of Míla ehf.

(an Icelandic telecommunications infrastructure company) to Ardian (a French investment fund) and chairman of the qualification committee for the appointment of the presidential secretary.

Between 2020 and 2022, Páll was a counsellor at Iceland's Permanent Commission to the European Union in Brussels, Belgium.
He represented Iceland in Integrated Policy Crisis Response (IPCR), where measures in response to Covid-19 have been co-ordinated in the EEA region.

He also worked on constitutional and interministerial issues in addition to those that are generally the remit of the Prime Minister's Office, not least gender equality.

Furthermore, he edited a newsletter on EU issues.

Since 2020, he has been a director of the Reykjavík Forestry Association.
Since 2014, Páll has chaired the Government Offices Steering Group on implementation of the EEA Agreement, and since 2021 he has represented Iceland in the EU's task force regarding the implementation of the rules on the Internal Market.

Since 2022, he has been the head of the Constitutional and Administrative Affairs department in the Prime Minister's Office, as well as the deputy of the Permanent Secretary.

He leads a team of 16 people that includes lawyers, as well as other employees.
The department is responsible for secretarial services for the Minister and the cabinet, constitutional reform, integrity in public service, media relations, international relations, administrative law and information law, as well as other related duties.

Páll's area of responsibility in the Prime Minister's Office have included numerous aspects of the judicial system.
All government-initiated legislative amendments, including those relating to courts and procedural law, have been scrutinized by his department from 2010 to 2021, when that task was transferred to the Ministry of Justice.

The Attorney General and two rulings committees, i.e.

the Complaints Committee on Information Affairs and the Wilderness Board, have been part of his administrative responsibilities since 2009.
While these are independent committees and positions, it is nevertheless the responsibility of the Prime Minister's Office to ensure that their operating conditions are suitable.

As a lawyer and head of department in the Prime Minister's Office, he has been responsible for many issues related to human rights.

For example, in 2009 he chaired a working group that drafted a bill for compensation for victims of ill-treatment in residential care homes.
Ten years later, he represented the state in settling a complex case that was widely covered in the media, involving individuals who had been convicted and served long sentences for serious crimes of which they were later acquitted.

The Attorney General, who represents the Icelandic state before the European Court of Human Rights, is part of the remit of Páll's department.
From time to time, therefore, he takes part in internal discussions concerning the position taken by Iceland in major cases that have come before the Court.

As head of department in the Prime Minister's Office, he has led efforts to review the legislative process so that bills are assessed for compliance with the Constitution and international law, 15 Doc.

15671 Communication including human rights obligations.
From 2014 to 2018, he sat on two committees, serving as vice-chair of the latter, which drafted several bills affecting freedom of expression and information, including whistleblower protection and the decriminalization of libel, largely inspired by the work of the Council of Europe.

For 17 years, Páll has been professionally responsible for preparing constitutional reforms.
During his professional career, he has followed ECtHR case law and published, for example, three years in a row (for the years 1999, 2000 and 2001) an annual overview of the most important judgments of the Court in the legal journal Úlfljótur.

Later he was responsible for courses in constitutional law.

Freedom of expression has been his core subject, both as a journalist and later in the communications department of the European Council, in the Prime Minister's Office and finally as a teacher and scholar.
Since 1995, he has also held a number of lectures on freedom of expression, for example on the annual Law Day.

2.5.

Assessment of applicants The following is the assessment of the evaluation committee of the applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson based on those perspectives described in detail in Chapter 2.3 2.5.1.
High moral character of applicants The applicant, Dóra Guðmundsdóttir, stated that she did not consider anything in her career or conduct to be of such a nature that she would not be considered of high moral character, in the meaning of Paragraph 1 of Art.

21 of the ECHR, neither with regard to her private life nor the performance of the work she has carried out.

The same applies to the applicant Páll Þórhallsson.
He stated that he did not consider anything in his career or conduct to be of such a nature that he would not satisfy the requirement to be considered of high moral character, in the meaning of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR.

In the committee's opinion nothing has come to light to indicate that the applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson do not meet the said conditions.
On the contrary, it is the opinion of the committee that both applicants enjoy good repute as lawyers and that their conduct indisputably corresponds with the respect and trust that must be shown to the European Court of Human Rights and its judges.

2.5.2.
Eligibility to hold higher judicial positions – a jurisconsult of recognised competence As recounted in Section 2.0, it is possible according to Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR, the eligibility of applicants to serve as a judge at the ECtHR can be assessed based on two types of considerations: on the one hand, by an assessment of whether the applicant fulfils requirements on eligibility to hold a high judicial office in his/her home country and, on the other hand, according to an assessment of whether the applicant is considered a jurisconsult of recognised competence.
An assessment of whether the candidate fulfils the condition of being qualified to hold a higher judicial office, in the sense of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR, is determined by whether the person fulfils, as appropriate, the requirements stated in Articles 13 or 21 of the Act on the Courts, No.

50/2016.

A more detailed explanation of these requirements is provided in Chapter 2.

Chapter 4.0 recounts the education and professional career of the applicant Dóra Guðmundsdóttir.
When these are compared with the requirements of the second paragraph of Article 21 of Act No.

50/2016, which is considered to be relevant here and concerns the assessment of eligibility to serve as a judge of the Court of Appeal, it is clear that the applicant fulfils conditions in Points 1 to 6 of the paragraph.
Point 7 of the paragraph sets the requirement that to be appointed to the office of judge of the Court of Appeal an applicant must have worked for at least three years as a District Court Judge, attorney before the Supreme Court, professor or associate professor of law, Chief of Police, District Commissioner, prosecutor, Permanent Secretary of a Ministry, office director in a ministry responsible for the courts and judicial procedure, or Parliamentary Ombudsman.
Dóra has neither held these positions nor, within the meaning of Point 7, any other similar position that provides comparable legal experience.

According to this, Dóra Guðmundsdóttir does not, in the opinion of the committee, fulfil the conditions of the first paragraph of Article 21 of the Human Rights Convention, on eligibility to hold a higher judicial office in Iceland, assessed in light of the conditions of the second paragraph of Article 21 of Act No.

50/2016, on the Courts.


For the assessment of the evaluation committee of Ms Oddný Arnardóttir see extract from the Opinion of 3 February 3.

2022 at the end of this Opinion 16 Doc.

15671 Communication The next step is to examine whether Dóra satisfies the requirement to be considered a jurisconsult of recognised competence, in the sense of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR.
The reference points of view of the Council of Europe's Advisory Panel of Experts when assessing that requirement are outlined in Chapter 2.

In this connection, it is right to reiterate what was previously stated, that although the requirements in Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR are worded as alternative (“either... or”), it could nevertheless happen that the Advisory Panel may consider it sufficient for the requirement of jurisconsult to combine elements covered by each individual requirement alone.
This implies, according to the Advisory Panel's guidelines, that even if a certain judge candidate does not meet the requirements according to the one condition when the requirements according to it are evaluated alone, the combined judicial experience, on the one hand, and academic or other relevant legal experience, on the other, in an overall assessment can result in a specific candidate being considered to satisfy the eligibility requirements of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR, on the basis that the person is a jurisconsult of recognised competence.
After completing her law studies at the University of Iceland, Dóra Guðmundsdóttir began working as a judge's associate at Reykjavík City Court, where she worked for over two years, exercising independent judicial authority in cases in absentia as well as assisting judges in resolving cases where a defence was presented.

She was a judges’ assistant at the Registry of the EFTA Court in Luxembourg for four years, an ad hoc judge at the same court for six years, taking a seat in the court as such.
Regarding Dóra's appointment as ad hoc judge at the EFTA Court, it should be noted that Paragraph 1 of Art.
30 of the agreement between the EFTA states on the establishment of Surveillance Authority and the Court, which is published in the Official Journal of the EU L 344 31.1.1994, p. 3, those persons who are indisputably independent of others and who fulfil the requirements to serve in the highest judicial office in their home states or who have gained a special reputation as lawyers shall be selected for the office of judge.
This is worded in the English version of the agreement that the person concerned [shall] "possess the qualifications required for appointment to highest judicial office in their respective countries or be jurisconsults of recognised competence.” It follows from the provisions of Paragraph 4 of Article 30 of the agreement that ad hoc judges at the EFTA Court have to meet the same eligibility requirements as permanent judges.
Due to the fact that Dóra did not meet the eligibility criteria to be appointed to the highest judicial office in Iceland, when she was appointed ad hoc judge at the EFTA Court in 2001, she was appointed by the EFTA states as ad hoc judge on the basis of having earned a special reputation as a lawyer (jurisconsult of recognised competence).
It should also be noted that Dóra has a 17-year career as adjunct professor and part-time specialist at two Icelandic universities, the University of Iceland and the University of Bifröst.

During her academic career, Dóra has conducted research and written scholarly articles and book chapters on legal issues, primarily in the field of European law, human rights and constitutional law, as her professional career and publications demonstrate.
It should also be noted that since 2017 Dóra has worked as a lawyer for the UK government (Government Legal Department) and most recently as a senior lawyer, first at the Department for Exiting the European Union, subsequently in the Cabinet Office Europe Legal Advisors and most recently in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.
Finally it should be mentioned that Dóra is a UK Agent before the Court of Justice of the European Union and in that capacity has pleaded cases and prepared pleadings with clients and their counsels pleading the cases.
In view of everything recounted here, it is the committee’s opinion that Dóra Guðmundsdóttir’s cumulative experience of domestic and international judicial work, academic activities and legal work in Iceland and in the UK public administration, together with her activity in scholarly research and publications in the legal field, results in the overall assessment that she satisfies the requirements for being considered a jurisconsult of recognised competence, in the sense of Paragraph 1 of Art.
21 of the ECHR.

She is therefore, in the committee's opinion, qualified to serve as a judge at the European Court of Human Rights, cf.

also for consideration the requirement of Point 8 of the second paragraph of Article 21 of Act No.

50/2016.

Chapter 4 recounts the education and professional career of the applicant Páll Þórhallsson.

When his career is compared with the requirements of Points 1 to 7 of the second paragraph of Article 21 of Act no.
50/2016, which is considered to be relevant here and concerns the assessment of eligibility to serve as a judge of the Court of Appeal, it is clear that the applicant fulfils conditions in Points 1 to 6 of the paragraph.
Point 7, as previously mentioned, makes it a requirement that the applicant has served for at least three years as a District Court Judge, attorney before the Supreme Court, professor or associate professor of law, Chief of Police, District Commissioner, prosecutor, Permanent Secretary of a Ministry, Office director in a ministry responsible for the courts and judicial procedure, or Parliamentary Ombudsman.

The applicant Páll has not held the positions listed there.

17 Doc.
17 Doc.

15671 Communication In light of Páll Þórhallsson's career, the next step is to examine whether he fulfils the condition of having for the same length of time, that is three years at least, held another similar position that provides similar legal experience to one of the jobs listed in Point 7 of the second paragraph of Article 21 of the Act on the Courts.
Among the requirements of Point 7 of the second paragraph of Article 21 of the Act on the Courts is that an applicant for the post of judge of the Court of Appeal must have worked for at least three years as an office director in a ministry that deals with matters of courts and legal procedure.

Courts and legal procedure are under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Justice, cf.
Points 3 and 4 of Article 2 of the Presidential Decree on the allocation of responsibilities among the ministries of Government Offices in Iceland, No.

6 of 31 January 2022.

Páll has not worked in that ministry.

On the other hand, for ten years, i.e.


2009-2019, Páll held the position of Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs in the Prime Minister's Office, and since 2022 he has held the position of Director of the Office of Constitutional and Administrative Affairs in the same ministry and is also the deputy Permanent Secretary of the ministry.

In the Office of Legislative Affairs, Páll directed the work of a team of up to 12 persons.
The office's areas of focus included administrative and information law, constitutional reform, administration of public lands, and legislative reform.

The Office of Legislative Affairs also took part in extensive international co- operation through OECD and the Council of Europe in the field of “better regulation”, ethics in public service and anti-corruption activities.
It should also be noted that the applicant's area of responsibility in the Prime Minister's Office in 2010-2021 included numerous elements that concern the courts and legislation on legal procedure.

In addition, it should be pointed out that matters concerning the Attorney General’s office, the Wilderness Committee and the Complaints Committee on Information Affairs have been the responsibility of the applicant in the Prime Minister's Office.
The Office of Constitutional and Administrative Affairs, where the applicant directs a team of 16 persons, is responsible inter alia for legislation on public administration and information law, constitutional reform, integrity in the public service and international relations.

Taking into account all that has been discussed here, it is the committee's opinion that Páll Þórhallsson fulfils the requirement in Point 7 of the second paragraph of Article 21 of Act No.
50/2016, of having for three years at least – and in practice for much longer – served as an office director in the Prime Minister's Office, as well as in a position similar to that of an office director in a ministry that deals with matters of courts and legal procedure, and that his position as office director in the Prime Minister's Office has given him similar legal experience to what he would have received from an office director's position in the Ministry of Justice.
Accordingly, it is the committee's assessment that the applicant Páll Þórhallsson fulfils the requirements in Points 1 to 8 of the second paragraph of Article 21 of Act No.

50/2016 to be appointed to position of judge of the Court of Appeal and thus qualified to hold a higher judicial position in the sense of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ECHR.

2.5.3.
2.5.3.

Language skill The guidelines CM (2012) 40 of 29 March 2012, on the selection of judges for the Human Rights Court, state that, as a minimum, judge candidates must have a good oral and written command of one of the two official languages of the court, i.e.

English or French, and some understanding of the other.

This is discussed in more detail in Chapter 2 above.
The applicant Dóra Guðmundsdóttir has completed a master's degree, LL.M, from the University of British Columbia in Canada, where the studies were conducted in English, worked for four years as a judge's assistant at the EFTA Court in Luxembourg, where the working language is English, has lived in the UK for over two decades and has worked there as a lawyer in the public service for around five years.

Her ability to speak and write English cannot therefore be questioned.
She maintains that she has good reading comprehension of French, writes French well and speaks it acceptably.

The evaluation committee verified this and can confirm the applicant's own assessment.

Accordingly, the applicant Dóra meets the requirement of guidelines CM (2012) 40, of having a good command of both written and spoken English and some understanding of French.

The applicant Páll Þórhallsson states that he reads, writes and speaks English very well.
The evaluation committee verified this in an interview with the applicant and can confirm the applicant's own assessment.

The applicant, who completed a master's degree in comparative law from the Université Robert Schuman Strasbourg where study was conducted in French, and was an expert in the media department, DG II, at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg for six years, states that he reads French very well and writes and speaks it well.
The evaluation committee verified this in an interview with the applicant and can confirm the applicant's own assessment.

Accordingly, Páll satisfies this requirement of the guidelines CM (2012) 40 concerning language skills.

18 Doc.

15671 Communication 2.5.4.

Knowledge of national law According to Point 4 of the guidelines CM (2012) 40, judge candidates are required to have knowledge of national law and practical experience in legal work is considered desirable.
As far as knowledge of national law is concerned, it should be noted that the applicant Dóra Guðmundsdóttir has completed a candidate's degree in law from the Faculty of Law of the University of Iceland.

Her master's thesis examined judicial review powers, where she compared the powers of Icelandic courts and those of courts in other Nordic countries to assess whether laws were compatible with the constitution.
She worked for about two years as a judges’ assistant at Reykjavík City Court, exercising judicial authority in cases in absentia, served for 17 years as adjunct professor and part-time expert at the University of Iceland and the University of Bifröst and has written journal articles and book chapters on Icelandic law.

Dóra has also provided legal advice to private and public entities in Iceland.

Therefore, Dóra is considered to have a good knowledge of Icelandic national law.
The applicant Páll Þórhallsson has completed a candidate's degree in law from the Faculty of Law of the University of Iceland.

His final thesis concerned freedom of expression and protection of repute and Icelandic legal rules on libel in light of Art.

10 of the ECHR.
10 of the ECHR.

He worked as an associate at one of the largest law firms in Iceland for two years, where he handled, among other things, litigation in both civil cases, criminal cases and cases regarding administrative law and fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, privacy and property rights.
During his 17 years as lawyer and office director in the Prime Minister's Office he has acquired extensive experience and expertise in many areas of Icelandic national law, including in the field of constitutional and administrative law, and has in addition written journal articles and book chapters on Icelandic law.

Therefore, Páll Þórhallsson is considered to have a good knowledge of Icelandic national law.

2.5.5.
2.5.5.

Knowledge of international law According to Point 4 of the Council of Europe guidelines CM (2012) 40, judge candidates are required to have knowledge of international law and practical experience in legal work is also considered desirable.
As far as knowledge of international law is concerned, it should be noted that Dóra Guðmundsdóttir completed an LL.M degree from the University of British Columbia in Canada focusing, among other things, on international law and international protection of human rights.
She also completed a master's degree from the European Academy of Legal Theory in Brussels, Belgium, in European methodology with a focus on, among other things, the European legal system and European human rights protection, in addition to studying European law and international human rights protection at the University of Copenhagen.
With regard to work experience in the field of international law, as mentioned above, Dóra worked as judges’ assistant at the EFTA Court in Luxembourg and as ad hoc judge at the same court for a period, taking her seat on the court as such.
Dóra has been UK Agent before the Court of Justice of the European Union, where cases have inter alia tested rules on human rights protection, and has provided the UK Government with advice and opinions on matters concerning international law and its special areas, including human rights.

Dóra has also carried out research and university teaching in Iceland in fields of international law and, as her publication record shows, has written articles and book chapters on international law topics.
She is therefore considered to possess good theoretical expertise and practical experience of legal work in the field of international law.

As mentioned above, Páll Þórhallsson completed a master's degree in comparative human rights law from the Université Robert Schuman Strasbourg, where his final thesis dealt with the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights in Icelandic law.
He worked for six years as an expert at the Media Department, DG II, of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg and during his 17-year career in the Prime Minister's office he has been involved in a variety of issues related to international law and its specialised fields.

He has also written journal articles and book chapters on international law topics.

He is therefore considered to possess good theoretical expertise and practical experience of legal work in the field of international law.

2.5.6.
2.5.6.

Practical experience of legal work From what is stated in the assessment of the evaluation committee in Points 5.4 and 5.5 above, the applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson have considerable practical experience of legal work in the field of national and international law and reference is made to that discussion.

19 Doc.

15671 Communication 2.5.7.


Requirement of being able to serve half a term Point 5 of the Council of Europe's guidelines sets a requirement concerning the age of candidates.

Both of the applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson, are 57 years old.

In view thereof, this requirement does not come into consideration when assessing their eligibility to serve as judge at the ECtHR.

2.5.8.
2.5.8.

Prohibition against incompatible work Point 6 of the Council of Europe's guidelines sets the requirement that judge candidates may not undertake any work that is incompatible with the independence and objectivity of the Court or with the demands of a full- time office.

Both candidates, Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson, have stated that they would, if elected, resign from all incompatible positions.
They also signed a declaration stating that they would “not engage in any activity incompatible with the independence of judges of the European Court of Human Rights, their impartiality or the demands of a full-time office at the Court”.

The evaluation committee considers this condition to be satisfied as far as both candidates are concerned, and in other respects refers to the discussion in Point 5.9 below.

2.5.9.
2.5.9.

Negative eligibility rule Finally, Point 7 of the Council of Europe guidelines stresses that a candidate should not be nominated if this would foreseeably result in a frequent and/or long-lasting need to appoint an ad hoc judge.

The applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson both signed a statement to the effect that it should not be necessary to appoint ad hoc judges to replace them often or for a lengthy period.
In light of what has been recounted here, the committee does not consider this negative eligibility rule to affect the eligibility of the two candidates.

2.6.

Conclusion of the evaluation committee With reference to all of the above, it is the conclusion of the qualification committee that the applicants Dóra Guðmundsdóttir and Páll Þórhallsson are eligible to be nominated by Iceland as judges at the European Court of Human Rights.
Extract from the Opinion of 3 February 2022 concerning Ms Oddný Arnardóttir's eligibility: Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir was born on 16 January 1970 and is therefore 52 years old.

She graduated with a law degree from the Faculty of Law at the University of Iceland (summa cum laude) in 1994 and completed a doctorate in law from the University of Edinburgh in 2002.

Her doctoral dissertation was entitled “Equality and Non-Discrimination in the European Convention on Human Rights; Towards a Substantive Approach”.
Oddný Mjöll was admitted to the bar as District Court attorney in 1995.

In 1993 she was a law student, lawyer and attorney (associate) at the legal office Málflutningsskrifstofa Borgartún 24 until 1995.

In the summer of 2001, she was the director of Reykjavík Academy and in the summer of 2001 [sic] director of the Institute of Human Rights at the University of Iceland.

She was an attorney (partner) at law firm Lögmannsstofan Skeifan from 2002 to 2004.
From 2004 to 2006, she worked as an attorney (partner) at the law firm Acta lögmannsstofa.

From 1999 to 2000, Oddný Mjöll was an adjunct professor at Bifröst University and in 2005 a sessional lecturer at Reykjavík University.

From 2006 to 2012, she was a professor in the field of human rights at Reykjavík University.

She was director of doctoral studies at the Faculty of Law from 2010 to 2012.
From 2012 to 2018, Oddný Mjöll was a professor in the field of human rights at the University of Iceland; however, during the autumn term of 2014 she was a visiting professor at the University of Copenhagen.

In the spring of 2015 and in the autumn of 2017, she was on a research stay at the European University Institute.
She also arranged international doctoral student courses at Reykjavík University and the University of Iceland in 2009 and 2015 and has been a guest lecturer in doctoral student courses at foreign universities and taught courses for other parties in Iceland and abroad.

She has taught and supervised a good number of master's students in the fields of international, European and constitutional human rights protection and related fields, as well as organising a number of conferences.
She has also been an opponent in the doctoral defences of four students at foreign universities and has been a member of many evaluation and selection committees assessing the qualifications of staff at domestic and foreign universities and applicants for doctoral studies.

20 Doc.

15671 Communication Oddný Mjöll was appointed a judge to the Court of Appeal in June 2017.

Since January 2018, she has also held the position of research professor at the University of Iceland.
Since 2021, she has been a judge at the Court for Re-opened Cases.

Oddný Mjöll has been an ad hoc judge at the European Court of Human Rights since May 2014 and has sat as judge in three cases (2017, 2019).

She has also served as ad hoc judge at the Supreme Court of Iceland in six cases (2018).
Oddný Mjöll was a member of the Legal Committee of the Icelandic Bar Association from 2003 to 2005 and in 2004 she was appointed an ad hoc member of the Equal Rights Complaints Committee and took a seat in one case.

From 2003 to 2006, she served as an expert in the field of human rights on the National Bioethics Committee.
In 2010 she taught a course for the Icelandic Bar Association on discrimination directives of the European Union and from 2000 to January 2018 she taught a course for lawyers taking bar exams for District Court attorney status.

In 2010, she was also appointed by the Prime Minister to a working group on the administration's response to the report of the parliamentary Special Investigation Commission (SIC).
The working group made proposals to the Prime Minister and the government on possible responses to issues raised in the SIC report that focused specifically on the administration and the working practices of Government Offices.

In 2012, she was appointed to an expert group under the auspices of the Althingi's Constitutional and Supervisory Committee which was tasked with reviewing the Constitutional Council's proposals for a new constitution and converting these into a bill of legislation.
She was responsible for Articles 5-36 of the bill (scope, human rights and nature), Article 112 (obligations under international agreements) and the Explanatory Notes to those provisions.

From 2005 to 2006, Oddný Mjöll was chair of the board of the Icelandic Women Lawyers’ Association.

Oddný Mjöll was a member of the Electoral Commission for the Reykjavík South Constituency for six years from 2007 to 2013.
In 2014, she sat on two three-member election committees to decide on the validity of municipal elections in Langanesbyggð and in Reykjavík.

In 2011 Oddný Mjöll was a lecturer in the course “Current Reflections on EU Equality and Non-Discrimination Law”, held at the Academy of European Law, Trier.

In November 2009, she organised and taught a course on European Union equality directives for the Icelandic Bar Association.
From May 2015 until January 2018, she was the appointed chair of the opinion committee for applications for registration of religious organisations or organisations with non-religious convictions.
Oddný Mjöll was a member of the working group of the School of Social Sciences at the University of Iceland on studies in English from November 2014 to January 2018, chair of the professional council of the School of Social Sciences at the University of Iceland from 2015 to 2017 and a member of the professional council (2014 to 2015), a member of the board of the University of Iceland Research Fund 2015 to 2017, a member of the professional council of the humanities and social sciences at the Icelandic Research Centre 2007 to 2009.
She was also a member of the research council of Reykjavík University from 2007 to 2008.

She was a member of the committee on the granting of leave to appeal before the Court of Appeal 2018 to 2019.

She was also a member of a working group that reviewed the rules on oral evidence and playback of recordings before the Court of Appeal in criminal cases in 2020 and in 2021 she led a working group on the writing of the rules of the Court for Re-opened Cases.
In her work as a judge of the Court of Appeal, Oddný Mjöll deals with cases in all areas of law, many of which concern the protection of human rights.

In this connection, it could be pointed out that in recent years cases have increasingly made reference to the European Convention on Human Rights and the judgments of the ECtHR in case law.
Since being appointed a judge of the new Court for Re-opened Cases (in January 2021) Oddný Mjöll has also ruled on requests for re-opening, many of which are based on alleged violations of the right to a fair legal process.

She was also the Deputy Chair of the Immigration Appeals Board for one year after its establishment (in January 2015), during which time she ruled on a number of cases concerning immigrants and asylum seekers.
Oddný Mjöll has been a professor of human rights and a research professor at Icelandic universities for 16 years.

Her main subjects were international and European human rights protection, but in addition she has taught courses on research methods, labour law and more.
Her research focuses on international, European and constitutional human rights protection; in recent years she has focused on research on the principle of subsidiarity and the relationship between European human rights protection, European law and national law.

Her other main research areas are non-discrimination rules, health law and the rights of people with disabilities.

She has also participated in and directed a number of international research projects and teams.
Her research in the field of international and European human rights is well known, as well as being cited extensively, as can be seen, for example, from the 630 citations of her work on the database www.scholar.google.com.

21 Doc.

15671 Communication Since 1998, she has taken an active part in public debate on human rights in Iceland and internationally.
This is reflected, for example, in the fact that she has delivered 75 conference presentations and lectures, provided advice to the government and the Althingi, and participated in work on behalf of the United Nations and the Council of Europe.
As an example of the above, in 2018 she delivered a speech entitled “European Supervision”, at the High-Level Expert Conference: Implementing the Copenhagen Declaration, which was held in Copenhagen by the Danish government during its presidency of the Council of Europe.

The conference comprised a follow-up on the reform work of the ECtHR and the Intergovernmental Conference in Copenhagen 2018.
She was also a participant in the “Expert Group Meeting on the Role of the Judiciary in Advancing the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”, held in Geneva by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Special Envoy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in November 2018.
She also gave a public lecture entitled “The Discrimination Grounds and Recent Developments under Article 14 ECHR: Innovation or Business as Usual?”, delivered in an annual lecture series in memory of Tove Stang Dahl at the University of Oslo in June 2017.
She also advised the Ministry of the Interior on bills to amend the Foreign Nationals Act from April 2015 to January 2016, the Ministry of Social Affairs on bills intended to transpose the EU's Gender Equality Directives (2000/78/EC and 2000/43/EC) in May 2013), and was a member of the Foreign Ministry's Consultative Group on Iceland's human rights policy in February 2007.
In addition, she has provided a number of opinions to parliamentary committees and advised on the opinions drafted by the Icelandic Human Rights Centre on bills.

Oddný Mjöll was chairperson of the board of the Institute of Human Rights at the University of Iceland for four years (2013 to 2017).

The Institute was established by the University of Iceland, the Icelandic Bar Association and the Icelandic Association of Judges and is directed by their representatives.
The Institute’s role is to promote research and education in the field of human rights.

Previously, she was also the chair or member of the board of the Icelandic Human Rights Centre for five years (2007 to 2012).

The Centre is an independent institution promoting human rights in Iceland through research and education.

The Centre also has a supervisory role comparable to national human rights organisations, although it has not been registered as such under the United Nations’ Paris rules.
At the beginning of her career, Oddný Mjöll worked as an attorney for over six years.

In this work, she dealt with various issues testing the protection of human rights and thus gained valuable experience in the process of such cases.

From 2004 to 2020, Oddný Mjöll was involved in various types of editorial work and peer reviews.
As an example, she was a member of the editorial board of the Icelandic journal Mannréttindadómstóll Evrópu – dómareifanir (European Court of Human Rights – summaries of judgments) from 2005 to 2008.

In 2012, she was also appointed to the evaluation committee for grant applications to the EU research program and has been a member of the steering group of four international research networks.
Furthermore, she was a member of the peer review committee of the Icelandic legal journal Lögrétta from 2004 to 2006 and 2007 to 2008 and in addition has provided peer reviews for various domestic and foreign magazines and article collections.
Oddný Mjöll is the author of two scholarly publications: The Principle of Subsidiarity, Scope for Assessment and the Relationship between the European Court of Human Rights and the National Court (2018) and Equality and Non-Discrimination under the European Convention on Human Rights (2003).

She has also edited four collections of articles.


She is the author of 45 articles and book chapters and has two works in progress, including a book chapter in a festschrift in honour of Róbert Spanó, President of the ECtHR.
Extract from the Opinion of 3 February 2022: Assessment of Applicants Applicants’ high moral character Oddný Mjöll did not consider anything in her career or her conduct of such nature that she was not considered of high moral character or that was incompatible with the independence and neutrality of a judge.
Eligibility to serve in high judicial office Oddný Mjöll applied for a position as Supreme Court judge in the summer of 2020 and was, in an opinion of 30 October 20204, considered qualified for the job and equally qualified as were those appointed to the office.

She therefore fulfils the conditions for eligibility to hold a high judicial office.

The committee has examined the documents that accompanied the application and sees no reason other than to rely entirely on the earlier opinion.
https://www.stjornarradid.is/library/04-Raduneytin/Domsmalaraduneytid/Ums%c3%b6gn%20d%c3%b3mnefndar 4.

%20dags.%2030.%20okt%c3%b3ber%202020.pdf 22 Doc.

15671 Communication Language skills Oddný Mjöll has written a major share of her scholarly writings in English, in addition to completing her doctorate from the University of Edinburgh.

She clearly fulfils the conditions for good command of one language of the Court.
It was revealed that she had a knowledge of French and answered a question in French, and furthermore that she had some understanding of the Court's judgments in French.

She also declared her readiness to attend a French course to reinforce her knowledge, should she be elected judge.

Knowledge of national law […] Oddný Mjöll, [has] recently been assessed by specifically appointed evaluation committees as qualified to serve as Supreme Court judges in Iceland.
Oddný Mjöll has been a judge at the Court of Appeal since 1 January 2018 and is also a judge at the Court for Re-opened Cases; prior to that she was a professor at domestic universities and practising attorney for several years.

Knowledge of international law When asked about her knowledge and experience in the field of international law, Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir referred to her special expertise and experience related to human rights protection as part of international law.
It is also clear from the applicant's research and scholarly writings that she has very extensive knowledge of the workings of the ECtHR as an international court and of the reform process which the Court's organisation has undergone over the past two decades.

With regard to her knowledge and experience in the field of international human rights, it is worth mentioning that Oddný Mjöll's doctoral dissertation dealt with Art.
14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and in her studies and later in various positions as an attorney, scholar and judge, both at the Court of Appeal and as an ad hoc judge at the ECtHR, she has become acquainted with all the articles of the Convention, its implementation and related reform work.
Practical experience of legal work Oddný Mjöll is currently a judge of the Court of Appeal and a judge at the Court for Re-opened Cases and has served ad hoc at both the ECtHR and the Supreme Court, in addition to having worked as an attorney for over six years Condition of being able to serve half a term Given the age of the applicants, this is not a question.
Prohibition against incompatible work The Guidelines also stipulate that a candidate for the post of judge should not engage in any activity incompatible with the independence or impartiality of the Court or with the demands of a full-time office.

All the candidates have stated that, if elected, they would resign from all incompatible jobs.
They also signed a declaration stating that they would “not engage in any activity incompatible with the independence of judges of the European Court of Human Rights, their impartiality or the demands of a full-time office at the Court”.

The committee therefore considers that this condition is met, but also refers to the discussion of item i) below.
Negative eligibility rule The Guidelines finally stress that a candidate should not be nominated if this would foreseeably result in a frequent and/or long-lasting recusals and the need to appoint an ad hoc judge.

Oddný Mjöll mentioned when asked that she would withdraw from any case she had adjudicated at the Court of Appeal came before the Court.
The candidates all signed, as previously stated, a statement to the effect that they knew of nothing that would foreseeably result in frequent and/or long-lasting recusals and the need to appoint an ad hoc judge to replace them.

In the light of the above, the committee considers that this negative eligibility rule does not affect the eligibility of any applicant.

23 Doc.

15671 Communication Appendix 1 – Oddný Mjöll ARNARDÓTTIR 1.

Curriculum vitae I.
Curriculum vitae I.

Personal details Name, forename: Arnardóttir, Oddný Mjöll Sex: Female Date and place of birth: 16 January 1970, Reykjavík Nationality: Icelandic II.

Education and academic and other qualifications 2002 Ph.D. (jurisprudence), the University of Edinburgh.

– – Thesis title: ‘Equality and Non-Discrimination in the European Convention on Human Rights; Towards a Substantive Approach’.
Recipient of numerous postgraduate study grants, including the University of Edinburgh Postgraduate Studentship, the British Chevening Scholarship and the Nato Science Fellowship.

1995 Licensed as a district court attorney in Iceland.

1994 Cand.

Jur.

(combined B.A.

and master’s degree in law), the University of Iceland.

– – – – Summa Cum Laude.

Recipient of two awards for outstanding academic performance.

Vice-president of Orator, the law students’ association (1991-1992).
Orator Oratorum, winner of the annual law students’ debate (1990).

1989 Upper secondary school diploma, Laugarvatn College, Iceland.

– – Summa Cum Laude.

Awards for outstanding academic performance in various subjects.

III.

Relevant professional activities a.

Description of judicial activities June 2017 – present: Judge at the Icelandic Court of Appeals (Landsréttur).

– – Member of the Court’s committee on leaves of appeal (2018-2019).
Member of drafting committee on revised Rules of Court on Direct Assessment of Evidence in Criminal Cases (2020).

Jan. 2021 – present: Judge at (Endurupptökudómur).

the Icelandic Court on Reopening of Judicial Proceedings – Chair of drafting committee on Rules of Court (2021).

May 2014 – present: Ad Hoc Judge at the European Court of Human Rights.

– Appointed in three cases (2017, 2019).

2018: Ad Hoc Judge at the Icelandic Supreme Court.

– Appointed in six cases (2018).


Jan. 2015 – Jan. 2016: Vice-Chairperson of the Icelandic Immigration and Asylum Appeals Board.

June 2014: Member of special administrative tribunals on the legitimacy of local elections in two municipalities in Iceland.

24 2004: Ad Hoc Member of the Gender Equality Complaints Committee (administrative tribunal).

Doc.

15671 Communication – Appointed in one case (2004).

b.
b.

Description of non-judicial legal activities Jan. 2018 – present: Research Professor, University of Iceland.

July 2012 – Jan. 2018: Professor of Human Rights Law, University of Iceland.

– – – – – – – – – – Visiting Professor at iCourts Centre of Excellence for International Courts, University of Copenhagen (fall 2014).

Research visits at the European University Institute (spring 2015 and fall 2017).
Supervisor and co-supervisor of two Ph.D. students (University of Iceland, European University Institute).

Opponent for four Ph.D. students (Maastricht University, Radboud University, Lund University, European University Institute).

Organiser and lecturer at an international Ph.D. course on ‘Methods of Human Rights Law Research’, University of Iceland (2015).

Lecturer at a Ph.D. course on ‘Research Methodologies in Legal Human Rights Scholarship’, European University Institute (2015).
Chair of Assessment Committee and member of the Management Board for the Joint Ph.D. programme with the University of Copenhagen (2013-2017).

Member of Committee on Research Education (2016-2017).

Teaching and supervision of numerous masters’ dissertations in International, European and Constitutional Human Rights Law and related fields.

Organiser of numerous research conferences.

Jan. 2006 – June 2012: Professor of Human Rights Law, Reykjavík University.
– – – – – – – – – Research visit, University of Copenhagen (spring 2009).

Supervisor of one Ph.D. student (Reykjavík University).

Lecturer at an international Ph.D. course on ‘The Essence of Biomedical Law’, Uppsala University (2011).

Lecturer at an international Ph.D. course on ‘Should States Ratify Human Rights Conventions’, University of Oslo/University of Iceland (2010).
Organiser and lecturer at an international Ph.D. course on ‘Human Rights Approaches to Research in Biomedical Law’, Reykjavík University (2009).

Director of Doctoral Studies, Reykjavík University School of Law (2010-2012).

Chairperson of the School of Law Research Council (2006-2008), Member of the Research Council (2008-2012).

Teaching and supervision of numerous masters’ dissertations in International, European and Constitutional Human Rights Law and related fields.
Organiser of numerous research conferences.

May 2015 – Jan. 2018: Chairperson of the Advisory Committee on Registered Religious or Belief Associations in Iceland.

Jan. 2000 – Jan. 2018: Lecturer at the Bar Admissions Program in Iceland.

Oct. 2013 – Oct. 2017: Chairperson of the Board of the University of Iceland Human Rights Institute.

25 Doc.
25 Doc.

15671 Communication June 2012 – Nov. 2012: Member of the Group of Experts appointed by the Constitutional and Supervisory Committee of the Icelandic Parliament to prepare a Constitutional Bill based on the work of the Constitutional Council.

– Responsible for the Group’s work on Articles 5 – 36 (field of application, human rights and nature), Article 112 (state obligations under international law), and the accompanying Explanatory Report.
May 2007 – May 2012: Chairperson of the Executive Board of the Icelandic Human Rights Centre (2010-2012), Vice-chairperson (2008-2010) and Member of the Board (2007).

Advisor to the Board (2012-2016).

Sept. 2011: Lecturer, ‘Current Reflections on EU Equality and Non-Discrimination Law’, Academy of European Law, Trier.
Jan. 2010 – May 2010: Member of the Advisory Committee appointed by the Prime Minister of Iceland on the public administration’s reactions to the findings of the Special Investigation Commission on the downfall of the Icelandic banks.

– Identification of how the findings of the Investigation Commission impacted the executive branch of government and formulation of suggestions for reform.
Nov. 2009: Organiser and lecturer at a course on the EU Framework Equality Directive and the EU Race Directive, the Icelandic Bar Association Continuing Education Program.

Nov. 2004 – Aug. 2006: Partner Attorney at Acta Law Firm, Iceland.

Aug. 2005 – Jan. 2006: Lecturer, Reykjavík University, Iceland.

2003 – 2006: Member (as human rights expert) of the Icelandic National Bioethics Committee.

2003 – 2005: Member of the Icelandic Bar Association Law Commission.
Sept. 2002 – Nov. 2004: Partner Attorney at Lögmannsstofan Skeifunni Law Firm, Iceland.

Aug. 1999 – Aug. 2000: Adjunct Lecturer, Bifröst University, Iceland.

Dec. 1993 – April 1996: Assistant, Associate Lawyer and Associate Attorney at Málflutningsskrifstofa Borgartúni 24 Law Firm, Iceland.

c. Description of non-legal professional activities Nov. 2014 – Jan. 2018: Member of Working Group on Courses in English at the University of Iceland School of Social Sciences.
Oct. 2014 – Oct. 2017: Chairperson of the Expert Council for Research at the University of Iceland School of Social Sciences (2015-2017).

Member of the Expert Council (2014-2015).

Oct. 2015 – Oct. 2017: Member of the Board of the University of Iceland Research Fund.

July 2007 – July 2009: Member of the Expert Council for Research in Social Sciences and Humanities for the Icelandic Research Fund.

Aug. 2007 – Aug. 2008: Member of the Reykjavík University Research Council.
March 2005 – March 2006: Chairperson of the Icelandic Women Lawyers Association.

Fall 2001: Director, the University of Iceland Human Rights Institute.

Summer 2001: Director, the Reykjavík Academy.

IV.

Activities and experience in the field of human rights As a judge at the Icelandic Court of Appeals I adjudicate cases in all fields of law, many which have human rights implications.
The European Convention of Human Rights, as incorporated in domestic legislation, and the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights are increasingly referred to in Icelandic judgments as a source of law and/or inspiration for the interpretation of domestic law.

Since my appointment to the new Icelandic Court on Reopening of Judicial Proceedings (January 2021) I have also adjudicated requests for 26 Doc.
15671 Communication reopening, many of which are based on claims of violations of the right to a fair trial.

Upon the establishment of the Icelandic Immigration and Asylum Appeals Board (January 2015) I also served as its Vice-Chairperson for one year and adjudicated many cases on immigration and asylum.

I have been a Professor of Human Rights Law and a Research Professor at Icelandic Universities for 16 years.
My main areas of teaching were International and European Human Rights Law, but I also taught courses in fields such as research methods and labour law.

My research is focused on International, European and Constitutional Human Rights Law, with special emphasis in recent years on subsidiarity and the interactive constitutional relationship between the Convention system, EU law and domestic law.
Other key areas of research include non-discrimination law, health law and the rights of persons with disabilities.

I have also participated in and managed several international research projects and teams.

My research is relatively well-known and widely cited in the field of International and European Human Rights Law as evidenced for example by 630 citations on www.scholar.google.com.

Since 1998, I have participated actively in public discourses on human rights law in Iceland and abroad.
This is evidenced for example by 75 conference papers and lectures given, by many consultancies for the legislative and executive branches of government in Iceland, and by participation in work conducted under the aegis of the UN and the Council of Europe.
Examples of the abovementioned include: – – – – – – – – – – – – Conference paper called ‘European Supervision’ given at the ‘High-Level Expert Conference: Implementing the Copenhagen Declaration’, held by the Danish Chairmanship of the Council of Europe, Copenhagen (November 2018).
Participant in ‘Expert Group Meeting on the Role of the Judiciary in Advancing the Rights of Persons with Disabilities’, convened by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Geneva (November 2018).

Public lecture called ‘The Discrimination Grounds and Recent Developments under Article 14 ECHR: Innovation or Business as Usual?’, given as the Tove Stang Dahl Memorial Lecture, University of Oslo (June 2017).
Conference paper called ‘Erga Omnes through the Backdoor: Res Interpretata and the Role of the Margin of Appreciation in Giving Domestic Effect to the Judgment of the ECtHR’, given at the ‘Conference on Margin of Appreciation and Democracy: Human Rights and Deference to Political Bodies’, University of Copenhagen (April 2016).

Consultancy for the Ministry of Internal Affairs on draft Bills for Amendments to the Foreign Nationals Act (April 2015 – January 2016).
Conference paper called ‘Rethinking the Two Margins of Appreciation’, given at the ‘Conference on the Global Challenge of Human Rights Integration: Towards a User's Perspective’, Ghent University (December 2015).

Consultancy for the Ministry of Social Affairs on draft Bills intended to implement the EU Equality Directives (2000/78/EC and 2000/43/EC) into Icelandic law (May 2013).
Keynote lecture called ‘Discrimination as a Magnifying Lens: Scope and Ambit under Article 14 and Protocol 12’, given at the conference ‘Shaping Rights: the Role of the European Court of Human Rights in Determining the Scope of Human Rights’, Ghent University (March 2012).
Conference paper called ‘Strengthening National Human Rights Systems’, given at the ‘11th annual conference of the Association of Human Rights Institutes: Reforming Human Rights Institutions, Progress and Status’, Reykjavík University (September 2010).
Keynote lecture called ‘The Concept of Equality Reflected in the UN Disability Convention’, given at the conference ‘Protecting and Promoting the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Europe: Towards Full Participation, Inclusion and Empowerment’, Council of Europe, Strasbourg (October 2008).

Member of a group convened by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to advise on a draft human rights policy for Iceland (February 2007).
Numerous consultancies for parliamentary committees in Iceland and advisory input on the submissions of the Icelandic Human Rights Centre to parliamentary committees.

I served as the Chairperson of the Board of the University of Iceland Human Rights Institute for four years (2013-2017).

The Institute was founded by the University of Iceland, the Icelandic Bar Association and the Icelandic Judges’ Association and is governed by its representatives.
Its role is to conduct, facilitate and disseminate research in the field of human rights.

Previously, I was also the Chairperson and a Member of the 27 Doc.

15671 Communication Executive Board of the Icelandic Human Rights Centre for five years (2007-2012).

The Centre is an NGO aimed at promoting human rights in Iceland through legal reform, research and dissemination of research results.
It also performs the monitoring role of a National Human Rights Institution, although it is not accredited as such under the UN Paris Principles.

In the beginning of my professional career, I practiced law for over six years.

During that time, I was involved in numerous cases with human rights implications.

V. Public activities a.

Public office None.

b.

Elected posts June 2007 – July 2013 Elected member of the Electoral Commission for the Reykjavík-South Constituency.
c. Posts held in a political party or movement None.

VI.

Other activities 2004 – 2020: Editorial work and peer-review.

– – – – – – – Co-editor of ‘Retfærd’, the Nordic Journal of Law and Justice (2016-2020).

Member of editorial board (2008-2016).

Editor of ‘Mannréttindasáttmáli Evrópu dómareifanir’, which publishes summarised translations of selected judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (2017).

Member of editorial board (2005-2008).


Member of the Committee of reviewers for ‘Lögrétta Law Review’ (2007-2008, 2004-2005).

Peer-review for numerous international and domestic journals.

Evaluator for research grants in the field of human rights law, the EU Seventh Framework Programme (2012).

Evaluator for numerous research grants in Iceland (2007-2018).

Member of evaluation boards for academic promotions in Iceland and abroad (2006-2019).

VII.

Publications and other works Author of two monographs.
Editor of four anthologies.

Author of 45 articles and book chapters.

Two research works in progress, including a book chapter for a forthcoming anthology in honour of Robert Spano, President of the European Court of Human Rights.

– – – – Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, Subsidiarity, Margin of Appreciation and the Relationship between the European Court of Human Rights and Domestic Law (Codex, 2018) (in Icelandic).
Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, ‘Res Interpretata, Erga Omnes Effect and the Role of the Margin of Appreciation in Giving Domestic Effect to the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights’ (2017) 28 European Journal of International Law, 819-843.

Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, ‘The ‘procedural turn’ under the European Convention on Human Rights and presumptions of Convention compliance’ (2017) 15 International Journal of Constitutional Law, 935.
Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, ‘Rethinking the Two Margins of Appreciation’ (2016) 12 European Constitutional Law Review, 27-53.

28 Doc.

15671 Communication – – – – – – – Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir and Dóra Guðmundsdóttir, ‘Speaking the Same Language?

Comparing Judicial Restraint at the ECtHR and the ECJ’, in Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir and Antoine Buyse (eds.

), Shifting Centres of Gravity in Human Rights Protection: Rethinking Relations between the ECHR, EU and National legal Orders (Routledge, 2016), 161-188.
Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, ‘The Differences that Make a Difference: Recent Developments on the Discrimination Grounds and the Margin of Appreciation under Article 14 ECHR’ (2014) 14 Human Rights Law Review, 647-670.

Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, ‘Discrimination as a Magnifying Lens: Scope and Ambit under Article 14 and Protocol 12’ in Eva Brems and Janneke Gerards (eds.
), Shaping Rights in the ECHR: The Role of the European Court of Human Rights in Determining the Scope of Human Rights (Cambridge University Press, 2013), 567-599.

Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, ‘The Rights of Persons with Disabilities in the Context of Health Care’ in Brigit Toebes, Mette Hartlev, Aart Hendricks and Janne Rothmar Herrmann (eds.

), Health and Human Rights in Europe (Intersentia, 2012), 249-271.
Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, ‘A Future of Multidimensional Disadvantage Equality?’ in Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir and Gerard Quinn (eds.

), The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: European and Scandinavian Perspectives (Martinus Nijhoff, 2009), 41-66.

Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, Equality and Non-Discrimination under the European Convention on Human Rights (Martinus Nijhoff, 2003).

VIII.

Languages Language Reading good fair very good Writing Speaking very good good fair very good good fair a.
First language: Icelandic........................ b.

Official languages: – English – French c. Other languages: Danish........................... German......................... Norwegian/Swedish...... x x ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ x ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ x ¨ x x x x ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ x ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ x ¨ x x x x ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ x ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ x ¨ x x IX.
In the event that you do not meet the level of language proficiency required for the post of judge in an official language [the second], please confirm your intention to follow intensive language classes of the language concerned prior to, and if need be also at the beginning of, your term of duty if elected a judge on the Court I fulfil the requirement of passive knowledge of French.

If I am elected a judge on the Court, I nevertheless intend to take French classes.

X.

Other relevant information XI.


Please confirm that you will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge on the Court I confirm that I will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge on the Court.

29 Doc.

15671 Communication Appendix 2 – Dóra GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR 2.

Curriculum Vitae I.

Personal details Name: Guðmundsdóttir, Dóra Sex: Female Date and place of birth: 15 July 1965, Reykjavík, Iceland Nationalities: Icelandic, British (dual nationality) II.
Education and academic and other qualifications 1994-1995: LL.M.

University of British Columbia, Canada (International law; international human rights law; Law, society and state; Legal reasoning and artificial intelligence; Current legal problems) 1993-1994: Master’s Degree in Legal Theory.

European Academy of Legal Theory, Brussels, Belgium (Legal theory; Foundations of EU legal order; Human rights) 1992-1993: Post-graduate study.
University of Copenhagen, Denmark (EU law and free movement rights; International human rights law; Law of evidence; Intellectual property rights; Law and morals) 1985-1990: Cand.

Jur.

Law Degree, University of Iceland I completed my secondary education in Reykjavík, Iceland, completing my college degree from the faculty of natural sciences with additional credits offered by the faculty of social sciences.
After a year studying philosophy, I studied law to a master´s degree level, graduating from the University of Iceland in 1990 with a first class degree (I) 7.89.

The topic of my dissertation was constitutional review of legislation in Icelandic law, as compared to other Nordic legal systems, with an emphasis on the legitimacy of judicial review and judicial activism.
Professional Qualifications – – Advocate (lögmaður) Iceland (1999) Registered European Lawyer, Solicitors Regulatory Authority, United Kingdom (2018-2020) III.
Relevant professional activities 2022-present: Senior Lawyer, Government Legal Department United Kingdom on loan to Legal Directorate Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), United Kingdom 2017-2022: Lawyer/ Senior Lawyer, Government Legal Department United Kingdom – – Senior Lawyer, Cabinet Office Europe Legal Advisors (2019-2022) Lawyer, Department for Exiting the European Union (2017-2019) 2000-2017: Consultant/ Legal Expert and Researcher – Lecturer/ Researcher University of Iceland and University of Bifröst 2001-2007: Ad hoc Judge EFTA-Court Luxembourg, appointed by Iceland 1996-1999: Legal secretary (réferéndaire) EFTA-Court Luxembourg 1995-1996: Research Lawyer EFTA-Court Luxembourg 1990-1992: Junior Assistant Judge, District Court of Reykjavík, Iceland a.
Description of judicial activities When I graduated from the Law Faculty at the University of Iceland in February 1990, I immediately took up a position as a junior assistant judge at the City Court of Reykjavík, Iceland.

This was a lower instance court for the district of Reykjavík prior to the reorganisation of the judiciary in Iceland in 1992.

That reorganisation came 30 Doc.


15671 Communication about as a result of an application against Iceland before the European Commission on Human Rights and settled before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in 1990 (Jón Kristinsson against Iceland).

The Commission found the system of administration of justice where junior assistants carried out executive and policing functions along with judicial activity in breach of Article 6 of the European Convention (ECHR).
As a junior assistant judge, I conducted open hearings at initial stages of litigation and presided over some contentious litigation as well as dealing with non-contentious issues.

I also assisted senior judges at the City Court in a variety of more complex litigation, including human rights cases such as a case involving the right of access to medical information and cases relating to freedom of speech (libel).
At this time the European Convention of Human Rights had not been incorporated into domestic law and was considered to have interpretative effect in domestic law falling short of being directly applicable or having a decisive effect in judicial decisions.
Following further studies in international law, including human rights law, in Denmark, Belgium and Canada, I took up a position with the EFTA-Court in Luxembourg, first as a research lawyer with the Court's Registry and subsequently as a legal secretary (réferéndaire) in the Cabinet of the Icelandic Judge, Mr Thór Vilhjálmsson.

In my three year role as a legal secretary I drafted summaries of pleadings (Reports for the Hearing, submitted by a reporting judge).
I also drafted opinions and judgments of the Court and assisted with research in relation to cases of a wide variety of EEA law, including labor law, state aid law, free movement law and state liability under the EEA Agreement (Case E-9/1997 Erla María Sveinbjörnsdóttir).

In 2001, I was appointed an ad hoc Judge at the EFTA-Court for a period of three years, subsequently renewed for another three year term in 2004.
As an ad hoc Judge at the EFTA-Court, I followed developments in EEA-law and the EFTA-Court´s practice.

I was on the panel of judges that decided Case E-1/02 EFTA Surveillance Authority v Norway, a case concerning the legitimacy of earmarking academic positions exclusively for women under equality provisions of the EEA-Agreement.

b.
b.

Description of non-judicial legal activities Since 2017 I have worked in the UK Civil Service as a lawyer and senior lawyer in the Government Legal Department (GLD), first for the Department for Exiting the European Union and subsequently in the Cabinet Office Europe Legal Advisors and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.

Litigation I am a UK Agent before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and have worked with counsel and clients preparing litigation before the CJEU.
This includes recent litigation on data protection issues as well as competition law cases involving intellectual property rights (patents).
Human rights related cases include: – – – – Case C-311/18 Facebook Ireland and Schrems – a preliminary reference on standard contract clauses for transferring data, powers of supervisory authorities, safeguards by data controllers and EU-US privacy Shield; Case C-623/17 Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs – a preliminary reference concerning a public authority’s gathering and transmission of traffic and location data in the context of national security services and availability of national security exemption in that context under EU law; Case C-591/16 P Lundbeck v Commission and associated cases (UK intervening in an appeal) -long running competition law cases where the Commission’s decision was challenged before the General Court and subsequently before the CJEU.
The cases involved alleged ‘pay for delay’ contracts between pharmaceutical companies and ‘generics’ providers and involved alleged patent law infringements as a defence to alleged competition law breaches; and Case C-201/19 P Servier and others v Commission and associated cases (UK intervening in an appeal) – similar litigation to Lundbeck v Commission between different parties.
Advisory work In my work for the Department for Exiting the European Union and Cabinet Office Europe Legal Advisers, my primary role has been advisory.

In that capacity, I have advised extensively on legal issues relating to the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement).

31 Doc.
31 Doc.

15671 Communication I have advised on negotiations between the United Kingdom and European Union on parts of the Withdrawal Agreement and, subsequently, the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland, an integral part of that Agreement.
In this role I have advised on a variety of EU law issues, including energy, climate change and environmental legislation, as well as both environmental and labor law non-regression commitments in free trade agreements and in relation to the UK EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement.
I have advised on provisions on mobility of persons and compatibility with international law (WTO); agreements on mutual recognition of professional qualifications; single market regulations on goods and services; sanitary and phytosanitary rules and controls for agricultural goods, medicines and procurement rules.
I have also advised on other discrete issues which concern fundamental rights, including advising on UK’s contributions for Facility for Refugees in Turkey under the Withdrawal Agreement and selected provisions of the Citizens’ rights provisions of the Withdrawal Agreement.

During negotiations and subsequently in my current role, my work has principally involved advising clients and ministers on EU single market rules made applicable under the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland.
In addition to advising on EU rules on goods, energy, state aid and procedural rules, I have advised in respect of ‘no diminution’ of human rights under the Protocol.

I have also advised on the impact of and interaction between the Protocol provisions and other international law obligations of the United Kingdom, and the direct applicability of Withdrawal Agreement and Protocol provisions in domestic law.
This work included consideration of various issues relating to the application of the Withdrawal Agreement and the Protocol in domestic law and I have also supported Ministers in taking legislation through Parliament and preparing bills for legislative scrutiny in the House of Commons and House of Lords.

I have also worked on domestic litigation on Withdrawal Agreement and Protocol issues, where the British Government is a defendant.
Consultant/ legal expert and researcher Prior to my work for the UK Civil Service, I worked in a self-employed capacity advising on EU and EEA law, including advising on litigation and litigation strategy for public sector and private clients.
This included work in the capacity as a legal expert in EU/EEA law, including human rights law, in the following cases before the EFTA Court: – – – as a member of a litigation team for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Iceland in EFTA-Court Case E-16/11 EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (‘Icesave’); with the Office of the Attorney General (Civil affairs), Iceland in a case before the EFTA-Court, preparing pleadings in a case where an Advisory Opinion was sought from the EFTA-Court on right of entry under the EEA Agreement (restricting the right of entry of a member of Hells Angels) (Case E-15/12 Wahl); with the Office of the Attorney General (Civil affairs) in a case before the EFTA-Court arguing equal treatment in taxation for economically inactive persons under the EEA Agreement (Case E-26/13 Gunnarsson).
I provided advice to the Office of the Attorney General on litigation strategy before the EFTA-Court and subsequently before the Supreme Court in Iceland.

I advised on an application to the European Court of Human Rights for the Association of Academics (BHM) against Iceland in respect of freedom of association and collective bargaining under Article 11 ECHR and I have provided legal opinions on matters of EEA and Icelandic law, e.g.
in relation to winding-up of credit institutions in a case pending before the Paris Court of Appeal (LBI hf.

v Giraux).
Other work where rights and human rights issues have featured include advising: – – – – the Icelandic Parliament ‘s committee on financial matters on the Icesave agreement between the Icelandic Deposit Guarantee Fund and the Icelandic State on the one hand and the Dutch and British Governments on the other; the Ministry of the Interior on aspects of EEA-law when it was considering amending legislation on the rights of foreigners (Act on Aliens); the Ministry of the Interior in drafting a bill amending legislation on the status of refugees and international protection to bring Icelandic law into conformity with EU Asylum Directives; a government appointed committee on investment by an EEA-based company in a geothermal energy company incorporated in Iceland; 32 Doc.
15671 Communication – – the Ministry of Education on religious education in primary schools and compliance with ECHR with regard to Folgerø and Others v. Norway, No.

15472/02, ECtHR (Grand Chamber), 29 June 2007; and the Ministry of Business on limits applicable to bank secrecy.
Academic work Prior to working for the UK Civil Service, I held academic positions at two Universities in Iceland between 2000-2017 where I taught European Union law and EEA law at Master's level, creating and organising courses and teaching materials in EU and EEA law in English and in Icelandic.

I have also conducted seminars and given presentations on EU and EEA law, including for judges and law practitioners.
I have researched and published a variety of work on the fundamental aspects of EU and EEA law and its interaction with domestic legal systems, the role of domestic courts and cooperation between international courts and domestic courts.

Throughout my academic career my work has centred on constitutional aspects of EU and EEA law as systems neither ascribing fully to the characteristics of international law or domestic law but combining elements of both.
I have researched and analysed the role of courts (including CJEU and ECtHR), legal reasoning and judicial dialogue.

A particular focus of research has been my work on Union citizenship and its roots in EU free movement law.
I have also researched the relationship between Union citizenship and the protection of fundamental human rights in the EU and EEA, publishing articles and book chapters on these issues, including research on the interpretation and application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter).

Early in my academic career I researched the methodology of the European Court of Human Rights, including references to ‘consensus’ in the Court’s case law.
My master’s dissertation at the European Academy of Legal Theory in Brussels was on the methodology of consensus in the jurisprudence of the ECHR.

The references to a ‘consensus’ or a ‘common denominator’ between the member States in the Convention system has been criticised as vague and sometimes not based on clear and comprehensive methodology when it comes to the comparison between state parties and their practices.
My Master's thesis at the University of British Columbia, under the supervision of professor Joel Bakan, was titled Problems of Legitimacy regarding the European Convention on Human Rights: Formalism, fuzziness or lack of theory?

The thesis analysed some of the criticism of the Court’s practice at that time, considering in particular alleged formalism and restrictive judicial reasoning in the Court’s practice.
In recent work I have revisited issues and literature on the Court’s contribution to human rights protection in Europe.

Here I have researched and published further work on the doctrine of the margin of appreciation in the jurisprudence of the Court (and the CJEU), critically assessing different theories about the legitimacy of international courts and the balance between local and international judicial decision-making in the name of subsidiarity and margin of appreciation (see publications below).
Extensive research projects in my academic career include EU citizenship rights and fundamental human rights.
Examples of other research projects involving rights include: – – – – – Margin of appreciation in ECHR and CJEU – a comparative approach (see publications below) Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – rights and principles (see publications below) Analysis of the 2000 EU Equality Directives and their voluntary implementation in Iceland (EU Progress grant) (see publications below) Country Report for the Council of Europe on discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation Comparison and analysis of constitutional provisions on referendums (Icelandic) Other comprehensive research projects and reports include: – – – Status Report on the Application by Iceland to join the European Union with a group of expert economists and lawyers for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Iceland (chapters on the single market, labour law and social policy) Developing a proposal for constitutional provisions on referendums as one of three specialists reporting as an expert group for the Prime Minister’s Office, Iceland Conducting an independent audit for the Supervisory Board of the Central Bank of Iceland on the Central Bank’s administration of currency restrictions, with a team organised by the Law Institute, University of Iceland 33 Doc.
15671 Communication c. Description of non-legal professional activities N/A IV.

Activities and experience in the field of human rights Reference is made to section III above.

Throughout my career I have contributed to the development of human rights and convention practice in Iceland as well as contributing to research and academic debate on issues of European constitutional law and fundamental rights protection.

My work has been published both in Icelandic and in English (see list below in VII).
At the start of my career as a junior assistant judge at the City Court of Reykjavík, I worked on a number of cases where convention rights were considered.

At that time the ECHR was not incorporated in domestic law.
Adhering to a dualist doctrine to explain the relationship between international and domestic law, at the time the predominant view was that convention rights were not available to claimants to argue before domestic courts but that the convention could be considered when interpreting domestic law and constitutionally protected rights.
In an influential article published in 1994 (Incorporation and application of the European Convention of Human Rights in Icelandic law), I argued for the need to review and revise prevalent methodology in order to ensure the effective protection of convention rights in the domestic system.
Drawing comparatively on theory and practice in Denmark, I argued for a revision of traditional methodology which would allow for international law, including ECHR provisions and practice, to be integrated as a necessary factor into judicial reasoning.

The article was published in 1994, the year that the ECHR was incorporated in domestic law in Iceland.
In the article I examined the likely effect of incorporating the convention by enacting general legislation (and not a constitutional statute) and accounted for the methodology of ECtHR, explaining how it would necessarily influence and interact with jurisprudence and legal approaches in Iceland at the time.
During further studies in international law and EU law, I researched the Court’s methodology, including the doctrine of consensus as a factor in the Court’s methodology, suggesting that the doctrine might become more important in conjunction with increasing political integration in Europe (through the European Union) and, at the same time, that methodologically there were considerable difficulties in applying the doctrine in a coherent and comprehensive way.
Allowing contracting parties a margin of appreciation in areas where a consensus cannot be established may be a reasonable methodological position but a difficult balance may have to be struck between lack of consensus between Council of Europe state and the parties to the Convention on the one hand and effective protection of rights on the other.
When teaching fundamentals of EU and EEA law, subsequent to working at the EFTA Court, my research focussed on broader issues of European identity and citizenship, and also on the methodology of both CJEU and the EFTA Courts in their cooperation with the national judiciary.

I considered in detail the necessary cooperation between the national judiciary and international courts and the importance of dialogue, including requirements of sound legal reasoning as a basis for a theory of judicial dialogue.
In an article published in Icelandic, I explained the foundations of the role of national courts in applying EU law (and parallel EEA law) in domestic systems (Role of national courts in implementation of EU and EEA law in national legal systems).
Further articles written at that time contributed to the academic debate on equality and non- discrimination in EU and EEA law, both the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality (The principle of equality and its impact on free movement law in the EEA) and prohibition of discrimination based on other grounds, including sex and sexual orientation (The Framework Directive and Icelandic Law: Sexual Orientation Discrimination).
In addition to research on equality rights, constitutional issues have been at the core of my academic contribution, including in particular legitimacy of judicial review of legislation.

I addressed issues arising from international and domestic courts’ interpretation of fundamental human rights in an article analysing a controversial Supreme Court decision in Iceland.
The decision concerned a disabled person’s entitlement to minimum financial assistance and the extent to which it enjoyed constitutional protection.

The article highlighted persistent methodological approaches in Iceland, arguably based on political constitutionalism.

I found that this prevalence of ‘limited judicial review of legislation’ explained both the minority view in the case and the legal community’s critical reception of the majority decision in the case.
In contrast to the minority’s view, the majority decision found that when interpreted in light of international human rights obligations (including the European Social Charter), a rule limiting financial subsistence allowance for disabled people with reference to spousal income was not compatible with a constitutionally protected right to minimum financial assistance, taken together with the constitutional protection of equal treatment between men and women.
Applying a theory of constitutional rights to analyse the case, I argued that the majority view was 34 Doc.

15671 Communication consistent and further, that when constitutional provisions are considered to provide for substantive rights, the majority’s examination of the issue was not only methodologically correct but also in line with interpreting domestic law in light of international obligations (Constitutional principles and protection of individual rights).
More recently I have revisited the Convention and ECtHR jurisprudence in academic work, in particular the methodology of ‘margin of appreciation’ on the one hand and interaction with CJEU case law on the other.

I have also researched and published contributions relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
In a research project, culminating in work co-written with Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, I considered case law from both CJEU and ECtHR through the lens of the doctrine of the margin of appreciation.

The objective was to examine whether and to what extent comparison could be drawn between the Convention system on the one hand and the EU system and the jurisprudence of the CJEU on the other.
While some parallels may be drawn, I found that theories conceptualising the EU/ EEA and Convention system as an integrated system with the respective national system, emphasising ‘limited and shared jurisdiction’ between national and international courts (CJEU and ECtHR) were a more appropriate basis for a methodology that would allow for synergy in jurisprudence and judicial dialogue.
Separately, in a further article on the margin of appreciation and ‘subsidiarity’ in the Convention system, I argued that influences form political constitutionalism – which have partly underpinned the recent institutional and methodological changes in the Convention system (Brighton declaration and Protocol 15) should be counterbalanced with reference to other doctrines and theories, including considerations based on legal constitutionalism, where the role of courts is recognised in interpreting and giving meaning to constitutional provisions and subjecting the legislature’s decisions to scrutiny by domestic and international courts.
Iconsidered a number of alternatives to the rise of the formal margin of appreciation doctrine, such as theories of judicial dialogue, and theories considering formal cooperation between courts and where the ECtHR allows domestic courts a wide margin of appreciation and even full scope to determine Convention issue where it is shown that domestic courts have appreciated and applied the ECtHR methodology (the responsible domestic court doctrine).
In 2015 I published an article in the Common Market Law Review, based on further research on the methodology based on ´limited and shared jurisdiction´ in the integrated legal system in Europe.

The article also focussed on the historic distinction between civil and political rights (first generation rights) on the one hand and economic, social and cultural rights (second generation rights) on the other.
The Charter combines both ‘generations’ of rights in a single text which is binding on the institutions and bodies of the Union and Member States when implementing EU law or where situations otherwise come within scope of EU law.

In the article I examined signs of CJEU case law drawing a distinction between ‘rights’ and ‘principles’ as foreseen in Article 51 of the Charter, in particular in the then case law.
I argued that the case law could alternatively be explained by application of EU law specific doctrines of lack of horizontal effect and associated exclusionary effects in national law (as opposed to a distinction drawn between rights and principles where only rights can be relied on by individuals to enforce their Charter rights).
The article then developed a methodology for deciding Charter cases, again inspired by a principle of limited and shared jurisdiction in an integrated legal system, comprising EU law, national law and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Drawing on the Convention system, I suggested that CJEU could also draw parallels with the margin of appreciation doctrine under the ECHR in formulating a doctrine of judicial restraint, separating normative elements from systemic elements such as formal boundaries between jurisdictions (national and international) and conflict rules; competence issues (EU competences vs national competences) and conditions for dialogue between courts cooperating in a system of limited and shared jurisdiction.
It was suggested that the CJEU could also draw on ECtHR case law when determining rights and their protected core with reference to issues similar to those that have been identified with reference to a ‘normative’ margin of appreciation.

The ECtHR case law recognising interaction and permutation of civil and political rights on the one hand and economic, social and cultural rights on the other could also form a basis for further dialogue between the two Courts and domestic courts.
The article suggested that such a methodology would be more constructive for effective human rights protection than a conceptual distinction between rights and principles.

V. Public activities a.

Public office Please see above on my experience in the field of human rights as a part of professional activity in the judiciary, in public office, and in my academic career.

35 Doc.

15671 Communication b.

Elected posts Ad hoc Judge EFTA Court 2001-2007 c. Posts held in a political party or movement N/A VI.
Other activities Throughout my career I have held positions in and contributed to publishing of legal material, I have reviewed legal texts for publication and supervised written dissertations in EU law and international law, including fundamental human rights.

VII.

Publications and other works Publications – – – – – – – – – – Mannréttindadómstóllinn.

Nálægðarreglan og fullveldi samningsaðila (The European Court of Human Rights.

Subsidiarity and Members ´sovereignty´).

Fullveldi í 99 ár.
Fullveldi í 99 ár.

Safn ritgerða til heiðurs dr. Davíð Þór Björgvinssyni sextugum.

Reykjavík, Hið íslenska bókmenntafélag 2017 (167-189).

With Oddný Mjöll Arnardottir: „Speaking the same language?

Comparing judicial restraint at the ECtHR and the ECJ“.

Shifting Centres of Gravity in Human Rights Protection.

Rethinking relations between the ECHR, EU and national legal orders.

Ritstj.

Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir og Antoine Buyse.

Rutledge 2016 (163-188).


A Renewed Emphasis on the Charter's distinction between Rights and Principles: Is a doctrine of judicial restraint more appropriate?

2015 52(3) Common Market Law Review (685-720).

Fyrsta skilyrði skaðabótaskyldu í ESB- og EES-rétti: réttindi einstaklinga (Conditions for state liability in EU and EEA law: rights of individuals).

Afmælisrit: Viðar Már Matthíasson sextugur.

Reykjavík 2014 (89-122).


Case E-3/11 Sigmarsson v The Central Bank of Iceland, Judgement of the EFTA Court of 14 December 2011.

2012 49(6) Common Market Law Review (2019-2038).

Framework Directive and Icelandic Law: Sexual Orientation Discrimination.

Equality into Reality.

Action for Diversity and non-Discrimination in Iceland (eds.

Evelyn Ellis and Kristin Benediktsdóttir) Reykjavik 2011 (333-371).
Stjórnarskrárbundnar meginreglur og stjórnarskrárvarin réttindi (Constitutional principles and protection of individual rights).

Guðrúnarbók, Reykjavík 2006 (133-158).

Jafnræðisreglan og áhrif hennar á lagareglur um frjálsa för innan Evrópska efnahagssvæðisins (The principle of equality and its impact on free movement law in the EEA).

Lögberg- Rit Lagastofnunar Háskóla Íslandes (ritstj.

Stefán Már Stefánsson o.fl.)

Reykjavík 2003 (187-228).

Getur dómstólum borið skylda til…?


Um hlutverk dómstóla aðildarríkja við framkvæmd réttar Evrópusambandsins og dómstóla samningsaðila við beitingu EES-réttar (Role of national courts in implementation of EU and EEA law in national legal systems).

Afmælisrit Þór Vilhjálmsson sjötugur.

Reykjavík 2000 (111-148).

Um lögtöku Mannréttindasáttmála Evrópu og beitingu í íslenskum rétti (Incorporation and application of the European Convention of Human Rights in Icelandic law).
Tímarit lögfræðinga 1994 44(3) (151-190).

VIII.

Languages Language Reading very good good fair Writing very good good moyen Speaking very good good fair a.

First language: (Icelandic) b.

Official languages: – English – French x x .. ¨ .. x ¨ .. .. ¨ .. x ¨ .. .. x x .. ¨ .. .. ¨ .. x x x .. 36 c. Other languages: – Danish .. x .. .. x .. .. x .. Doc.

15671 Communication XI.


In the event that you do not meet the level of language proficiency required for the post of judge in an official language [the second], please confirm your intention to follow intensive language classes of the language concerned prior to, and if need be also at the beginning of, your term of duty if elected a judge on the Court I have a good knowledge of written French and intend to follow intensive language classes in French X.
Other relevant information I have lived, studied and worked in Iceland and across Europe, including in the United Kingdom, for over 25 years.

This experience has provided me with insights into societal and cultural aspects of different societies and legal systems in Europe while maintaining my personal and professional connection with my country of origin.

I have worked on legal issues, including within the judiciary; in academic research, publishing in Icelandic as well as English.
I have maintained my knowledge of the legal system in Iceland as well as acquiring expertise in its interdependencies with EEA law, EU law and the Convention system.

Through academic activity and professional work, I have also gained substantial knowledge of other legal systems, in particular in the United Kingdom.
I am currently employed in the public sector in the United Kingdom but I have not held a judicial position in the United Kingdom and it is not likely that it would be necessary to call in ad hoc judges due to my prior involvement in any issue either in Iceland or the United Kingdom.

XI.

Please confirm that you will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge on the Court I confirm that I will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge.

37 Doc.
37 Doc.

15671 Communication Appendix 3 – Páll ÞÓRHALLSSON 3.

Curriculum vitae I.

Personal details Name, forename: Þórhallsson, Páll Sex: Male Date and place of birth: 24 September 1964, Reykjavík, Iceland Nationality: Icelandic II.

Education and academic and other qualifications 1998: “Diplôme d’études approfondies” (DEA) in comparative human rights protection from Robert Schuman University in Strasbourg.
Diploma Thesis: “The Incorporation of the ECHR into the Icelandic Legal Order” 1996: Licensed as a district court attorney in Iceland 1995: Cand.

Jur.

from the University of Iceland.

Diploma Thesis: “Freedom of Expression and Libel Law in the Light of Article 10 of the ECHR” 1995: B.A.

in Philosophy and Political Science from the University of Iceland.
Diploma Thesis: “The Virtuous Journalist” 1987: Intermediary test (Zwischenprüfung) following 4 semesters of study in Political Science and Philosophy at the Universities of Heidelberg and Munich III.

Relevant professional activities a.


Description of judicial activities 2019: Drafted guidelines for the Ministries on their relations with the State Attorney, the office which represents the State in civil court cases (https://www.stjornarradid.is/efst-a-baugi/frettir/stok-frett/2019/12/04/ Leidbeiningar-um-verklag-i-samskiptum-raduneyta-og-stofnana-vid-rikislogmann).
2014-2015: Elected by Parliament to be a member of the Committee to evaluate candidates for judicial office 2005- 2006: Secretary to the Information Committee that rules on access to information disputes between individuals and public authorities.

This is an independent committee which issues binding rulings (approximately 30 per year at that time) following a written procedure where both parties have their say.
The Secretary drafts decisions which are then discussed and decided upon by the 3 member Committee.

1995-1997: Associate at A&P Lögmenn, law firm in Reykjavik – – – Preparation of legal briefs to be presented in court Representation of clients in court, both in civil, administrative and criminal cases Several cases involved fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression, right to privacy or property rights.
Several aspects of the judicial system have fallen within my remit at the Prime Minister´s Office.

All legislative amendments, initiated by the Government, including those who deal directly with the courts and law of procedure, have been scrutinised by my office from 2010 until 2021 (when this function was moved to the Ministry of Justice).
The State Attorney and two organs, which issue binding rulings, namely the Information Committee and the Committee on Public Land Ownership (óbyggðanefnd), have been under my administrative responsibility since 2009.

Those are independent organs, but nevertheless it is the PMOs responsibility to provide the framework for proper functioning.

38 b.
38 b.

Description of non-judicial legal activities 2022- Director of Constitutional and Administrative Affairs, Prime Minister´s Office, Deputy to the Permanent Secretary Doc.
15671 Communication – – – – – – – – Supervise a team of 16, lawyers and other staff members Secretary services for the Minister and the Cabinet of Ministers Constitutional reform Integrity in public office Media relations International relations Administrative Law and Law on Access to Official Documents Other related duties 2020-2022: Counsellor in Iceland´s Permanent Mission to the European Union, Brussels – – – Represented Iceland in the IPCR (Integrated Policy Crisis Response), where Covid-19 related measures have been co-ordinated across the EEA Worked on constitutional and transversal issues and those falling within the remit of the PMO, in particular equality between men and women Edited a newsletter on EU-matters: https://www.stjornarradid.is/sendiskrifstofur/sendirad-islands-i- brussel/evropusamstarf/ 2005-2019: Part-time lecturer at the University of Reykjavik in Icelandic and European Media Law, – – – – Legislative Process and Constitutional Law Responsible for approximately 20 full scale semester courses in total, mainly at Master´s level.
Responsible for the 1st year course in Constitutional Law, 4 years in a row.

Supervisor of numerous Master´s and B.A.

dissertations.

2009-2019: Director of Legislative Affairs, Prime Minister´s Office – – – – – – – Supervised a team of up to 12, lawyers and linguists “Better regulation”, i.e.
legislative quality control and promotion of good regulatory practices Constitutional reform Management of publicly owned land Administrative Law and Law on Access to Official Documents Extensive international cooperation in the field of “better regulation” (OECD), ethics in public service and anti-corruption activities (OECD and the CoE) In 2015 and 2016, I was for two longer periods, also the director for cultural heritage.
2005-2009: Lawyer, Prime Minister´s Office – – – Secretary to the Constitutional Committee and the assisting Expert Group Simplification of legislation and regulations Legal advice to the Prime Minister 1999-2005: Administrative Officer, Media Division, DG II, Council of Europe – – – – Secretary to expert groups in the field of Internet regulation, copyright and neighbouring rights Cooperation programmes in the South Caucasus Responsible for the website of the Division Replaced the Head of Division ad interim when the position was vacant 39 Doc.
15671 Communication c. Description of non-legal professional activities 1987-1995: Journalist at Morgunblaðið, daily newspaper in Iceland – – – – Foreign news News analysis Court reporting Continued freelancing until 2005, often analysing events in Iceland from a Council of Europe and human rights perspective IV.

Activities and experience in the field of human rights As a lawyer and Director in the Prime Minister´s Office, I have been responsible for many human rights related matters.
For example, in 2009 I chaired a working group which drafted a bill of law on compensation to childhood victims of abuse in residential institutions.

Ten years later, I worked on a highly mediatised and complex case settlement between the State and persons who had served long sentences for serious crimes of which they were later acquitted.

The State Attorney, who is also Iceland´s Agent before the European Court of Human Rights, falls within the remit of my office.
I am therefore, from time to time, involved in an internal discussion on the approach to be taken on Iceland´s behalf in the more important cases before the Court.

In my capacity as Director in the Prime Minister’s Office, I have been instrumental in revising the legislative drafting process to include an assessment of the conformity of draft legislation with the constitution and international law, including human rights obligations.
In general, the legislative process has become more transparent, inclusive and evidence based, which I believe is in line with Council of Europe core values.

The Law on Access to Official Documents falls under the responsibility of my office.
From 2014-2018, I was a member of two committees, and vice-chair of the latter, which drafted several bills pertaining to freedom of expression and information, including on the protection of whistleblowers and decriminalisation of defamation, largely inspired by the work of the Council of Europe.

As an administrative officer in DG II, Council of Europe, for six years, I took part in standard setting in the field of freedom of expression and in various cooperation activities in member States.
I organised numerous seminars in Armenia and Azerbaijan intended to raise awareness about the European Convention on Human Rights, and in particular freedom of expression, in those, at the time, new member States.

I also organised bigger events, such as a Conference in Warsaw on the human rights aspects of Internet regulation and a Ministerial Conference on freedom of the media in Kyiv.

Constitutional reform has been my professional responsibility for 17 years.
I have done my best to use my knowledge and contacts from the Strasbourg years, both as student in comparative human rights protection and as an administrative officer at the CoE, to enrich the Icelandic discussion on human rights and constitutional reform in general.

Throughout my career, I have followed the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.
To give an example, I published 3 years in a row (covering 1999, 2000 and 2001) an annual review of the most important cases in Icelandic law journal Úlfljótur.

Later, I kept up to date in preparation for the courses I gave in Constitutional Law.

Freedom of expression has been the core topic for me, both as a journalist and then later in the Media Division at the Council of Europe, in the Prime Minister´s Office and finally through my teaching and academic writing.
From 1995, I have also given numerous lectures on freedom of expression, for example in the annual conferences of the Icelandic national lawyers´association.

V. Public activities a.


Public office (other than mentioned in Chapter III) 2014 -: Chairman of the Government´s Steering Group on the implementation of the agreement on the European Economic Area 2021-: Iceland´s representative on the EU´s Single Market Enforcement Task Force 2021-: Chairman of a recruitment panel for the post of Secretary General to the President of the Icelandic Republic 40 Doc.

15671 Communication 2021: Chairman of the Group of experts to evaluate the sale of Míla ehf.
(Icelandic telecommunications infrastructure company) to Ardian (French investment fund) 2020: Head of the Government´s Coordination Team for Covid-19 screening at the borders 2007-2022: Substitute representative of Iceland in GRECO – – Represented Iceland in rounds III (transparency of party funding) and V (preventing corruption and promoting integrity in central governments) Member of the evaluation team for Norway in round III 2014-2016: Chairman of the Icelandic Constitutional Committee – – All political parties in Parliament were represented Resulted in a bill presented by the Prime Minister in Parliament covering natural resources, protection of the environment and referendums 2016-2018: Member of the Bureau of the OECD Regulatory Policy Committee 2015-2019: Chairman of the legislative coordination group of the Icelandic Ministries 2012: Member of the Group of Experts appointed by the Constitutional and Supervisory Committee of the Icelandic Parliament to prepare a Constitutional Bill based on the work of the Constitutional Council 2010-2014: Director (the first one) of the School of Central administration which provides training to staff members of the Icelandic Ministries 2009: Member of a committee established to negotiate with the United Kingdom and the Netherlands on the Icesave issue 2009-2013: Member of the working group for legal issues in relation to Iceland´s application for EU membership 2009-2013: Member of a working group and later coordination committee on ethics in public administration 2006-2008: Chairman of the committee for simplification of laws and regulations b.
Elected posts c. Posts held in a political party or movement VI.

Other activities 2020-present Member of the board of the Reykjavík Forestry Association 2008-2019 Member of the board of the Association of Icelandic Lawyers 1990 Chairman of the Icelandic Youth Association 1988-1989 Board member, and during the 2nd year chairman, of the Association of Icelandic Students Abroad VII.
Publications and other works – – – – – “The 2016 Bill of the Constitutional Committee: three proposals for reforming the 1944 Constitution” – in Ágúst Þór Árnason and Catherine Dupré (ed.

), Icelandic Constitutional Reform – People, Processes, Politics, Routledge 2021, 171-184 “The freedom of expression of public officials – ethical and legal considerations”, in Hafsteinn Dan Kristjánsson (ed.
), 25 years of Administrative Law, Reykjavík 2019, 541-568 [in Icelandic] “Constitutional development in Europe“, in The Report of the Constitutional Revision Committee, 1st volume, February 2011, 316-345 [in Icelandic] “Freedom of expression“, in Björg Thorarensen (ed.
), The European Convention on Human Rights, Principles, practice and impact on Icelandic Law, 2nd edition, Reykjavík 2017, 353-392 [in Icelandic] Principles, pratice and impact on Icelandic law, 2nd edition, Reykjavík 2017, 353-392 [in Icelandic] 41 Doc.
15671 Communication – – – – – – “Freedom of political debate and the Council of Europe“, in IRIS Special on Political Debate and the Role of the Media, European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2004, 53-59 “The Freedom of Expression Regime in Europe: Coping with the Net“, in Spreading the Word on the Internet, OSCE, Vienna 2003, 71-79 “Freedom of the Media and the Internet“, in From Quill to Cursor, OSCE, Vienna 2003, 49-56 Icelandic Law on a Central Data Base “The Grundrechtezeitschrift Heft 5-6 1999,170-173 [in German] in the Healthcare System”, Europäische “Article 27 [cultural rights]”, in G. Alfredsson and A. Eide (ed.
), The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Kluwer Law International 1999 (with Mr Ragnar Adalsteinsson), 575-596 “The incorporation of the ECHR”, Úlfljótur XLIV, 2. vol.

1994,157-169 [in Icelandic] VII.

Languages Language Reading very good good fair Writing very good good fair Speaking very good good fair a.

First language: Icelandic (Please specify) b.


Official languages: – English – French c. Other languages: ....Danish...................... ....German.................... x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x IX.
In the event that you do not meet the level of language proficiency required for the post of judge in an official language [the second], please confirm your intention to follow intensive language classes of the language concerned prior to, and if need be also at the beginning of, your term of duty if elected a judge on the Court X.
Other relevant information It is challenging to summarise 35 years of public (or societal) service, first as a journalist and then as a lawyer in a law firm at the Council of Europe and in the Prime Minister´s Office.

Above, I mention various duties that I have been entrusted with which were certainly related to my post, but not necessarily a part of it.
I believe that the list demonstrates that I have been solicited to take on very challenging tasks in the legal and administrative field, by Governments of different political leanings: How to solve the current constitutional stalemate?

How to strike a balance between Covid-19 measures and freedom of movement?

How to compensate victims of abuse in residential institutions or victims of miscarriage of justice?

How to restore trust in Government following the economic crisis in 2008?

to name but a few.
to name but a few.

Perhaps this can be explained by my professional skills, acquired though studies in 3 countries and work experience home and abroad, solid knowledge of both Icelandic and International Law, objectivity and diplomacy, as well as my personal integrity and the trust that I enjoy throughout the legal and political community in Iceland.
Through my work, I believe I have demonstrated leadership qualities, innovative spirit, vision and a constant willingness to improve the way Governments function and interact with the citizens.

My approach has always been based on the principles at the heart of the Council of Europe, namely human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

42 XI.
42 XI.

Please confirm that you will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge on the Court I confirm that I will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge on the Court.

Doc.
Doc.

15671 Communication 43 2/8/23, 12:04 PM PACE elects Anne Louise Haahr Bormann judge to the European Court of Human Rights in respect of Denmark PACE elects Anne Louise Haahr Bormann judge to the European Court of Human Rights in respect of Denmark 24/01/2023 Session | Election of Judges The Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) today elected Anne Louise Haahr Bormann as judge to the European Court of Human Rights in respect of Denmark.
Ms Bormann, having obtained an absolute majority of votes cast, is elected judge of the European Court of Human Rights for a term of office of nine years which shall commence not later than three months after her election.

Judges are elected by PACE from a list of three candidates nominated by each State which has ratified the European Convention on Human Rights.
Share Tweet Links  Voting result  List and curricula vitae of candidates submitted by the Government of Denmark  How are judges of the ECHR elected?
https://pace.coe.int/en/news/8948 1/1 24 January 2023 / 24 janvier 2023 ELECTION OF A JUDGE TO THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS FOR DENMARK 24 January 2023 First part of the 2023 Ordinary Session ÉLECTION D’UN JUGE À LA COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME AU TITRE DU DANEMARK 24 janvier 2023 Première partie de la Session ordinaire de 2023 Total number of members voting / Nombre total de membres votants Number of spoilt or blank ballot papers / Nombre de bulletins nuls ou blancs Absolute majority of the votes cast / Majorité absolue des suffrages exprimés Number of valid votes / Nombre de votes valides 189 3 95 186 The votes were cast as follows / Les suffrages ont été exprimés comme suit Mr Mohammad AHSAN Ms Anne Louise Haahr BORMANN Mr Jon Esben HVAM 10 139 37 Ms Anne Louise Haahr BORMANN, having obtained an absolute majority of votes cast, is elected judge of the European Court of Human Rights for a term of office of nine years which shall commence not later than three months after his election.
Mme Anne Louise Haahr BORMANN, ayant obtenu une majorité absolue des suffrages exprimés, est élu juge à la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme ; son mandat de neuf ans commence au plus tard trois mois après son élection.

Doc.

15670 22 December 2022 Election of judges to the European Court of Human Rights List and curricula vitae of candidates submitted by the Government of Denmark Communication Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Doc.
15670 Communication Contents Page 1.
List and curricula vitae of candidates submitted by the Government of Denmark .................................... 3 Appendix 1 – Mohammad AHSAN ............................................................................................................... 5 Appendix 2 – Anne Louise BORMANN ........................................................................................................ 8 Appendix 3 – Jon Esben HVAM ................................................................................................................. 11 2 Doc.
15670 Communication 1.
List and curricula vitae of candidates submitted by the Government of Denmark Letter dated 30 November 2022 from the Government of Denmark to Ms Despina Chatzivassiliou-Tsovilis, Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe: List of Danish candidates for the position of Judge at the European Court of Human Rights and description of the national selection procedure With reference to your letter of 14 October 2022, the Government of Denmark (hereinafter the “government”) respectfully submits the following candidates for election as judge at the European Court of Human Rights: – – – Mr Mohammad Ahsan Ms Anne Louise Haahr Bormann Mr Jon Esben Hvam.
The government observes that the list above is arranged in alphabetical order after surname, and the list is therefore not prioritised.

The curricula vitae in English and French are attached to this letter as appendices 1 to 3.

1.1.

Description of the procedure by which the candidates were selected 1.
By letter dated 14 October 2022 the Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe informed the government that the former list of three candidates for the position as judge at the European Court of Human Rights in respect of Denmark was rejected due to the fact that the list only contained male candidates.
The government was therefore requested to submit a new list of candidates and their detailed curricula vitae as well as a description of the procedure by which the candidates were selected to the Parliamentary Assembly no later than 8 December 2022.
By letter dated 20 October 2022 a request was submitted to the government by the Chair of the Advisory Panel of Experts on Candidates for Election as Judge to the European Court of Human Rights for the submission of the names and curricula vitae of the candidates together with information on the procedure by which the candidates were selected.

The government was requested to provide the information to the Advisory Panel no later than 14 November 2022.

2.
2.

On 24 October 2022 the notice for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights was re- published widely on two major websites for vacant positions in Denmark (https://www.jobuniven.dk and https://job.jobnet.dk).

Furthermore, the notice was published on the websites of the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and in a more targeted manner on the website of the General Council of the Danish Bar and the Law Society and on the National Courts Administration's intranet.
The notice included information on the requirements for qualification as judge at the European Court of Human Rights, including linguistic competences, as well as relevant information about the application process.

In the notice persons who wished to be nominated as candidates for the position as judge at the European Court of Human Rights were invited to submit to the Ministry of Justice their applications no later than 7 November 2022.
All interested persons, regardless of personal background, were encouraged to apply.

It appeared from the notice that previously submitted applications would still be taken into consideration.

Three additional applications were received within the deadline on 7 November 2022, including one 3. from a female candidate and two from male candidates.
The government observes in this regard that the notice for the position of judge at the European Court of Human Rights was previously published on 9 February 2022 and 18 March 2022.

The government received during these rounds five applications from male candidates.

In total, eight applications were received within the deadlines.

In March 2013 an 4. independent standing committee (Dommerudnœvnelsesrådet vedrørende internationale dommerstillinger mv.)
of five members was appointed by the Minister of Justice upon nomination from the President of the Supreme Court (nomination of the chairman of the Committee), the Presidents of the High Courts, the General Council of the Danish Bar and Law Society, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Justice respectively.

The members of the committee are the following: – – Mr Oliver Talevski, Supreme Court Judge (chairman) Ms Gitte Rubrek Pedersen, Judge at the Danish Eastern High Court 3 Doc.
15670 Communication – – – Mr Jens Rostock-Jensen, Attorney Mr Jeppe Tranholm-Mikkelsen, Permanent Secretary of State for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Mr Johan Kristian Legarth, Permanent Secretary of State for the Ministry of Justice.
The committee's task is to evaluate the qualifications of applicants to the positions as Danish judge at the European Court of Human Rights, Danish judge at the Court of Justice of the European Union, Danish judge at the General Court of the European Union, and Danish Advocate General at the Court of Justice of the European Union.

On the basis of this evaluation, the committee nominates the best candidates to the Government.

The Ministry of Justice serves as the secretariat of the committee.
The Committee assessed whether the applicants met the eligibility requirements for nomination as 5. candidates for the position as judge at the European Court of Human Rights in accordance with Article 21 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as the qualifications listed in inter alia the Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers on the selection of candidates for the post of judge at the European Court of Human Rights CM(2012)40 of 29 March 2012 and in Recommendation 1649 (2004) from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
The Committee summoned five out of eight applicants to interviews on 4 May 2022 and 9 November 2022.

On that basis, and after assessing the qualifications of the applicants, the committee nominated the three above-mentioned candidates to the government.
On 14 November 2022 the government transmitted the names and the curricula vitae of the three candidates, together with information on the procedure by which the candidates were selected, to the Advisory Panel of Experts on Candidates for election as Judge to the European Court of Human Rights.

6.
6.

Should any further information or clarifications be needed, please contact Co Agent of the Government of Denmark, Ms Nina Holst-Christensen, the Ministry of Justice (e-mail: mailto:nhc@jm.dk, phone +45 20105551).

4 Doc.

15670 Communication Appendix 1 – Mohammad AHSAN 1.

Curriculum Vitae I.

Personal details Name, forename: Ahsan, Mohammad Sex: Male Date and place of birth: 25 December 1970, Gujrat, Pakistan Nationality: Danish II.
Education and academic and other qualifications 1998: Master of Law, University of Copenhagen, Denmark III.

Relevant professional activities a.


Description of judicial activities – – – – – 2001-2004: Deputy judge at the Supreme Court 2002-2004: Deputy judge (part-time) at the Special Complaints Court 2017-2018: Ad hoc judge at the Danish Eastern High Court (for nine months) 2018-current: High court judge and, since 2021, assisting president of section at the Danish Eastern High Court 2019-current: Arbitrator at the Danish Institute of Arbitration b.
Description of non-judicial legal activities Main employments – – – – – – – 1998-2001: Head of section, Ministry of Justice, two different divisions 2004-2006: Head of section, Ministry of Justice, Constitutional Law Division 2006-2008: Senior legal adviser, Ministry of Justice, Constitutional Law Division 2008-2009: Senior legal adviser, Ministry of Justice, Criminal Law Division 2009-2011: Head of division, Ministry of Justice, Constitutional Law Division 2011-2013: Head of the Law Department at the Prime Minister’s Office, Chief Legal Adviser to Prime Ministers Mr Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Mrs Helle Thorning-Schmidt 2013-2018: Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Part-time employments – – – – – 1998-1999: Assisting prosecutor, District Prosecutor’s Office, Copenhagen 2003-2004: Legal secretary to the President of the Supreme Court 2004-2006: Assisting prosecutor, State Prosecutor’s Office, Copenhagen 2019-current: Chairman, the Independent Police Complaints Authority 2021-current: Vice-chairman, the Danish Refugee Appeals Board 5 Doc.
15670 Communication Other activities – – – – – – – – – 1999-2003: Assistant lecturer of Constitutional Law and Human Rights Law at the University of Copenhagen 2002: Assistant lecturer of International Law at the University of Copenhagen 2005: Associate professor of European Human Rights Law at the University of Copenhagen 2003-2007: Associate professor of Constitutional Law and Human Rights Law at the University of Copenhagen 2004-2008: Member of the Council of Europe Group of Specialists on Access to Official Information (under the Steering Committee for Human Rights) which drafted the 2008 Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents to 2004-2009: Secretary (Offentlighedskommissionen, betænkning nr.
1510/2009) the Committee on Access to Public Administration Files 2020-current: The Danish Parliamentary Ombudsman’s evaluation panel Member of governmental working groups and expert committees preparing legislation For many years been teaching government officials, lawyers and others in administrative law, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Data Protection Act and the Public Access to Information Act c. Description of non-legal professional activities None.

IV.
Activities and experience in the field of human rights – – – – 1999-2007: The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights was an important element when I was teaching in Constitutional Law and Human Rights Law at the University of Copenhagen 2004-2008/2009-2011: The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and the rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights was an integrative element when I was working in the Constitutional Law Division at the Ministry of Justice and giving general and specific advice to ministries and public authorities on constitutional law issues 2013-2018: As a Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions I argued cases orally and in writing before the Supreme Court where human rights issues where a key element 2018-current: As a high court judge, I have applied the substantive and procedural rights of the European Convention on Human Rights in cases presented to me.
As vice-chairman of the Danish Refugee Appeals Board, I have had the opportunity to apply different articles of the European Convention on Human Rights when handling asylum cases.

Furthermore, I have applied different articles of the Convention when handling police complaint cases as chairman of the Independent Police Complaints Authority V. Public activities No public office posts, elected posts or posts held in a political party or movement.

VI.
VI.

Other activities Reference is made to the information above.

VII.

Publications and other works I have written the following articles on human rights issues: – Together with another author: The European Court of Human Right’s case law on expulsion (Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedsdomstols udvisningspraksis), The Danish Law Journal (Juristen), 2000, p. 365.

6 Doc.
6 Doc.

15670 Communication – – – – Together with another author: The legal status of human rights convention in the Danish legal system (Menneskerettighedskonventioners retskildemæssige status i dansk ret), The Danish Law Journal (Juristen), 2002, p. 92.

Freedom of expression and defamation in a human rights perspective (Ytringsfrihed og ærekrænkelser i et menneskeretligt perspektiv), The Danish Law Journal (Juristen), 2002, p. 248.
Together with the former President of the Supreme Court of Denmark, Børge Dahl: The Supreme Court and International Law (Højesteret og folkeretten), 2018, p. 117, in festschrift to Stefan Lindskog, President of the Supreme Court of Sweden.

Author of a Commentary of the Public Access to Information Act (Offentlighedsloven med kommentarer), Djoef Publishing, Copenhagen.

The first edition covered 850 pages and was published in 2014 and the second edition was published in 2020 and covers 959 pages.

VIII.
VIII.

Languages Language Reading very good good fair a.

First language: – Danish b.

Official languages: – English – French c. Other languages: – Urdu/Hindi X X X X Writing very good X X good fair Speaking very good good fair X X X X* X X* * I do not write French and only speak very little French.

IX.
IX.

In the event that you do not meet the level of language proficiency required for the post of judge in an official language [the second], please confirm your intention to follow intensive language classes of the language concerned prior to, and if need be also at the beginning of, your term of duty if elected a judge on the Court I confirm my intention concerning the French language.

X.

Other relevant information None.

XI.


Please confirm that you will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge on the Court I confirm that, if elected a judge on the Court, I will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg.

7 Doc.

15670 Communication Appendix 2 – Anne Louise BORMANN 2.

Curriculum Vitae I.

Personal details Name, forename: Bormann, Anne Louise Haahr Sex: Female Date and place of birth: 25 August 1967, Ebeltoft, Denmark Nationality: Danish II.
Education and academic and other qualifications 1991 Master of Law, University of Copenhagen 1999 Master of Law, Human Rights Law, University of Nottingham III.

Relevant professional activities a.


Description of judicial activities – – – – – – 1993-1994: Part time deputy judge at the District Court of Copenhagen 1994-1996: Deputy judge at the District Court of Kalundborg 2004: Acting High Court Judge, Eastern High Court 2005-2016: High Court Judge, Eastern High Court 2016: Supreme Court Judge 2019: Vicepresident of the Labour Court b.
Description of non-judicial legal activities Full time employment – – – 1991-1994, 1996-1998 and 1999-2000: Head of Section, Ministry of Justice 2000-2001: Senior Legal Advisor, Law Department 2001-2004: Head of Division, Law Department Part time employment – – – – – – 1991-1993: Assistant prosecutor, Copenhagen Police 1996-2000: Assistant prosecutor, Copenhagen State Prosecutor’s Office 2010-2014: Chair of the law reform committee on marital property regimes 2012-2015: Consultant on a Danida project for the training of Ugandan magistrates 2014: Chair of the standing committee on criminal procedure 2020: Vicechair of the Press Complaints Board In addition to this I have taught a number of courses for judges and other legal professionals mainly on legislative drafting, family law and recent judgments of the Danish Supreme Court c. Description of non-legal professional activities None 8 Doc.
15670 Communication IV.

Activities and experience in the field of human rights As a senior legal advisor and later head of division in the Ministry of Justice one of my responsibilities was identifying human rights issues in proposed legislation sent from other ministries for review in the Ministry of Justice As a High Court Judge and later Supreme Court Judge and Labour Court Judge I have handled numerous cases involving sometimes complex human rights issues.
Human rights issues are part of the courses I teach and the books I have written also concern the human rights aspects of family law.

While a High Court Judge I was a consultant on a Danida project where I travelled to Uganda to choose magistrates who came to Denmark for training.

Examining candidates on their knowledge of human rights was part of the selection process and I also took part in the training focusing among other issues human rights.

V. Public activities None VI.

Other activities None VII.
Publications and other works I am the (co)author of the following books: – – – – – – Loven, 2002 (On quality in legislative drafting, 2002) Arveloven med kommentarer (Inheritance law, 1st edition 2008, 2nd edition 2017) Dødsboskifte (Administration of the estates of deceased persons, 2nd edition 2012, 3rd edition 2022) Ægtefælleloven med kommentarer (Marital property regimes, 1st edition 2019) Retsplejeloven med kommentarer (The Administration of Justice Act 10th edition 2018 and 11th edition expected in 2023, my contributions to this book concerned criminal procedure) In addition I have written a number of articles mainly on family law including an article published in 2013 on the human rights aspects of paternity cases.
VIII.

Languages Language Reading very good good fair Writing very good good fair Speaking very good good fair a.

First language: – Danish b.

Official languages: – English – French c. Other languages: – German X X X X X X X X X X X X IX.
In the event that you do not meet the level of language proficiency required for the post of judge in an official language, please confirm your intention to follow intensive language classes of the language concerned prior to, and if need be also at the beginning of, your term of duty if elected a judge on the Court.

I am starting French classes in November and will continue to follow classes in that language.

9 Doc.

15670 Communication X.

Other relevant information XI.


Please confirm that you will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge on the Court.

If elected I will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg.

10 Doc.

15670 Communication Appendix 3 – Jon Esben HVAM 3.

Curriculum Vitae I.
Curriculum Vitae I.

Personal details Name, forename: Hvam, Jon Esben Sex: Male Date and place of birth: 22 December 1972, Aarhus, Denmark Nationality: Danish Family status: Married to Mrs Herborg Kråkevik, Norwegian actress and singer, two daughters Agnes (18) and Petra (12) II.

Education and academic and other qualifications Law Degree from Aarhus University in 1998 Admitted to the Danish Bar in 2010 III.

Relevant professional activities a.


Description of judicial activities As of 2015: High Court Judge at the Danish Western High Court Previous main positions in the judicial sector: 2014: Judge at the District Court of Holstebro, Jutland 2013: Acting High Court Judge of the Danish Western High Court 2006-2009: Assistant judge at the Supreme Court 2007-2009: Assistant judge at the Danish Labour Court (subsidiary occupation) b.
Description of non-judicial legal activities August 2011-2012: Senior Legal and Human Rights Advisor at the International Law and Policy Institute in Oslo, Norway Main tasks: Provision of advice and conducting legal reviews/analysis for various international institutions, UN organisations and Norwegian ministries on Public International Law, Human Rights Law and Justice Sector Reform 2010-July 2011: Attorney-at-law at the Danish law firm Nielsen Nørager in Copenhagen Main tasks: Provision of advice to and carrying out legal proceedings on behalf of private clients and public institutions in the areas of contract law, insolvency law, company law and tort law 1998-2001 and 2003-2006: Civil Servant at the Danish Ministry of Justice Doing service in the Office of Naturalisation (1998-1999), Office of Personnel (1999-2001), Office of Procedural Law (2003-2004), and Office of Constitutional Law (2004-2006) Main tasks: Preparation of law drafts, providing legal advice to other ministries, case handling and administrative tasks Part-time prosecutor for the Copenhagen Police Commissioner (1999-2001) and the Zealand State Attorney (2004-2006) 11 Doc.
15670 Communication c. Description of non-legal professional activities 2018: Chairman of the Board of Viborg Cathedral School (High School and Boarding School with approximately 1 150 Danish and international students) IV.
Activities and experience in the field of human rights August 2011-2012: Senior Legal and Human Rights Adviser at the International Law and Policy Institute in Oslo, Norway Main tasks: Provision of advice and conducting legal reviews/analysis for various international institutions, UN organisations and Norwegian ministries on Public International Law, Human Rights Law and Justice Sector Reform.
2001-2003: Human Rights and Legal Advisor to the Danish Human Rights Institute working as an adviser to the Cambodian Government and as the local representative of the institute in Cambodia.

Main tasks: Supporting the elaboration of a plan for reform of the Legal and Judicial sector in Cambodia with the point of departure in the Cambodian Constitution and International Human Rights Conventions ratified by Cambodia.
Facilitation of the co-operation between the Cambodian Government and UN organisations present in Cambodia, the World Bank, various embassies and local NGOs on legal and judicial reform in Cambodia.

2003-2011: Part-time consultancies for the Danish Institute for Human Rights in the area of Human Rights Law and implementation of the Rule of Law and Due Process in Serbia, Yemen and Cambodia.
1999-2008: Part-time senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law at the University of Copenhagen on the subject “Danish Constitutional Law and Human Rights Law”.

2005-2007: Part-time senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law at the University of Copenhagen on the subject “The Practice of the European Court of Human Rights” (with teaching and examinations conducted in English).

1999-2001: Part-time lecturer at the Faculty of Law at the University of Copenhagen on the subject “Public International Law”.
V. Public activities As of 2019: Chairman of the Danish Disciplinary Court for Surveyors (public committee, which according to law is presided over by a High Court Judge) As of 2019: Deputy Chairman of the Danish Appeals Permission Board within the section of family law (granting permissions to appeal judgments/decisions of the District Courts to the High Courts) 2016-2018: Chairman of the Danish Consumer Complaints Board (public committee, which according to law is presided over by a High Court Judge) VI.
Other activities Legal and financial support to the Prey Lang Community Network, a project aiming to protect the Prey Lang forest in Cambodia, the largest evergreen forest on the Indochinese peninsula.

VII.

Publications and other works Elaboration of compilations of teaching material on the subject “Danish Constitutional Law and Human Rights Law” during my 9 years as part-time senior lecturer at the University of Copenhagen.

VIII.

Languages Language a.


First language: – Danish good fair Reading very good X Writing very good X 12 good fair good fair Speaking very good X b.

Official languages: – English – French c. Other languages: – German – Norwegian – Swedish X X X X X X X X X X Doc.

15670 Communication X X X X X X IX.


In the event that you do not meet the level of language proficiency required for the post of judge in an official language [the second], please confirm your intention to follow intensive language classes of the language concerned prior to, and if need be also at the beginning of, your term of duty if elected a judge on the Court I have begun taking private classes in French in March 2022 and will continue to do so.
I intend to continue learning French and also to work on fine-tuning my Legal English.

X.

Other relevant information XI.

Please confirm that you will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge on the Court I will take up permanent residence in Strasbourg if elected a judge.

My wife and younger daughter will be prepared to move to Strasbourg with me.
13 Women@PACE meeting, Parliamentary Assembly Session January 2023 , 2/8/23, 10:49 AM On world Education Day, the Women@PACE group expresses solidarity with women and girls in Afghanistan On world Education Day, the Women@PACE group expresses solidarity with women and girls in Afghanistan 25/01/2023 Women@PACE | Session To mark World Education Day (24 January), the Women@PACE group today expressed its solidarity with women and girls in Afghanistan who are barred from receiving an education.
“Since the Taliban seized power in Afghanistan in August 2021, the situation of women and girls in the country has severely deteriorated.

Afghan women are being banned from working outside their home and from attending education beyond the sixth grade, their right to political participation is denied, as well as their social, economic, and cultural rights.

This unacceptable situation must end.

No other country in the world bars women and girls from attending schools.
Education is a universal human right and, as such, must be fully respected.

We demand that the decision to close schools for women and girls across Afghanistan be reversed and the right to education for all be ensured.

When women are not safe there can be no peace, stability, freedom or economic development.

Education is essential as the foundation of this stability.

On 15 January, former Afghan parliamentarian and activist, Mursal Nabizada, was brutally killed outside her home.
Despite threats, she had decided to stay in the country after the Taliban takeover because she wanted to continue to serve her people.

She spoke up courageously against the ban on women’s education.

We must take action to ensure that her words, and the voices of hundreds of women and girls in Afghanistan, are not silenced or forgotten.

They have the right to live in freedom, the right to education, the right to work and the right to make their own decisions about their lives.
They can count on our support to make their voices better heard and their rights protected.” Share Tweet Links  Flickr gallery https://pace.coe.int/en/news/8953 1/1 2/7/23, 6:20 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.

15674 Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15674 Assembly's voting results Environmental impact of armed conflicts 106 in favor, 0 against, 1 abstention All participants in the vote Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Petra BAYR Mr Eduard KÖCK Mr Stefan SCHENNACH Ms Nigar ARPADARAI Ms Konul NURULLAYEVA Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA Ms Karin BROUWERS Mr Christophe LACROIX Mr Simon MOUTQUIN Mr Domagoj HAJDUKOVIĆ Austria Austria Austria Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Belgium Belgium Belgium Belgium Croatia Mr David SMOLJAK Czech Republic Ms Tarja FILATOV Ms Inka HOPSU Ms Hilkka KEMPPI Ms Mai KIVELÄ Mr François CALVET Ms Mireille CLAPOT Ms Marie-Christine DALLOZ Mr Bernard FOURNIER Abstention Mr Thibaut FRANÇOIS In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Joël GIRAUD Mr Alain MILON Ms Anne STAMBACH-TERRENOIR Mr Andrej HUNKO Mr Kriton-Ilias ARSENIS Finland Finland Finland Finland France France France France France France France France Germany Greece SOC EPP/CD SOC EC/DA EC/DA SOC EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC NR SOC SOC ALDE UEL EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD UEL UEL UEL https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39262/print 1/4 2/7/23, 6:20 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15674 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Gergely ARATÓ Ms Boglárka ILLÉS Mr Attila TILKI Mr Björn Leví GUNNARSSON Ms Berglind Ósk GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR Mr Bjarni JÓNSSON Mr Paul GAVAN Ms Aurora FLORIDIA Ms Elisabetta GARDINI Ms Valentina GRIPPO Mr Arnaldo LOMUTI Mr Andrea ORLANDO Mr Fabio PIETRELLA Mr Francesco VERDUCCI Ms Sandra ZAMPA Ms Ieva BRANTE Mr Normunds DZINTARS Mr Hubert BÜCHEL Ms Franziska HOOP Ms Aušrinė NORKIENĖ Ms Rita TAMAŠUNIENĖ Ms Octavie MODERT Mr Joseph Beppe FENECH ADAMI Mr José BADIA Ms Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO Ms Margreet De BOER Mr Bob van PAREREN Hungary Hungary Hungary Iceland Iceland Iceland Ireland Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Latvia Latvia Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Lithuania Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Monaco Monaco Netherlands Netherlands SOC EC/DA EC/DA SOC EC/DA UEL UEL SOC EC/DA NR NR SOC EC/DA SOC SOC NR EC/DA ALDE ALDE SOC EC/DA EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD ALDE SOC EC/DA Mr Aleksandar NIKOLOSKI North Macedonia EPP/CD Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN Mr Even ERIKSEN Ms Lise SELNES Mr Andreas Sjalg UNNELAND Mr Włodzimierz BERNACKI Mr Nuno CARVALHO Mr Pedro CEGONHO Norway Norway Norway Norway Poland Portugal Portugal SOC SOC SOC UEL EC/DA EPP/CD SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39262/print 2/4 2/7/23, 6:20 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15674 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Edite ESTRELA Ms Mara LAGRIMINHA Mr Paulo PISCO Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA Mr Sorin-Titus MUNCACIU Ms Daniela OTEŞANU Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Romania Romania Ms Marica MONTEMAGGI San Marino Ms Laura CASTEL Ms María Valentina MARTÍNEZ FERRO Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO Ms Esther PEÑA Mr Gonzalo ROBLES Ms Susana SUMELZO Mr Adnan DIBRANI Mr Gustaf GÖTHBERG Mr Mattias JONSSON Mr Kristoffer LINDBERG Ms Beatrice TIMGREN Mr Markus WIECHEL Ms Sibel ARSLAN Ms Marina CAROBBIO GUSCETTI Mr Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ Mr Jean-Pierre GRIN Mr Niklaus-Samuel GUGGER Ms Emine Nur GÜNAY Mr Hişyar ÖZSOY Ms Selin SAYEK BÖKE Ms Larysa BILOZIR Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK Mr Oleksandr MEREZHKO Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA Mr Dmytro NATALUKHA Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA Mr Serhii SOBOLIEV Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine SOC SOC SOC EPP/CD EC/DA NR SOC UEL EPP/CD SOC SOC EPP/CD SOC SOC EPP/CD SOC SOC EC/DA EC/DA SOC SOC SOC ALDE EPP/CD NR UEL SOC ALDE EC/DA ALDE EC/DA EPP/CD EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39262/print 3/4 2/7/23, 6:20 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15674 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Lesia VASYLENKO Ms Lesia ZABURANNA Ukraine Ukraine ALDE ALDE Lord David BLENCATHRA United Kingdom EC/DA Mr Jeremy CORBYN Mr Geraint DAVIES Lord George FOULKES Ms Sally-Ann HART Mr John HOWELL Ms Ruth JONES Lord Richard KEEN Sir Edward LEIGH Mr David MORRIS United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom SOC SOC SOC EC/DA EC/DA United Kingdom SOC United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom EC/DA EC/DA EC/DA https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39262/print 4/4 2/7/23, 6:17 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15677 Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15677 Assembly's voting results Conflict-related sexual violence 122 in favor, 0 against, 4 abstentions All participants in the vote Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Klotilda BUSHKA Ms Etilda GJONAJ Ms Blerina GJYLAMETI Ms Mònica BONELL Ms Doris BURES Ms Andrea EDER-GITSCHTHALER Mr Franz Leonhard ESSL Mr Reinhold LOPATKA Ms Nigar ARPADARAI Ms Konul NURULLAYEVA Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA Mr Christophe LACROIX Mr Simon MOUTQUIN Mr Stanislav ANASTASSOV Mr Daniel LORER Mr David SMOLJAK Mr Mogens JENSEN Ms Charlotte MUNCH Mr Alexander RYLE Mr Søren SØNDERGAARD Ms Tarja FILATOV Ms Inka HOPSU Ms Mai KIVELÄ Ms Anne-Mari VIROLAINEN Mr Bertrand BOUYX Albania Albania Albania Andorra Austria Austria Austria Austria Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Belgium Belgium Belgium Bulgaria Bulgaria Czech Republic Denmark Denmark Denmark Denmark Finland Finland Finland Finland France SOC SOC SOC ALDE SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD EC/DA EC/DA SOC SOC SOC ALDE NR NR SOC NR NR UEL SOC SOC UEL EPP/CD ALDE https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39218/print 1/4 2/7/23, 6:17 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15677 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr François CALVET Ms Mireille CLAPOT Mr Emmanuel FERNANDES Mr Thibaut FRANÇOIS Mr Joël GIRAUD Ms Marietta KARAMANLI Mr Alain MILON Ms Anne STAMBACH-TERRENOIR Mr Bruno STUDER Ms Khatia TSILOSANI Ms Heike ENGELHARDT Ms Nicole HÖCHST Mr Norbert KLEINWÄCHTER Mr Axel SCHÄFER Ms Zita GURMAI Mr Paul GAVAN Mr Alfredo ANTONIOZZI Ms Elena BONETTI Abstention Mr Dimitri COIN In favour In favour In favour Ms Aurora FLORIDIA Mr Ettore Antonio LICHERI Mr Fabio PIETRELLA Abstention Ms Domenica SPINELLI In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Normunds DZINTARS Ms Zanda KALNIŅA-LUKAŠEVICA Mr Hubert BÜCHEL Ms Franziska HOOP Ms Cécile HEMMEN Ms Octavie MODERT Mr Joseph Beppe FENECH ADAMI Mr José BADIA Ms Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO Mr Caspar Van den BERG Ms Margreet De BOER France France France France France France France France France Georgia Germany Germany Germany Germany Hungary Ireland Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Latvia Latvia Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Luxembourg Luxembourg Malta Monaco Monaco Netherlands Netherlands EPP/CD ALDE UEL EC/DA ALDE SOC EPP/CD UEL ALDE SOC SOC EC/DA EC/DA SOC SOC UEL EC/DA NR EC/DA SOC NR EC/DA EC/DA EC/DA NR ALDE ALDE SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD ALDE ALDE SOC Mr Bob van PAREREN Netherlands EC/DA https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39218/print 2/4 2/7/23, 6:17 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15677 Voting choice Member Country Political group Ms Petra STIENEN Mr Darko KAEVSKI Netherlands North Macedonia ALDE SOC Mr Aleksandar NIKOLOSKI North Macedonia EPP/CD In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN Mr Even ERIKSEN Ms Ingjerd SCHOU Ms Lise SELNES Mr Andreas Sjalg UNNELAND Ms Iwona ARENT Mr Marek BOROWSKI Mr Arkadiusz MULARCZYK Ms Katarzyna SÓJKA Mr Nuno CARVALHO Mr Pedro CEGONHO Ms Edite ESTRELA Ms Isabel MEIRELLES Mr Paulo PISCO Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA Ms Maria-Gabriela HORGA Mr Sorin-Titus MUNCACIU Ms Daniela OTEŞANU Ms Diana STOICA Mr Marco NICOLINI Ms Dubravka FILIPOVSKI Abstention Mr Stefan JOVANOVIĆ In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Elvira KOVÁCS Mr Aleksandar MARKOVIĆ Ms Jelena MILOŠEVIĆ Ms Biljana PANTIĆ PILJA Abstention Ms Dunja SIMONOVIĆ BRATIĆ In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms María FERNÁNDEZ Ms María Valentina MARTÍNEZ FERRO Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO Ms Esther PEÑA Mr Gonzalo ROBLES Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway Poland Poland Poland Poland Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Romania Romania Romania Romania San Marino Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain SOC SOC EPP/CD SOC UEL EC/DA EPP/CD EC/DA EC/DA EPP/CD SOC SOC EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD EC/DA NR ALDE UEL EPP/CD NR EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD SOC SOC EPP/CD SOC SOC EPP/CD https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39218/print 3/4 2/7/23, 6:17 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15677 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr José María SÁNCHEZ GARCÍA Ms Susana SUMELZO Ms Boriana ÅBERG Mr Adnan DIBRANI Mr Mattias JONSSON Mr Kristoffer LINDBERG Mr Markus WIECHEL Ms Sibel ARSLAN Mr Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ Mr Hannes GERMANN Mr Jean-Pierre GRIN Ms Emine Nur GÜNAY Mr Haluk KOÇ Ms Selin SAYEK BÖKE Mr Zeki Hakan SIDALI Ms Larysa BILOZIR Mr Yuriy KAMELCHUK Ms Olena KHOMENKO Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA Mr Dmytro NATALUKHA Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA Mr Serhii SOBOLIEV Ms Lesia VASYLENKO Spain Spain Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Lord George FOULKES United Kingdom EC/DA SOC EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC EC/DA SOC SOC ALDE ALDE NR SOC SOC ALDE ALDE EPP/CD EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD ALDE SOC Ms Jo GIDEON United Kingdom EC/DA Lord Leslie GRIFFITHS United Kingdom SOC Ms Sally-Ann HART Ms Ruth JONES Ms Jill MORTIMER Ms Kate OSAMOR United Kingdom EC/DA United Kingdom SOC United Kingdom EC/DA United Kingdom SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39218/print 4/4 2/7/23, 6:19 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15678 Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15678 Assembly's voting results The role and responsibility of men and boys in stopping gender-based violence against women and girls 80 in favor, 3 against, 1 abstention All participants in the vote Voting choice Member In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Petra BAYR Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA Mr Christophe LACROIX Mr Mogens JENSEN Ms Charlotte MUNCH Mr Alexander RYLE Mr Søren SØNDERGAARD Mr Indrek SAAR Ms Tarja FILATOV Ms Hilkka KEMPPI Mr Mika NIIKKO Mr François CALVET Ms Mireille CLAPOT Mr Emmanuel FERNANDES Mr Bernard FOURNIER Ms Liliana TANGUY Ms Khatia DEKANOIDZE Mr Frank SCHWABE Ms Derya TÜRK-NACHBAUR Ms Zita GURMAI Mr László TOROCZKAI Mr Björn Leví GUNNARSSON Ms Berglind Ósk GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR Ms Elena BONETTI Mr Piero FASSINO Country Austria Belgium Belgium Denmark Denmark Denmark Denmark Estonia Finland Finland Finland France France France France France Georgia Germany Germany Hungary Hungary Iceland Iceland Italy Italy Political group SOC SOC SOC SOC NR NR UEL SOC SOC ALDE EC/DA EPP/CD ALDE UEL EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC NR SOC EC/DA NR SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39287/print 1/3 SOC SOC SOC SOC SOC EC/DA SOC SOC EPP/CD ALDE SOC EC/DA ALDE SOC SOC SOC SOC UEL EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD 2/7/23, 6:19 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15678 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Aurora FLORIDIA Mr Andrea ORLANDO Mr Francesco VERDUCCI Ms Sandra ZAMPA Abstention Ms Aušrinė NORKIENĖ Ms Rita TAMAŠUNIENĖ Ms Romilda BALDACCHINO ZARB Ms Naomi CACHIA Mr José BADIA Ms Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO Ms Margreet De BOER Mr Bob van PAREREN Ms Petra STIENEN Italy Italy Italy Italy Lithuania Lithuania Malta Malta Monaco Monaco Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Ms Arta BILALLI ZENDELI North Macedonia Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN Mr Even ERIKSEN Ms Lise SELNES Mr Andreas Sjalg UNNELAND Mr Nuno CARVALHO Mr Pedro CEGONHO Ms Edite ESTRELA Ms Mara LAGRIMINHA Ms Isabel MEIRELLES Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA Norway Norway Norway Norway Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Ms Natalia DAVIDOVICI Republic of Moldova EPP/CD Mr Iulian BULAI Mr Corneliu-Mugurel COZMANCIUC Ms Maria-Gabriela HORGA Ms Daniela OTEŞANU Ms Elena-Simona SPĂTARU Ms Diana STOICA Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania Ms Marica MONTEMAGGI San Marino Ms Nerea AHEDO Ms Laura CASTEL Mr Antón GÓMEZ-REINO Spain Spain Spain ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD NR ALDE ALDE SOC ALDE UEL UEL Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39287/print 2/3 2/7/23, 6:19 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15678 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Pablo HISPÁN Ms María Valentina MARTÍNEZ FERRO Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO Ms Esther PEÑA Mr José María SÁNCHEZ GARCÍA Ms Susana SUMELZO Mr Adnan DIBRANI Mr Mattias JONSSON Mr Kristoffer LINDBERG Ms Jessica STEGRUD Ms Beatrice TIMGREN Ms Sibel ARSLAN Mr Jean-Pierre GRIN Ms Ada MARRA Ms Selin SAYEK BÖKE Ms Feleknas UCA Mr Pavlo BAKUNETS Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVYCH Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA Ms Lesia VASYLENKO Ms Lesia ZABURANNA Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Türkiye Türkiye Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Mr Jeremy CORBYN United Kingdom EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC SOC EC/DA SOC SOC SOC SOC EC/DA EC/DA SOC ALDE SOC SOC UEL NR EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD ALDE ALDE ALDE SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39287/print 3/3 2/7/23, 6:18 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15679 Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15679 Assembly's voting results Finding solutions for marital captivity 77 in favor, 3 against, 3 abstentions All participants in the vote Voting choice Member In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Petra BAYR Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA Mr Christophe LACROIX Mr Mogens JENSEN Ms Charlotte MUNCH Mr Alexander RYLE Mr Søren SØNDERGAARD Mr Indrek SAAR Ms Tarja FILATOV Ms Hilkka KEMPPI Mr Mika NIIKKO Mr François CALVET Ms Mireille CLAPOT Mr Emmanuel FERNANDES Mr Bernard FOURNIER Ms Liliana TANGUY Ms Khatia DEKANOIDZE Mr Frank SCHWABE Ms Derya TÜRK-NACHBAUR Ms Zita GURMAI Mr László TOROCZKAI Mr Björn Leví GUNNARSSON Ms Berglind Ósk GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR Mr Piero FASSINO Ms Aurora FLORIDIA Country Austria Belgium Belgium Denmark Denmark Denmark Denmark Estonia Finland Finland Finland France France France France France Georgia Germany Germany Hungary Hungary Iceland Iceland Italy Italy Political group SOC SOC SOC SOC NR NR UEL SOC SOC ALDE EC/DA EPP/CD ALDE UEL EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC NR SOC EC/DA SOC SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39288/print 1/3 2/7/23, 6:18 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15679 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour Mr Andrea ORLANDO Mr Francesco VERDUCCI Ms Sandra ZAMPA Abstention Ms Aušrinė NORKIENĖ Ms Rita TAMAŠUNIENĖ Ms Romilda BALDACCHINO ZARB Ms Naomi CACHIA Mr José BADIA Ms Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO Ms Margreet De BOER Mr Bob van PAREREN Ms Petra STIENEN Italy Italy Italy Lithuania Lithuania Malta Malta Monaco Monaco Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Ms Arta BILALLI ZENDELI North Macedonia Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN Mr Even ERIKSEN Ms Lise SELNES Mr Andreas Sjalg UNNELAND Mr Nuno CARVALHO Mr Pedro CEGONHO Ms Edite ESTRELA Ms Mara LAGRIMINHA Ms Isabel MEIRELLES Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA Norway Norway Norway Norway Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Mr Iulian BULAI Mr Corneliu-Mugurel COZMANCIUC Ms Maria-Gabriela HORGA Ms Daniela OTEŞANU Ms Elena-Simona SPĂTARU Ms Diana STOICA Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania Ms Marica MONTEMAGGI San Marino Ms Natalia DAVIDOVICI Republic of Moldova EPP/CD Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour SOC SOC SOC SOC EC/DA SOC SOC EPP/CD ALDE SOC EC/DA ALDE SOC SOC SOC SOC UEL EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD NR ALDE ALDE SOC ALDE UEL UEL EPP/CD Ms Nerea AHEDO Ms Laura CASTEL Mr Antón GÓMEZ-REINO Abstention Mr Pablo HISPÁN Spain Spain Spain Spain https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39288/print 2/3 2/7/23, 6:18 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15679 Voting choice Member Country Political group Abstention Ms María Valentina MARTÍNEZ FERRO In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO Ms Esther PEÑA Mr José María SÁNCHEZ GARCÍA Ms Susana SUMELZO Mr Adnan DIBRANI Mr Mattias JONSSON Mr Kristoffer LINDBERG Ms Jessica STEGRUD Ms Beatrice TIMGREN Ms Sibel ARSLAN Mr Jean-Pierre GRIN Ms Ada MARRA Ms Selin SAYEK BÖKE Ms Feleknas UCA Mr Pavlo BAKUNETS Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVYCH Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA Ms Lesia VASYLENKO Ms Lesia ZABURANNA Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Türkiye Türkiye Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine EPP/CD SOC SOC EC/DA SOC SOC SOC SOC EC/DA EC/DA SOC ALDE SOC SOC UEL NR EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD ALDE ALDE ALDE SOC Mr Jeremy CORBYN United Kingdom https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39288/print 3/3 Vote on Current Affairs Debate - Doc.
15665 Assembly's voting results First part of the 2023 Ordinary Session (23-27 January 2023) 91 in favor, 13 against, 13 abstentions All participants in the vote Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against Against Against Against Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Klotilda BUSHKA Ms Etilda GJONAJ Ms Mònica BONELL Mr Armen GEVORGYAN Ms Arusyak JULHAKYAN Mr Ruben RUBINYAN Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN Ms Doris BURES Ms Andrea EDER-GITSCHTHALER Mr Martin GRAF Mr Reinhold LOPATKA Ms Nigar ARPADARAI Mr Rafael HUSEYNOV Mr Kamal JAFAROV Mr Asim MOLLAZADA Mr Samad SEYIDOV Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA Mr Bob De BRABANDERE Mr Christophe LACROIX Mr Simon MOUTQUIN Ms Sophie WILMES Mr Davor Ivo STIER Ms Eva DECROIX Mr Søren SØNDERGAARD Mr Eerik-Niiles KROSS Mr Indrek SAAR Albania Albania Andorra Armenia Armenia Armenia Armenia Austria Austria Austria Austria Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Belgium Belgium Belgium Belgium Belgium Croatia SOC SOC ALDE EC/DA EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD EC/DA EPP/CD EC/DA ALDE EC/DA EC/DA EC/DA SOC EC/DA SOC SOC ALDE EPP/CD Czech Republic EC/DA Denmark Estonia Estonia UEL ALDE SOC Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Inka HOPSU Mr Kimmo KILJUNEN Mr Bertrand BOUYX Ms Mireille CLAPOT Mr Emmanuel FERNANDES Mr Joël GIRAUD Ms Marietta KARAMANLI Mr Claude KERN Ms Anne STAMBACH-TERRENOIR Abstention Ms Khatia TSILOSANI In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Knut ABRAHAM Mr Andrej HUNKO Mr Axel SCHÄFER Mr Frank SCHWABE Mr Harald WEYEL Mr George KATROUGALOS Mr George PAPANDREOU Mr Gergely ARATÓ Ms
 Thórhildur Sunna ÆVARSDÓTTIR Ms Fiona O'LOUGHLIN Mr Joseph O'REILLY Mr Alfredo ANTONIOZZI Ms Elena BONETTI Mr Dimitri COIN Mr Piero FASSINO Ms Aurora FLORIDIA Ms Elisabetta GARDINI Mr Ettore Antonio LICHERI Mr Fabio PIETRELLA Mr Marco SCURRIA Ms Domenica SPINELLI Mr Hubert BÜCHEL Ms Franziska HOOP Ms Aušrinė NORKIENĖ Mr Gusty GRAAS Finland Finland France France France France France France France Georgia Germany Germany Germany Germany Germany Greece Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Ireland Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg SOC SOC ALDE ALDE UEL ALDE SOC ALDE UEL SOC EPP/CD UEL SOC SOC EC/DA UEL SOC SOC SOC ALDE EPP/CD EC/DA NR EC/DA SOC NR EC/DA NR EC/DA EC/DA EC/DA ALDE ALDE SOC ALDE Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Romilda BALDACCHINO ZARB Mr José BADIA Ms Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO Malta Monaco Monaco Mr Caspar Van den BERG Netherlands SOC EPP/CD ALDE ALDE Ms Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN Netherlands EPP/CD Mr Bob van PAREREN Ms Petra STIENEN Mr Darko KAEVSKI Netherlands Netherlands North Macedonia Abstention Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour Against In favour In favour Mr Even ERIKSEN Ms Ingjerd SCHOU Ms Lise SELNES Ms Ingvild Wetrhus THORSVIK Mr Nuno CARVALHO Mr Pedro CEGONHO Ms Edite ESTRELA Ms Mara LAGRIMINHA Mr Paulo PISCO Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA Mr Iulian BULAI Mr Titus CORLĂŢEAN Mr Sorin-Titus MUNCACIU Ms Daniela OTEŞANU Mr Ionuț-Marian STROE Ms Marica MONTEMAGGI Mr Marco NICOLINI Abstention Ms Dubravka FILIPOVSKI In favour Mr Stefan JOVANOVIĆ Abstention Ms Elvira KOVÁCS Abstention Abstention Abstention In favour In favour In favour Mr Aleksandar MARKOVIĆ Ms Jelena MILOŠEVIĆ Ms Biljana PANTIĆ PILJA Ms Nerea AHEDO Ms María Valentina MARTÍNEZ FERRO Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO Norway Norway
 Norway Norway Norway Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania San Marino San Marino Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Spain Spain Spain EC/DA ALDE SOC SOC SOC EPP/CD SOC ALDE EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC SOC EPP/CD ALDE SOC EC/DA NR EPP/CD SOC UEL EPP/CD NR EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD SOC Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against Against Against Against Mr Gonzalo ROBLES Ms Boriana ÅBERG Mr Mattias JONSSON Mr Kristoffer LINDBERG Mr Roland Rino BÜCHEL Mr Damien COTTIER Mr Hannes GERMANN Mr Jean-Pierre GRIN Ms Ada MARRA Mr Ahmet BÜYÜKGÜMÜŞ Ms Emine Nur GÜNAY Mr Zeki Hakan SIDALI Mr Ahmet YILDIZ Abstention Ms Larysa BILOZIR Abstention Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVYCH In favour Abstention Abstention Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA Abstention Mr Serhii SOBOLIEV Abstention Ms Lesia ZABURANNA Spain Sweden Sweden Sweden Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine In favour Mr Ian LIDDELL-GRAINGER United Kingdom EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC SOC ALDE ALDE ALDE ALDE SOC NR NR ALDE NR ALDE EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD ALDE EC/DA 2/7/23, 6:22 PM Vote on Recommendation - Doc.
15673 Vote on Recommendation - Doc.
15673 Assembly's voting results The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges 79 in favor, 3 against, 1 abstention All participants in the vote Voting choice Member In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Petra BAYR Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA Mr Christophe LACROIX Mr Mogens JENSEN Ms Charlotte MUNCH Mr Alexander RYLE Mr Søren SØNDERGAARD Mr Indrek SAAR Ms Tarja FILATOV Ms Hilkka KEMPPI Mr Mika NIIKKO Mr François CALVET Ms Mireille CLAPOT Mr Emmanuel FERNANDES Mr Bernard FOURNIER Ms Liliana TANGUY Ms Khatia DEKANOIDZE Mr Frank SCHWABE Ms Derya TÜRK-NACHBAUR Ms Zita GURMAI Mr László TOROCZKAI Mr Björn Leví GUNNARSSON Ms Berglind Ósk GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR Ms Elena BONETTI Mr Piero FASSINO Country Austria Belgium Belgium Denmark Denmark Denmark Denmark Estonia Finland Finland Finland France France France France France Georgia Germany Germany Hungary Hungary Iceland Iceland Italy Italy Political group SOC SOC SOC SOC NR NR UEL SOC SOC ALDE EC/DA EPP/CD ALDE UEL EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC NR SOC EC/DA NR SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39286/print 1/3 SOC SOC SOC SOC SOC EC/DA SOC SOC EPP/CD ALDE SOC EC/DA ALDE SOC SOC SOC SOC UEL EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD 2/7/23, 6:22 PM Vote on Recommendation - Doc.
15673 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Aurora FLORIDIA Mr Andrea ORLANDO Mr Francesco VERDUCCI Ms Sandra ZAMPA Abstention Ms Aušrinė NORKIENĖ Ms Rita TAMAŠUNIENĖ Ms Romilda BALDACCHINO ZARB Ms Naomi CACHIA Mr José BADIA Ms Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO Ms Margreet De BOER Mr Bob van PAREREN Ms Petra STIENEN Italy Italy Italy Italy Lithuania Lithuania Malta Malta Monaco Monaco Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Ms Arta BILALLI ZENDELI North Macedonia Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN Mr Even ERIKSEN Ms Lise SELNES Mr Andreas Sjalg UNNELAND Mr Nuno CARVALHO Mr Pedro CEGONHO Ms Edite ESTRELA Ms Mara LAGRIMINHA Ms Isabel MEIRELLES Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA Norway Norway Norway Norway Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Ms Natalia DAVIDOVICI Republic of Moldova EPP/CD Mr Iulian BULAI Mr Corneliu-Mugurel COZMANCIUC Ms Maria-Gabriela HORGA Ms Daniela OTEŞANU Ms Elena-Simona SPĂTARU Ms Diana STOICA Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania Ms Marica MONTEMAGGI San Marino Ms Nerea AHEDO Ms Laura CASTEL Mr Antón GÓMEZ-REINO Spain Spain Spain ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD NR ALDE ALDE SOC ALDE UEL UEL Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39286/print 2/3 2/7/23, 6:22 PM Vote on Recommendation - Doc.
15673 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Pablo HISPÁN Ms María Valentina MARTÍNEZ FERRO Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO Ms Esther PEÑA Mr José María SÁNCHEZ GARCÍA Ms Susana SUMELZO Mr Adnan DIBRANI Mr Mattias JONSSON Mr Kristoffer LINDBERG Ms Jessica STEGRUD Ms Beatrice TIMGREN Ms Sibel ARSLAN Mr Jean-Pierre GRIN Ms Ada MARRA Ms Selin SAYEK BÖKE Ms Feleknas UCA Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVYCH Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA Ms Lesia VASYLENKO Ms Lesia ZABURANNA Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Türkiye Türkiye Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Mr Jeremy CORBYN United Kingdom EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC SOC EC/DA SOC SOC SOC SOC EC/DA EC/DA SOC ALDE SOC SOC UEL EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD ALDE ALDE ALDE SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39286/print 3/3 2/7/23, 6:16 PM Vote on Recommendation - Doc.
15681 Vote on Recommendation - Doc.
15681 Assembly's voting results The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges 101 in favor, 1 against, 5 abstentions All participants in the vote Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Etilda GJONAJ Ms Mònica BONELL Mr Eduard KÖCK Mr Reinhold LOPATKA Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA Mr Rik DAEMS Mr Christophe LACROIX Ms Marijana BALIĆ Ms Zdravka BUŠIĆ Mr Davor Ivo STIER Ms Eva DECROIX Mr David SMOLJAK Mr Mogens JENSEN Mr Alexander RYLE Ms Tarja FILATOV Mr Kimmo KILJUNEN Mr Mika NIIKKO Mr Bertrand BOUYX Mr François CALVET Ms Marie-Christine DALLOZ Mr Bernard FOURNIER Mr Joël GIRAUD Ms Sylvie GOY-CHAVENT Ms Marietta KARAMANLI Abstention Mr Alain MILON Albania Andorra Austria Austria Belgium Belgium Belgium Croatia Croatia Croatia SOC ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC ALDE SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD Czech Republic EC/DA Czech Republic Denmark Denmark Finland Finland Finland France France France France France France France France NR SOC NR SOC SOC EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39225/print 1/4 2/7/23, 6:16 PM Vote on Recommendation - Doc.
15681 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Nathalie SERRE Mr Irakli CHIKOVANI Ms Khatia DEKANOIDZE Ms Eka SEPASHVILI Ms Khatia TSILOSANI Mr Andrej HUNKO Mr Norbert KLEINWÄCHTER Mr Max LUCKS Mr Frank SCHWABE Mr Gergely ARATÓ Mr Koloman BRENNER Ms Boglárka ILLÉS Mr Zsolt NÉMETH Mr Barna Pál ZSIGMOND Mr Bjarni JÓNSSON Mr Thomas PRINGLE Mr Robert TROY Ms Elena BONETTI Abstention Mr Dimitri COIN In favour In favour In favour Ms Aurora FLORIDIA Ms Elisabetta GARDINI Mr Andrea ORLANDO Abstention Ms Domenica SPINELLI Mr Francesco VERDUCCI Mr Hubert BÜCHEL Ms Franziska HOOP Mr Joseph Beppe FENECH ADAMI Mr José BADIA Ms Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO Mr Caspar Van den BERG Mr Bob van PAREREN Ms Petra STIENEN In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour France Georgia Georgia Georgia Georgia Germany Germany Germany Germany Hungary Hungary Hungary Hungary Hungary Iceland Ireland Ireland Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Malta Monaco Monaco Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD NR SOC UEL EC/DA SOC SOC SOC NR EC/DA EC/DA EC/DA UEL UEL ALDE NR EC/DA SOC EC/DA SOC EC/DA SOC ALDE ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD ALDE ALDE EC/DA ALDE Mr Aleksandar NIKOLOSKI North Macedonia EPP/CD Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN Mr Even ERIKSEN Norway Norway SOC SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39225/print 2/4 2/7/23, 6:16 PM Vote on Recommendation - Doc.
15681 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Ingjerd SCHOU Ms Ingvild Wetrhus THORSVIK Mr Andreas Sjalg UNNELAND Mr Nuno CARVALHO Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA Mr Iulian BULAI Mr Titus CORLĂŢEAN Mr Corneliu-Mugurel COZMANCIUC Ms Maria-Gabriela HORGA Ms Elena-Simona SPĂTARU Ms Diana STOICA Mr Ionuț-Marian STROE Ms Nerea AHEDO Ms María FERNÁNDEZ Ms María Valentina MARTÍNEZ FERRO Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO Ms Esther PEÑA Mr Gonzalo ROBLES Abstention Mr José María SÁNCHEZ GARCÍA In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Susana SUMELZO Mr Adnan DIBRANI Mr Gustaf GÖTHBERG Mr Mattias JONSSON Mr Kristoffer LINDBERG Ms Beatrice TIMGREN Abstention Mr Roland Rino BÜCHEL In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Damien COTTIER Mr Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ Mr Hannes GERMANN Ms Ada MARRA Mr Ahmet BÜYÜKGÜMÜŞ Mr Ahmet Ünal ÇEVİKÖZ Mr Mehmet Mehdi EKER Mr Yunus EMRE Mr Haluk KOÇ Norway Norway Norway Portugal Portugal Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye EPP/CD ALDE UEL EPP/CD EPP/CD ALDE SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD ALDE ALDE EPP/CD ALDE SOC EPP/CD SOC SOC EPP/CD EC/DA SOC SOC EPP/CD SOC SOC EC/DA ALDE ALDE SOC ALDE SOC NR SOC NR SOC SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39225/print 3/4 2/7/23, 6:16 PM Vote on Recommendation - Doc.
15681 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Selin SAYEK BÖKE Mr Pavlo BAKUNETS Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO Mr Yuriy KAMELCHUK Ms Olena KHOMENKO Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVYCH Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA Ms Lesia VASYLENKO Ms Yelyzaveta YASKO Sir Edward LEIGH Türkiye Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine SOC NR EC/DA EPP/CD EC/DA EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD ALDE ALDE EPP/CD United Kingdom EC/DA https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39225/print 4/4 2/7/23, 6:15 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15591 Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15591 Assembly's voting results Addressing the issue of Daesh foreign fighters and their families returning from Syria and other countries to the member States of the Council of Europe 101 in favor, 6 against, 15 abstentions All participants in the vote Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against Ms Klotilda BUSHKA Ms Etilda GJONAJ Ms Mònica BONELL Ms Andrea EDER-GITSCHTHALER Mr Franz Leonhard ESSL Mr Reinhold LOPATKA Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA Mr Bob De BRABANDERE Abstention Mr Rik DAEMS In favour Mr Christophe LACROIX Abstention Ms Sophie WILMES In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Stanislav ANASTASSOV Ms Marijana BALIĆ Mr Davor Ivo STIER Mr David SMOLJAK Mr Mogens JENSEN Abstention Ms Charlotte MUNCH Abstention Mr Søren SØNDERGAARD In favour Against Ms Inka HOPSU Mr Bertrand BOUYX Abstention Ms Mireille CLAPOT In favour In favour Against In favour Ms Marie-Christine DALLOZ Mr Emmanuel FERNANDES Mr Joël GIRAUD Ms Sylvie GOY-CHAVENT Albania Albania Andorra Austria Austria Austria Belgium Belgium Belgium Belgium Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Croatia Czech Republic Denmark Denmark Denmark Finland France France France France France France SOC SOC ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC EC/DA ALDE SOC ALDE ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD NR SOC NR UEL SOC ALDE ALDE EPP/CD UEL ALDE EPP/CD https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39194/print 1/4 2/7/23, 6:15 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15591 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour Ms Marietta KARAMANLI Abstention Mr Jacques LE NAY Abstention Mr Alain MILON In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr André VALLINI Mr Knut ABRAHAM Ms Heike ENGELHARDT Mr Andrej HUNKO Mr Armin LASCHET Mr Max LUCKS Mr Harald WEYEL Mr George PAPANDREOU Mr Gergely ARATÓ Ms Mónika BARTOS Mr László TOROCZKAI Ms Thórhildur Sunna ÆVARSDÓTTIR Ms Deborah BERGAMINI Ms Elena BONETTI Mr Dimitri COIN Mr Piero FASSINO Ms Aurora FLORIDIA Ms Elisabetta GARDINI Mr Ettore Antonio LICHERI Mr Fabio PIETRELLA Mr Marco SCURRIA Mr Francesco VERDUCCI Abstention Ms Ieva BRANTE Mr Edmunds CEPURĪTIS Mr Normunds DZINTARS Mr Hubert BÜCHEL Ms Franziska HOOP Mr Arminas LYDEKA Ms Aušrinė NORKIENĖ Ms Rita TAMAŠUNIENĖ In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour France France France France Germany Germany Germany Germany Germany Germany Greece Hungary Hungary Hungary Iceland Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Latvia Latvia Latvia Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania SOC ALDE EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD SOC UEL EPP/CD SOC EC/DA SOC SOC EC/DA NR SOC NR NR EC/DA SOC NR EC/DA NR EC/DA EC/DA SOC NR SOC EC/DA ALDE ALDE ALDE SOC EC/DA SOC EPP/CD Ms Cécile HEMMEN Luxembourg Mr Joseph Beppe FENECH ADAMI Malta https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39194/print 2/4 2/7/23, 6:15 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15591 Voting choice Member Abstention Ms Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Margreet De BOER Ms Agnes MULDER Mr Pieter OMTZIGT Mr Bob van PAREREN Ms Petra STIENEN Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN Mr Even ERIKSEN Ms Lise SELNES Abstention Ms Ingvild Wetrhus THORSVIK In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Against In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Marek BOROWSKI Mr Daniel MILEWSKI Mr Nuno CARVALHO Mr Pedro CEGONHO Ms Edite ESTRELA Ms Mara LAGRIMINHA Ms Isabel MEIRELLES Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA Mr Corneliu-Mugurel COZMANCIUC Ms Maria-Gabriela HORGA Mr Sorin-Titus MUNCACIU Ms Daniela OTEŞANU Mr Ionuț-Marian STROE Ms Marica MONTEMAGGI Mr Marco NICOLINI Ms Dubravka FILIPOVSKI Ms Elvira KOVÁCS Ms Jelena MILOŠEVIĆ Ms Biljana PANTIĆ PILJA Ms Dunja SIMONOVIĆ BRATIĆ Abstention Ms Nerea AHEDO Country Monaco Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Norway Norway Norway Norway Poland Poland Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Romania Romania Romania Romania Romania San Marino San Marino Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Spain Spain Spain Spain Political group ALDE SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD EC/DA ALDE SOC SOC SOC ALDE EPP/CD EC/DA EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD EC/DA NR EPP/CD SOC UEL EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD SOC ALDE SOC EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms María FERNÁNDEZ Ms María Valentina MARTÍNEZ FERRO Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO Ms Boriana ÅBERG Sweden https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39194/print 3/4 2/7/23, 6:15 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15591 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Mattias JONSSON Mr Kristoffer LINDBERG Ms Beatrice TIMGREN Mr Markus WIECHEL Ms Sibel ARSLAN Abstention Mr Roland Rino BÜCHEL Abstention Mr Damien COTTIER In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ Mr Hannes GERMANN Ms Ada MARRA Mr Ahmet Ünal ÇEVİKÖZ Abstention Mr Mehmet Mehdi EKER In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Yunus EMRE Mr Hişyar ÖZSOY Ms Selin SAYEK BÖKE Ms Feleknas UCA Abstention Mr Ahmet YILDIZ In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Pavlo BAKUNETS Mr Yuriy KAMELCHUK Ms Olena KHOMENKO Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVYCH Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA Mr Serhii SOBOLIEV Ms Lesia ZABURANNA Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine SOC SOC EC/DA EC/DA SOC ALDE ALDE SOC ALDE SOC SOC NR SOC UEL SOC UEL NR NR EPP/CD EC/DA EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD ALDE SOC Lord Leslie GRIFFITHS United Kingdom https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39194/print 4/4 2/7/23, 6:22 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15648 Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15648 Assembly's voting results Contact tracing applications: ethical, cultural and educational challenges 104 in favor, 0 against, 3 abstentions All participants in the vote Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Klotilda BUSHKA Ms Etilda GJONAJ Ms Blerina GJYLAMETI Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN Mr Eduard KÖCK Mr Stefan SCHENNACH Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA Ms Karin BROUWERS Mr Christophe LACROIX Mr Simon MOUTQUIN Mr Domagoj HAJDUKOVIĆ Mr Constantinos EFSTATHIOU Ms Eva DECROIX Mr David SMOLJAK Ms Charlotte MUNCH Mr Alexander RYLE Mr Søren SØNDERGAARD Ms Tarja FILATOV Ms Inka HOPSU Ms Hilkka KEMPPI Mr Kimmo KILJUNEN Ms Mai KIVELÄ Mr François CALVET Ms Mireille CLAPOT Ms Marie-Christine DALLOZ Albania Albania Albania Armenia Austria Austria Belgium Belgium Belgium Belgium Croatia Cyprus SOC SOC SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC SOC EPP/CD SOC SOC SOC SOC Czech Republic EC/DA Czech Republic Denmark Denmark Denmark Finland Finland Finland Finland Finland France France France NR NR NR UEL SOC SOC ALDE SOC UEL EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39284/print 1/4 2/7/23, 6:22 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15648 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Emmanuel FERNANDES Mr Bernard FOURNIER Mr Joël GIRAUD Ms Marietta KARAMANLI Mr Alain MILON Ms Anne STAMBACH-TERRENOIR Ms Khatia DEKANOIDZE Mr Andrej HUNKO Mr Kriton-Ilias ARSENIS Mr Attila TILKI Abstention Mr László TOROCZKAI In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Abstention Abstention In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Björn Leví GUNNARSSON Ms Berglind Ósk GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR Mr Bjarni JÓNSSON Ms Aurora FLORIDIA Ms Elisabetta GARDINI Mr Ettore Antonio LICHERI Mr Arnaldo LOMUTI Mr Andrea ORLANDO Mr Fabio PIETRELLA Ms Domenica SPINELLI Mr Francesco VERDUCCI Mr Hubert BÜCHEL Ms Franziska HOOP Mr Arminas LYDEKA Ms Aušrinė NORKIENĖ Ms Rita TAMAŠUNIENĖ Ms Cécile HEMMEN Mr Max HENGEL Ms Octavie MODERT Mr Joseph Beppe FENECH ADAMI Mr José BADIA Ms Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN Mr Even ERIKSEN France France France France France France Georgia Germany Greece Hungary Hungary Iceland Iceland Iceland Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Italy Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Luxembourg Luxembourg Luxembourg Malta Monaco Monaco Norway Norway UEL EPP/CD ALDE SOC EPP/CD UEL EPP/CD UEL UEL EC/DA NR SOC EC/DA UEL SOC EC/DA NR NR SOC EC/DA EC/DA SOC ALDE ALDE ALDE SOC EC/DA SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD ALDE SOC SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39284/print 2/4 2/7/23, 6:22 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15648 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Ms Ingjerd SCHOU Mr Andreas Sjalg UNNELAND Mr Nuno CARVALHO Mr Pedro CEGONHO Ms Edite ESTRELA Ms Isabel MEIRELLES Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA Mr Sorin-Titus MUNCACIU Ms Daniela OTEŞANU Norway Norway Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Portugal Romania Romania Ms Marica MONTEMAGGI San Marino Ms Dubravka FILIPOVSKI Ms Elvira KOVÁCS Mr Aleksandar MARKOVIĆ Ms Biljana PANTIĆ PILJA Ms Laura CASTEL Ms María FERNÁNDEZ Mr Antonio GUTIÉRREZ LIMONES Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO Ms Esther PEÑA Mr Gonzalo ROBLES Mr José María SÁNCHEZ GARCÍA Ms Susana SUMELZO Serbia Serbia Serbia Serbia Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain Spain EPP/CD UEL EPP/CD SOC SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD EC/DA NR SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD EPP/CD UEL SOC SOC SOC SOC EPP/CD EC/DA SOC Mr Gustaf GÖTHBERG Sweden EPP/CD Ms Sibel ARSLAN Ms Marina CAROBBIO GUSCETTI Mr Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland SOC SOC SOC Mr Jean-Pierre GRIN Switzerland ALDE Mr Niklaus-Samuel GUGGER Switzerland EPP/CD Mr Ahmet BÜYÜKGÜMÜŞ Mr Mehmet Mehdi EKER Mr Yunus EMRE Mr Haluk KOÇ Ms Selin SAYEK BÖKE Ms Feleknas UCA Ms Larysa BILOZIR Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Türkiye Ukraine NR NR SOC SOC SOC UEL ALDE https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39284/print 3/4 2/7/23, 6:22 PM Vote on Resolution - Doc.
15648 Voting choice Member Country Political group In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour In favour Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO Mr Yuriy KAMELCHUK Ms Olena KHOMENKO Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK Mr Oleksandr MEREZHKO Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA Mr Serhii SOBOLIEV Ms Lesia VASYLENKO Ms Lesia ZABURANNA Mr Duncan BAKER Mr Jeremy CORBYN Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine EC/DA EPP/CD EC/DA ALDE EC/DA EPP/CD ALDE EPP/CD ALDE ALDE United Kingdom EC/DA United Kingdom SOC https://pace.coe.int/en/votes/39284/print 4/4 Speakers list / Liste des orateurs Issued at 08.10 / Distribuée à 08h10 Debate: Wednesday 25 January 2023 1.
Environmental impact of armed conflicts • HOWELL, John [Mr] (United Kingdom, EC/DA), Rapporteur; Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development (Doc.

15674) Débat : mercredi 25 janvier 2023 1.

Impact environnemental et conflits armés • HOWELL, John [M.] (Royaume-Uni, CE/AD), Rapporteur; Commission des questions sociales, de la santé et du développement durable (Doc.
15674) Speakers on behalf of political groups / Orateurs au nom des groupes politiques UEL / GUE SOC KIVELÄ, Mai [Ms] Finland / Finlande CORBYN, Jeremy [Mr] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni EPP/CD / PPE/DC YASKO, Yelyzaveta [Ms] ALDE / ADLE EC/DA / CE/AD OVCHYNNYKOVA, Yuliia [Ms] GONCHARENKO, Oleksii [Mr] Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine Speakers list / Liste des orateurs SOC ARATÓ, Gergely [Mr] Hungary / Hongrie EPP/CD / PPE/DC JULHAKYAN, Arusyak [Ms] Armenia / Arménie ALDE / ADLE HUSEYNOV, Rafael [Mr] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan EC/DA / CE/AD ZSIGMOND, Barna Pál [Mr] Hungary / Hongrie SOC BAYR, Petra [Ms] Austria / Autriche EPP/CD / PPE/DC DEKANOIDZE, Khatia [Ms] Georgia / Géorgie NR / NI SOC SOC ALTUNYALDIZ, Ziya [Mr] Türkiye JONES, Ruth [Ms] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni BOER*, Margreet De[Ms] Netherlands / Pays-Bas EPP/CD / PPE/DC CARVALHO, Nuno [Mr] ALDE / ADLE VASYLENKO, Lesia [Ms] Portugal Ukraine EC/DA / CE/AD ILLÉS, Boglárka [Ms] Hungary / Hongrie EPP/CD / PPE/DC RUBINYAN, Ruben [Mr] Armenia / Arménie SOC ARSLAN, Sibel [Ms] Switzerland / Suisse EPP/CD / PPE/DC MILON, Alain [M.] France F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 | Fax: +33 3 88 41 2733 Speakers list / liste des orateurs Speakers list / Liste des orateurs ALDE / ADLE GRIN, Jean-Pierre [M.] Switzerland / Suisse EC/DA / CE/AD ARPADARAI, Nigar [Ms] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan UEL / GUE GAVAN, Paul [Mr] Ireland / Irlande OTHER.DEL / AUTRE.DEL TAHIRI, Besnik [Mr] Assembly of Kosovo* / Assemblée du Kosovo* SOC HOPSU, Inka [Ms] Finland / Finlande EPP/CD / PPE/DC ROCHA FERREIRA, Catarina [Ms] Portugal ALDE / ADLE CLAPOT, Mireille [Mme] France SOC DAVIES, Geraint [Mr] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni EC/DA / CE/AD NURULLAYEVA, Konul [Ms] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan EPP/CD / PPE/DC VARDANYAN, Vladimir [Mr] Armenia / Arménie SOC RUSTAMYAN, Armen [M.] Armenia / Arménie EPP/CD / PPE/DC KAMELCHUK, Yuriy [Mr] ALDE / ADLE
 BILOZIR, Larysa [Ms] Ukraine Ukraine EC/DA / CE/AD GADIRLI, Erkin [Mr] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan SOC HAJDUKOVIĆ, Domagoj [Mr] Croatia / Croatie EPP/CD / PPE/DC NIKOLOSKI, Aleksandar [Mr] North Macedonia / Macédoine du Nord SOC VUČINIĆ, Maksim [Mr] Montenegro / Monténégro EPP/CD / PPE/DC FENECH ADAMI, Joseph Beppe [Mr] Malta / Malte EC/DA / CE/AD FATALIYEVA, Sevinj [Ms] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan UEL / GUE JÓNSSON, Bjarni [Mr] OBS.
MONTEMAYOR CASTILLO, Santy [Ms] Iceland / Islande Mexico / Mexique EC/DA / CE/AD GANJALIYEV, Tural [Mr] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan EC/DA / CE/AD LEIGH, Edward [Sir] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni EC/DA / CE/AD BLENCATHRA, David [Lord] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni UEL / GUE UNNELAND, Andreas Sjalg [Mr] Norway / Norvège EC/DA / CE/AD MORRIS, David [Mr] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni EC/DA / CE/AD GIDEON, Jo [Ms] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni EC/DA / CE/AD KHOMENKO, Olena [Ms] Ukraine UEL / GUE PRINGLE, Thomas [Mr] Ireland / Irlande EC/DA / CE/AD NATALUKHA, Dmytro [Mr] Ukraine EC/DA / CE/AD TIMGREN, Beatrice [Ms] Sweden / Suède *Moved up 3 positions (Additional provisions relating to Assembly debates, Rules of Procedure, page 108, paragraph 10) / Placé trois rangs plus haut (dispositions complémentaires relatives aux débats de l’Assemblée, Règlement, p. 109, paragraphe 10).
*Following the Bureau decision of 12 September 2022.

All reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population, shall be understood in full compliance with United Nations Security Council 2 Speakers list / liste des orateurs Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo / À la suite de la décision prise par le Bureau le 12 septembre 2022.
Toute référence au Kosovo, qu’il s’agisse du territoire, des institutions ou de la population, doit être comprise dans le plein respect de la résolution 1244 du Conseil de Sécurité des Nations Unies et sans préjudice du statut du Kosovo.

3 Provisional edition Wednesday 25 January 2023, morning Official report of debates Debate: Environmental impact of armed conflicts Mr Joseph Beppe FENECH ADAMI (Malta, EPP/CD): (Undelivered speech, Rules of Procedure Art.
31.2) Mr President as we speak this morning a war rages in the Ukraine.

A war which has left thousands of innocent citizen dead on both sides.

As we speak cities are being destroyed.

As we speak the infrastructure of the whole country is being razed to the ground.

As we speak the environment in the Ukraine is one of the biggest casualties effecting both human health and local ecosystems.
As reported, stretches of forest have been destroyed, targeted attacks on storage facililties and depots have led to leaks of fuel and industrial waste into rivers, ground water and sewage systems.

Reports speak agricultural fields contaminated by gasoline, and rivers where the natural habitat has suffocated under oil slicks.

To date Russian forces threaten nuclear energy plants.
With a steady barrage of strikes on refineries, chemical plants, energy facilities, industrial depots and pipelines, the country's air, water and soil have been polluted by toxic substances There are reports of damage to water supply infrastructure with millions of people in Ukraine currently having limited or no access to safe water.

This savage war has once again reminded us that armed conflicts cause so many casualties.

So many victims and the environment is one of them.
Mr President This is history repeating itself We all recall, the environmental damage cause by Iraq in the Gulf war in the 1990’s.

Then, the Iraqi forces deliberately caused Environmental catastrophe with approximately 3.5 million tons of crude oil released into the desert and 800,000 tons of oil spilled into the Persian Gulf.

Then in the desert, 250 oil lakes covered 50 square kilometers , as a result of the sixty million barrels of spilling from the burning oil wells.
Then an estimated six to eight million barrels of oil polluted the marine environment.

The Coast coast suffered over 100 miles of damage.

Oil, 15 inches deep in certain areas, destroyed the nesting grounds for endangered sea turtles and birds, fisheries, and shrimp-spawning areas.

Beaches, tide had been damaged, and thousands of bird species were killed.
Following the Gulf War of the early 90s, the U.N. Security Council voted to force Iraq to pay reparations to Kuwait, “including environmental damage,” which ultimately amounted to about three billion dollars of Iraq’s $52 billion post-war financial obligation.

Iraq finished paying off this debt only last February.

In this report: 1.

Speeches in English, French, German and Italian are reported in full in English.

2.
2.

Speeches in other languages are summarised from the interpretation and indicated by an asterisk (*).

3.

Speeches in German and Italian are available in full on the Assembly's website.

4.

The text of the amendments is available at the document centre and on the Assembly’s website.

Only oral amendments or oral sub-amendments are reproduced in the report of debates.

5. Corrections should be handed in at Room 1081 not later than 24 hours after the report has been published.
F - 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: +33 3 88 41 2000 | assembly.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Today thirty plus years after the Gulf war, war still rages in different parts of the world.

Today a war rages in the heart of Europe I am sure Mr President that the war in the Ukariane will come to an end and the Ukraine will triumph.

Post-war reconstruction will be a monumental task and will require comprehensive, well co-ordinated and well-funded effort.
When this happens a defeated Russia should be made to pay reparations for the damage and destruction caused , including the environmental damage it has deliberately created It is the Council of Europe’s obligation to also see that this happens.

I say all this in the light of the excellent report and resolution this Plenary is discussing.

A report which rightly concludes that Armed conflicts, wars and military aggression destroy human lives and damage human living space.
Armed conflicts cause Environmental damages which are multifaceted, severe, long-lasting and mostly irreversible.

The existing international legal framework provides for a limited protection of the environment in times of war.

I therefore support the need highlighted in this report to ensure co-application of human rights and humanitarian law during armed conflicts.
I advocate the call for the international recognition of the crime of ecocide and measures to outlaw the use of prohibited weapons which have disastrous impact on both the environment and humans.

It is for this reason that I shall support and vote in favour of this resolution and report.

Thank you for your attention.

2 Doc.


15674 05 January 2023 Environmental impact of armed conflicts Report1 Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Rapporteur: Mr John HOWELL, United Kingdom, European Conservatives Group and Democratic Alliance Summary Armed conflicts, wars and military aggression destroy human lives and damage human living space.

Environmental damages can be multifaceted, severe, long-lasting and mostly irreversible.
They affect not only ecosystems but also human health beyond the conflict area and long after the conflict is over.

The human rights to life and to a healthy environment are thus undermined.

The report notes that the existing international legal framework provides for a limited protection of the environment in times of armed conflict based on international humanitarian law instruments.

It highlights the need to ensure co-application of human rights and humanitarian law during armed conflicts.
It also advocates for the international recognition of the crime of ecocide and measures to outlaw the use of prohibited weapons which have disastrous impact on both the environment and humans.

The report recommends steps to consolidate a legal framework for the enhanced protection of the environment in armed conflicts at national, European and international levels, notably for monitoring infringements and addressing compensation claims.
Moreover, State responsibility for extraterritorial environmental damage should be strengthened, and a new regional legal instrument or treaty under the Council of Europe’s auspices should be drafted.

1.

Reference to committee: Doc.

15074, Reference 4506 of 7 May 2020. https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Doc.

15674 Report Contents Page A.

Draft resolution ........................................................................................................................................ 3 B.
Draft recommendation ............................................................................................................................. 6 C. Explanatory memorandum by Mr John Howell, rapporteur ......................................................................7 1.

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 7 2.
Legal framework: direct and indirect protection of the environment in times of armed conflicts .......... 7 3.

Limitations of the existing legal framework ..........................................................................................9 4.

Transboundary environmental damage .............................................................................................11 4.1.
The Kosovo War ....................................................................................................................... 12 4.2.

Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine ......................................................... 12 4.3.

The issue of environmental refugees ........................................................................................ 14 5.
Paving the way towards the recognition of ecocide at international level .......................................... 14 6.

Conclusions and recommendations .................................................................................................. 15 2 Doc.

15674 Report A.

Draft resolution2 Armed conflicts, wars and military aggression destroy human lives and leave deep scars on human 1. living space.
Environmental damages resulting from armed conflicts can be multifaceted, severe, long-lasting and mostly irreversible.

They not only harm natural habitats and ecosystems but can also affect human health well beyond the conflict area and long after the conflict is over.

The human rights to life and to a healthy environment are thus undermined.

2.
2.

The existing international legal framework provides for direct and indirect protection of the environment in times of armed conflict to a certain extent, based on international humanitarian law instruments such as the United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environment Modification Techniques (ENMOD convention), and the Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I).
In addition, international law doctrine came to accept the interplay between international humanitarian law and international human rights law in the 1996 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the “Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons”.
The Parliamentary Assembly notes that the co-application of human rights and humanitarian law during times of armed conflict has also been confirmed by the United Nations Human Rights Committee (via general comments) and the European Court of Human Rights (via case law).

The Assembly therefore considers that international human rights and humanitarian law imposes 3. substantive and procedural obligations on States involved in armed conflicts.
With the increased worldwide acceptance that the right to a healthy environment constitutes a human right, there are grounds to affirm that States may have extraterritorial obligations arising in and from armed conflicts.

The Assembly recalls that the norms of customary international law provide indirect protection of the 4. environment during armed conflicts.
To this end, it welcomes the Red Cross Guidelines for Military Manuals Instructions (“ICRC Guidelines”) as updated in 2020 which contribute, practically and effectively, to raising awareness about the need for the protection of the natural environment against the impact of armed conflicts.

However, the environment is thus protected only in an incidental manner, subordinated to wartime requirements, and conditioned on humanitarian imperatives.

5.
5.

The Assembly commends the work of the International Law Commission (ILC) of the United Nations on the draft principles on the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts.

It welcomes the endorsement of these principles by the United Nations General Assembly on 7 December 2022 and encourages their widest possible dissemination across all European States and their global partners.

6.
6.

The Assembly notes that the Council of Europe has developed several legal instruments to protect the environment: the Convention on Civil Liability for Damage resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment (ETS No.

150), the Convention on the Protection of Environment through Criminal Law (ETS No.

172), the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (ETS No.

104, “Bern Convention”) and the Landscape Convention (ETS No.176).
However, these conventions either do not explicitly cover or explicitly exclude damage caused by an act of war or military hostilities.

The currently ongoing revision of the criminal law convention (ETS No.

172), which is also open to non-member States, offers the possibility of establishing a new “ecocide” criminal offence at Council of Europe level.
The Assembly also notes that the Committee of Ministers Recommendation CM/Rec(2022)20 on human rights and the protection of the environment, adopted on 27 September 2022, mentions “the environmental harm stemming from armed conflicts”, reaffirms that “all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated” and urges steps to recognise the right to a healthy environment at the national level as a human right.
Severe destruction or deterioration of nature that could be qualified as ecocide may occur in times of 7. peace or war.

It is necessary to codify this notion in both national legislation, as appropriate, and international law.

The Assembly therefore strongly supports efforts to amend the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, so as to add ecocide as a new crime.
It reiterates its call, contained in Resolution 2398 (2021) “Addressing issues of criminal and civil liability in the context of climate change”, as regards the need for “recognising universal jurisdiction for ecocide and the most serious environmental crimes” and introducing “the crime of ecocide into […] national criminal legislation”.
The Assembly deplores the fact that despite an impressive international legal arsenal, important gaps 8. subsist in protecting the environment in the context of armed conflicts and their aftermath.

The existing legal instruments lack universality in terms of ratifications, precision of terms used (such as for qualifying 2.

Draft resolution adopted unanimously by the committee on 2 December 2022.

3 Doc.
3 Doc.

15674 Report “widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects”), a comprehensive coverage of offences and a sufficiently broad scope of application.

Moreover, a permanent international mechanism to monitor legal infringements and address compensation claims for environmental damage is also missing.

9.
9.

The Assembly urges Council of Europe member States to take all necessary measures to outlaw and prosecute the use of prohibited weapons in the course of armed conflicts that, among other ills, bring disproportionate environmental impact and render human life in the affected area impossible.

10.
10.

Considering that the Council of Europe has served as a laboratory of new legal developments to defend the values of human rights and the rule of law in Europe and beyond, the Assembly believes that the Organisation should take the lead in elaborating new legal instruments to guide member States and beyond in preventing massive environmental damage and reducing the scale of such damage as far as possible during armed conflicts and their aftermath.
It should pave the way towards the international recognition of the crime of ecocide.
With this in mind, and referring to the above considerations, the Assembly calls on the member States of the Council of Europe, as well as observer States and States whose parliament enjoys observer or partnership for democracy status with the Assembly to: 10.1. build and consolidate a legal framework for the enhanced protection of the environment in armed conflicts at national, European and international levels by: 10.1.1. the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, if they have not yet done so; ratifying the ENMOD convention and Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions relating to 10.1.2. taking steps to support the creation of a permanent international mechanism to monitor legal infringements and address compensation claims for environmental damage resulting from armed conflicts; 10.1.3. supporting practical implementation of the principles on the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts adopted by the United Nations General Assembly and promoting their dissemination through relevant domestic institutions, diplomatic channels and international stakeholders; 10.1.4. promoting a more coherent and comprehensive reading of the existing legal rules for protecting the environment in armed conflicts; 10.1.5. updating their legal arsenal to criminalise and effectively prosecute ecocide and taking concrete steps to amend the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in order to add ecocide as a new crime; 10.2. close gaps between different fields of law and the reality on the ground in order to adequately protect human living space, the environment, and human rights to life and to a healthy environment in the context of armed conflicts by: 10.2.1. strengthening State responsibility for environmental damage extending beyond their territorial limits, based on extraterritorial human rights obligations and the functional impact- model in situations where the impact is direct and reasonably foreseeable; 10.2.2. considering the drafting of a new regional legal instrument or treaty under the Council of Europe’s auspices, with a view to clarifying and filling the gaps identified in the existing legal regime (notably regarding the damage threshold, enforcement, liability, and the due diligence principle); 10.2.3. conducting a study, under the auspices of the Council of Europe, on the possible interplay between existing international criminal law and environmental harm occurring during armed conflicts, in particular as regards the possibility to invoke existing war crimes; 10.2.4. actively participating in the revision process of the Council of Europe’s convention No.
172 in order to ensure that the revised convention would apply also in the context of armed conflicts, wartime or occupation; 10.2.5. deploying sufficient means to ensure proper monitoring and implementation of commitments under the Council of Europe treaties, in particular the Bern Convention and the Landscape Convention; 10.2.6. ensuring that the relevant international legal framework is interpreted in a more open- ended manner, so as to offer more adequate protection of both the environment and human health; 4 Doc.
15674 Report 10.2.7. mapping areas of particular environmental importance or sensitivity, based on existing protected areas (such as world natural heritage sites or natural reserves), in anticipation of any form of armed conflict, and foreseeing the demilitarisation of such areas in the case of a military conflict; 10.2.8. adapting national military manuals in the light of the updated ICRC Guidelines, the United Nations principles on the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts and the evolving international legal framework; 10.2.9. considering establishing domestic and/or regional solutions to provide relief to environmental refugees fleeing a military conflict, given the international legal vacuum on this matter; 10.2.10. promoting knowledge of and compliance with international legal standards protecting the environment among non-state actors involved in armed conflicts.
5 Doc.

15674 Report B.

Draft recommendation3 The Parliamentary Assembly refers to its Resolution … (2023) “Environmental impact of armed 1. conflicts” and underscores the role of the Council of Europe as a guardian of human rights and the rule of law in times of peace and war.
It deplores the devastating effects that armed conflicts have on the environment as a source of living and insists on the co-application of human rights and humanitarian law during times of armed conflict, as confirmed by the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights.

2.
2.

The Assembly moreover underlines the indivisibility of human rights and considers that, with the increased acceptance that the right to a healthy environment constitutes a human right, the member States of the Council of Europe should take ambitious measures to improve the legal framework to adequately protect human living space, the environment, and the human right to life and to a healthy environment in the context of armed conflict.

3.
The Assembly therefore recommends that the Committee of Ministers: 3.1. urge member States and observers to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environment Modification Techniques (ENMOD convention) and the Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), if they have not yet done so; 3.2. mandate a competent body to study the feasibility of drafting a new regional legal instrument or treaty under the Council of Europe’s auspices, with a view to identifying and filling the gaps identified in the existing legal regime for the protection of the environment and human rights to life and to a healthy environment in armed conflicts, wartime or occupation (notably regarding the damage threshold, the characterisation of intent, behaviours that must be sanctioned, entities that should be held liable, enforcement, the scale of liability and proper interpretation of the principles of proportionality, military necessity, and due diligence); 3.3. mandate the governing body of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (ETS No.
104, “Bern Convention”) to elaborate recommendations regarding the protection of environmentally sensitive areas during armed conflicts, to study the feasibility of an additional Protocol to the Convention to this end, and to consider creating a review mechanism to ensure that the recommendations are implemented by States parties (notably, transposed into domestic law, incorporated into military doctrine, and shared broadly with a view to developing good practice); ensure that the revised Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Environment through 3.4.
Criminal Law (ETS No.

172) applies also in the context of armed conflicts, wartime or occupation, and covers ecocide; 3.5. allocate sufficient means to ensure proper monitoring and implementation of commitments under the Council of Europe treaties, in particular the Bern Convention and the Landscape Convention (ETS No.
176); promote and disseminate the United Nations principles on the protection of the environment in 3.6. relation to armed conflicts; support the creation of a permanent international mechanism to monitor legal infringements and 3.7. address compensation claims for environmental damage resulting from armed conflicts; encourage the European Court of Human Rights to use the functional impact-model with 3.8. jurisdiction whenever the question of the extraterritorial application of human rights arises in situations of armed conflict or occupation; 3.9. encourage member States to map areas of particular environmental importance or sensitivity in anticipation of any form of armed conflicts and to foresee the demilitarisation of such areas, in case a military conflict breaks out; 3.10. call on member States to update their legal arsenal to criminalise and effectively prosecute ecocide, to establish domestic and/or regional solutions to provide relief to environmental refugees fleeing a military conflict, and to take concrete steps to propose amendment of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in order to add ecocide as a new crime.
3.

Draft recommendation adopted unanimously by the committee on 2 December 2022.

6 Doc.

15674 Report C. Explanatory memorandum by Mr John Howell, rapporteur 1.

Introduction 1.

The impact on the environment of armed conflict, war or military aggression can be multifaceted, more or less severe, but mostly irreversible.
Several armed conflicts of the past can attest to that, including the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, but also the wars in the former Yugoslavia and in the Caucasus, or the military conflicts between Israel and Palestinian territories and Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine, with major environmental damages which can ultimately also affect human health well beyond the conflict area and after the conflict is over.
During such conflicts, environmental protection is typically relegated to the backstage (a “silent casualty”), as the focus of the fighting parties in international law must be to protect the life and rights of civilians caught in the crossfire.

However, protecting civilians actually also means protecting the environment in which they live and on which they depend.
Environmental damage may occur mainly during an armed conflict, but also before its outbreak,4 and 2. once it is over: there are no “clean wars”.

It is necessary to consider these damages in terms of human responsibility for the integrity of ecosystems, and as regards impact on human health (right to a healthy environment).

To address this concern, the motion entitled “Impact of armed conflict on transboundary environmental damage” (Doc.
15074) was referred to the Committee on Social Affairs, Health, and Sustainable Development for report, and I was appointed rapporteur.

3.
3.

This report examines the modalities of the existing international legal framework with regard to environmental protection in times of armed conflict, seeks to provide guidance to policy makers on how it could be used more effectively, and aims to propose additional measures for better protection as necessary (such as regarding compensation for damages, rehabilitation of damaged natural habitats, the definition of “ecocide”, etc.).
The report considers a few pertinent examples of environmental damage in the light of past and ongoing armed conflicts on European territory.

In this context, I should point out that this report is not about the political aspects of such conflicts: our focus is on the environment and the related repercussions on public health.

This last point is worth emphasising again: it is not about the political aspects of conflicts.

4.
As rapporteur, I would like to thank most warmly the experts who have contributed highly valuable elements to this report during the committee hearing on 23 June 2022, notably Ms Marja Lehto, Member of the UN International Law Commission and Special Rapporteur on the Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflicts; Ms Helen Obregón Gieseken, Legal Advisor of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and a co-author of its updated Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict; and Ms Karen Hulme, Chair of the Specialist Group on Environmental Security and Conflict Law of the International Union for Conservation of Nature World Commission on Environmental Law, professor of law at the University of Essex.
I should also thank my colleagues who not only spoke at the hearing but also provided me with detailed information for the selected cases evoked in this report.

Finally, I would also like to thank the Parliament of Ukraine where the Committee on Environmental Policy and Nature Management held a hearing on “The impact of the hostilities on the environment in Ukraine and its restoration” which I attended and spoke at online on 10 November 2022.

2.
2.

Legal framework: direct and indirect protection of the environment in times of armed conflicts In the second half of the 20th century, the international legal framework regarding the protection of the 5. environment gradually expanded.

It contains certain provisions to protect the environment either directly or indirectly during armed conflicts.
In times of war, international humanitarian law applies, including the United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environment Modification Techniques and the Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I).

Several of these legal instruments appear to have attained customary law status as recognised by the ICRC in its 2005 Customary International Law Study.
The soft law Rio Declaration on Environment and Development of 1992 states that States should “respect international law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict”.

6. International law doctrine came to accept the interplay between international humanitarian law and international human rights law in the 1996 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the “Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons”.
This has been followed up, most notably in the advisory opinion on the “Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories”.

4.

Through the build-up of military capacity and presence close to a conflict area.

7 Doc.
7 Doc.

15674 Report The co-application of human rights and humanitarian law during times of armed conflict has also been confirmed by the UN Human Rights Committee5 and the European Court of Human Rights.6 International human rights law thus imposes new substantive and procedural obligations on States involved in armed conflicts.
With the increased acceptance that the right to a healthy environment constitutes a human right,7 States may have extraterritorial human rights obligations arising from such activities.
While these instruments provide both direct and indirect protection of the environment in times of armed 7. conflict, several other international instruments also provide additional indirect protection.8 However, altogether the existing international instruments seem to offer very limited protection to prevent environmental damage in times of armed conflict.

International humanitarian law is above all anthropocentric, meaning to preserve the environment in order to ensure humans’ interests.
In the light of recent political moves at the Assembly and the United Nations levels to anchor the right to a healthy environment, this anthropocentric approach could develop more into an “eco-centric” approach aiming to intrinsically protect the environment.

8.

As it were, between 1955 and 1975, the Vietnam War became the stage of environmental destruction as the essential aim of the military strategy.
The United States performed experiments to alter the weather in Indochina in order to bring down rain and create mud and flooding in North Vietnam to limit enemy movements and cut off supply lines.9 These events led to the adoption, on 10 December 1976 and under the United Nations auspices, of a new legal instrument to protect the environment in times of armed conflict: the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environment Modification Techniques (also called Environmental Modification Convention, ENMOD).10 This convention was the first instrument of international humanitarian law to consider the environment directly.
It also remains the only legal instrument to prohibit the use of the environment as a weapon of war: article 1 of the ENMOD prohibits the “military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects”.

9.

In 1977, a year after the adoption of the ENMOD Convention, the Additional Protocol (to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949) relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) was adopted.
This international treaty protects the environment against the effects of armed conflicts through two legal provisions: articles 55 and 35.3.

Article 55 shows an essentially anthropocentric approach: the obligation to protect the natural environment is based on the need to protect the civilian population.

As article 55 states, “care shall be taken in warfare to protect the natural environment against widespread, long-term, and severe damage.
This protection includes a prohibition of the use of methods or means of warfare which are intended or may be expected to cause such damage to the natural environment and thereby to prejudice the health or survival of the population”.

“Attacks against the natural environment by way of reprisals are prohibited”.
Moreover, the Protocol also protects the natural environment as such: article 35.3 prohibits the use of “methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term, and severe damage to the natural environment”.

10.

The Council of Europe has developed several relevant legal instruments: the Convention on Civil Liability for Damage resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment (ETS No.
150) and the Convention on the Protection of Environment through Criminal Law (ETS No.

172), as well as the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (ETS No.

104, “Bern Convention”) and the Landscape Convention (ETS No.176).11 Convention No.

150 aims to ensure adequate compensation for damage to the environment and provides for means of prevention and reinstatement.

Problems of adequate See for example, UN HRC General Comments Nos.

29 (2001), 31 (2004) and 36 (2017).


For example, United Kingdom v. Hassan, App.

No.

29750/09, 16 September 2014.

See for example, UN General Assembly Resolution 76/300 “The human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable 5.

6.

7. environment”, 1 August 2022, A/RES/76/300.

8.
Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 relating to the Protection of Victims of Non- International Armed Conflicts (8 June 1977) (Protocol II); The Hague Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land (The Hague, 18 October 1907); The Geneva Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Geneva, 12 August 1949); Protocol (II) on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices (Geneva, 10 October 1980); Protocol (III) on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons (Geneva, 10 October 1980); The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction (the Chemical Weapons Convention, 1993).
9.

10.

See documentId=2AC88FF62DB2CDD6C12563CD002D6EC1&action=openDocument.

11.

This treaty promotes more general protection of the environment, with fifty countries and the European Union being parties to the Convention.

There is growing attention to looking at such environmental law instruments to see how far their rules could continue to bind States during conflict.
The Bern Convention could be quite useful for this, and the governing body of the convention could possibly undertake specific research and then take a position on this matter.

See https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule45_sectionb.

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?

8 Doc.

15674 Report compensation for emissions released in one country causing damage in another country are also considered of an international nature.
That said, this convention does not cover damage that “was caused by an act of war, hostilities, civil war, insurrection”.12 Convention No.

172 aims to deter and prevent conduct that is most harmful to the environment at the European level by using criminal law.

It also seeks to harmonise national legislation in this field, notably by obliging the contracting States to introduce specific provisions into their criminal law or to modify existing provisions in this field.
Following the high-level Conference on Environmental Protection and Human Rights (held on 27 February 2020 in Strasbourg), the criminal law convention is being revised.13 Moreover, we should note that the Committee of Ministers Recommendation CM/Rec(2022)20 on human rights and the protection of the environment, adopted on 27 September 2022, mentions “the environmental harm stemming from armed conflicts”, reaffirms that “all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated” and urges steps to recognise the right to a healthy environment at the national level as a human right.
11.

Norms of customary international law provide indirect protection of the environment during armed conflicts.

These customary norms are the principles of limitation, military necessity, proportionality, discrimination (between civilian and military objectives), precautions, and prevention of causing superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.
The ICRC produced the Red Cross Guidelines for Military Manuals Instructions in 1994 and updated them in 2020.14 The goal was not a new codification, but for the guidelines to serve as a reference tool for States and to contribute, practically and effectively, to raising awareness about the need for protection of the natural environment.

These guidelines are intended to be included in military manuals, instructions, and regulations about the laws of war.
They result from existing legal international provisions, in particular humanitarian law, and reflect the national practices on the protection of the environment against the impact of armed conflicts.

The updated guidelines recommend specific steps the belligerent parties might adopt to limit the environmental impact of the armed conflict.

12.
12.

In parallel to the ICRC’s work, in 2019 the International Law Commission (ILC) of the United Nations put forward 28 draft principles on the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts as adopted in the first reading (“ILC draft principles”).

After revisions in the light of various comments, the final draft principles (27 in total) were adopted on 27 May 2022 in the second reading and will be submitted to the UN General Assembly together with the ILC’s comments and recommendations.
The ILC draft principles seek to bridge the gap between the reality of current conflicts and the narrow focus of the existing treaty rules.
For this reason, they include the pre- and post-conflict phases and touch upon international human rights law and international environmental law.15 The UN General Assembly is expected to attach the draft principles and comments to its own resolution recommending them to the States, international organisations and all the concerned entities and encouraging their widest possible dissemination.16 3.

Limitations of the existing legal framework 13.


As promising as they can be, the existing legal instruments regarding direct protection of the environment in times of armed conflict are facing multiple issues.

Clearly, the application scope of the existing legal instruments is limited.

The ENMOD Convention, for instance, presents a lack of universality.

Indeed, it only applies to and between State parties.

To date, only 78 States have ratified the convention and 16 signed it but have not ratified it.
Many European countries have joined the convention, but 11 countries have not.17 Moreover, the convention only prohibits the use of environmental modification techniques, but not, for 12.

Council of Europe Treaty Office, Convention on Civil Liability for Damage resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment (ETS No.

150).

13.

See also Resolution 2398 and Recommendation 2213 (2021) “Addressing issues of criminal and civil liability in the context of climate change” (Doc.
15362), report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights; rapporteur: Mr Ziya Altunyaldiz, Turkey, NR.

14.

The Red Cross Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in Times of Armed Conflict to be implemented in national military training programmes.

“Armed conflicts and the environment: The International Law Commission’s new draft principles”, Ambassador Marja 15.
Lehto, 11 May 2020, and outcome document A/CN.4/L.968 of the 73rd session of the International Law Commission (2022), https://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/8_7.shtml.

16. ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?OpenAgent&DS=A/RES/77/104&Lang=E.

17.

These are: Albania, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, France, Georgia, Latvia, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, as well as Kosovo*.
A full list is available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=XXVI-1&chapter=26&clang=_en.

In the meantime, on 7 December 2022, the General Assembly adopted Resolution A/RES/77/104 - https://daccess- * All references to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population shall be understood in full compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.

9 Doc.
9 Doc.

15674 Report instance, the research, the development, or the preparation of such techniques.

Furthermore, there are ambiguities regarding the terms used: the interpretation of “environmental modification techniques”, “having widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects” and “the deliberate manipulation of natural processes” is unclear.

14.
14.

Like the ENMOD Convention, Protocol I (to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949) only applies to international armed conflict, and the Additional Protocol II relating to the Protection of Victims of Non- International Armed Conflicts does not contain a provision protecting the environment directly.

Even though 174 States are parties to Protocol I, certain States, involved in ongoing conflicts causing harm to the environment are not part of it, including the United States or Israel.
Doubts also persist about the customary nature of some provisions of this Protocol.

The Protocol’s application scope, furthermore, faces the issue of nuclear weapons: many countries, including for example France and the United Kingdom, consider that articles 35.3 and 55 only apply to conventional weaponry, thereby excluding nuclear weapons.
Moreover, the Protocol also states the need for “widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment”: these cumulative criteria impose a high threshold of environmental harm.

Like the ENMOD Convention, the interpretation of these notions is unclear, ambiguous, and comes with a high degree of subjectivity.

15.

Regarding the Council of Europe’s conventions Nos.

150 and 172, a lack of universality is to be noted too.
The Convention on civil liability has only been signed by nine Council of Europe member States18 and has not been ratified by any while the criminal law convention has been signed by fourteen member States19 and ratified by one (Estonia).

Three ratifications being necessary, none of these conventions have entered into force.
The Assembly’s Resolution 2398 (2021) “Addressing issues of criminal and civil liability in the context of climate change” called for “reinforcing criminal liability for acts and omissions that might […] cause […] severe environmental damage” and asked member States to harmonise “laws on liability for environmental damage, with special focus on the definition of environmental crimes and sanctions related thereto”, to “revise or replace, as soon as possible, Convention ETS No.
172 in order to have a legal instrument better adapted to the current challenges”, to introduce “the crime of ecocide into their national criminal legislation” and to “consider recognising universal jurisdiction for ecocide and the most serious environmental crimes, including in the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court”.

16.
16.

Moreover, the resolution asked to “strengthen civil liability for environmental damage by amending national civil law legislation, if need be, […] by alleviating the burden of proof, notably by establishing factual presumptions regarding causation, for persons requesting compensation for damage, adding specific provisions on responsibility for ecological harm, and/or by expanding the scope of strict liability in relevant situations relating to environmental damage”.
The Assembly’s Recommendation 2213 (2021) urged the replacement of Convention No.

172 with a new legal instrument and called for revision or replacement of Convention No.

150.

17.

The majority of international legal provisions seeking to protect the environment during armed conflict were designed for international armed conflict; however, according to findings of the 2005 ICRC customary law study, they can also apply to internal conflict – the majority of armed conflicts nowadays.
Yet, a permanent international mechanism to monitor legal infringements and address compensation claims for environmental damage is missing.

The ICRC Guidelines and the ILC draft principles aim to fill some of these gaps between existing legal rules and reality, showing that there is potential for a more coherent reading of the existing rules.
Nevertheless, Ambassador Marja Lehto, Special Rapporteur of the ILC for the environment and armed conflicts, argues that there is still no coherent legal framework for the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts.20 The protection of the environment provided indirectly by international customary law is limited.

The 18. environment is only protected in an incidental manner, subordinated to wartime requirements, and conditioned on humanitarian imperatives.
For example, the principle of military necessity forbids belligerents’ actions and harm to the environment, if an attack does not involve any military advantage.

While this principle appears to be useful for the protection of the environment in times of armed conflict, the principle of military necessity can, a contrario, legitimise environmental destructions required by the goals of the war and justify many measures disastrous for the environment.

19.
19.

The same goes with the principle of proportionality: it can be lawful to inflict collateral environmental damages when the military advantage conferred by the attack is sufficiently important to justify exposing the environment to an increased risk.

The more important the objective, the more environmental risk will be 18.

Cyprus, Finland, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands, and Portugal.

19.
19.

Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Romania, Sweden, and Ukraine.

20.

“Overcoming the disconnect: environmental protection and armed conflict”, Ambassador Marja Lehto, 27 May 2021.
10 accepted: “in applying this principle, it is necessary to assess the importance of the target in relation to the incidental damage expected: if the target is sufficiently important, a greater degree of risk to the environment may be justified”.21 Moreover, these principles are not easy to apply in practice.

The necessity to hierarchise priorities will lead to putting the environment at the bottom of the ladder in times of war when confronted with other values.
In any event, the incidental protection of the environment is uncertain.

Doc.

15674 Report 4.

Transboundary environmental damage 20.

Transboundary damage is the harm caused by activities carried out in places under the jurisdiction or control of one State and arising in places under the jurisdiction or control of another State or in places outside national jurisdiction.
Transboundary environmental damage mostly takes 3 forms: air pollution, pollution of a transboundary watercourse (or land in case of territorial/border changes between States), and transboundary shipment or dumping of waste.
In times of military conflict, the environment typically suffers from damages to strategic infrastructure and related pollution but also from “scorched earth techniques” which can include the deliberate destruction of agricultural facilities (in particular water canals, wells, and pumps), crops and forests.

21.

According to the theory of limited territorial sovereignty, States have responsibility for environmental damage extending beyond their territorial limits.
This international theory is an analogy to the Roman law maxim sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas that means “use your property so as not to injure that of another”.

It was applied in the 1941 Trail Smelter Arbitration.

According to this decision, States must refrain from causing ecological damages to other States (also in cases of occupation)22 or places outside the jurisdiction of any State.
This principle (prevention of transboundary harm and due diligence principle) is included in international conventions and non-binding instruments23 and has a customary value.

According to the Corfu Channel Case (1947-1949), it is applicable in times of armed conflict, as an obligation for belligerent States in their relations with non-belligerent States.

22.
22.

Regarding the specific issue of situations of occupation, the duty of diligence of the occupying State or power is backed by a few international humanitarian law provisions.

Most of those provisions are contained in the Hague Regulation from 1907, the fourth Geneva Convention (of 1949) and the first additional protocol to the Geneva Conventions (of 1977).
They have obtained customary value and provide for an indirect protection through the protection of both public and private property,24 and through the obligations of the occupying power.

The occupant has indeed an obligation (“best-effort” obligation, not “result-oriented” obligation) to protect the environment under both international law (duty of diligence) and the domestic law of the occupied State.25 23.
Moreover, international humanitarian law rules on neutrality apply in times of armed conflict and occupation whereby the territory of neutral States is deemed inviolable and protected from collateral damage.26 The obligation to prevent transboundary harm is also linked to international practice concerning compensation for damage.

The UN Compensation Commission,27 for instance, has systematically applied environmental in considering environmental claims.
Some multilateral environmental agreements provide for a conciliatory approach to environmental protection during armed conflicts.28 We should note further that due diligence obligations for States entail responsibility for lack of vigilance regarding acts of non-state actors.29 law principles 21.

Final report to the Prosecutor by the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, 3 June 2000, para.

19.

22.
19.

22.

Such as in the International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion in the Namibia case (Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (Southwest Africa)) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1971, p. 16, para.118).

23.

Examples: United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (10 December 1982), article 194 para.

2; and Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, principle 2.

24.
24.

See Article 23(g) of the Hague Regulation of 1907 and its specific application to forests and agricultural lands in Article 55.

25.

See Article 43 of the Hague Regulation of 1907: “The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.” 26.
M. Bothe, “The Law of Neutrality”, in D. Fleck (ed.

), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law, 3rd Edition, Oxford University Press 2013, pp.

547–580, pp.

559–600.

27.

The Compensation Commission was created in 1991 as a subsidiary organ of the UN Security Council under Security Council Resolution 687 (1991) to process claims and pay compensation for losses and damage suffered as a direct result of Iraq’s unlawful invasion and occupation of Kuwait in 1990-1991.

28.
28.

B. Sjöstedt, The Role of Multilateral Environmental Agreements: A Reconciliatory Approach to Environmental Protection in Armed Conflict, Hart Publishing, New York, 2020.

11 Doc.

15674 Report 4.1.

The Kosovo War The Kosovo War on Yugoslavian territory (from 6 March 1998 to 10 June 1999) is one relevant 24. example we can look at for the purposes of this report.

This military conflict opposed the armed forces of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Kosovo Liberation Army.
During this war, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) also conducted military operations against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Industrial sites and energy installations were damaged by bombing or missile strikes.

The destruction and fires at these sites caused serious damage to the country’s natural environment.

The bombing affected ecosystems, surface water, groundwater, protected areas, forests, landscapes, soils, and air in the Balkans that were contaminated in an unprecedented manner.
Over 100 toxic substances were involved, including ordnance containing depleted uranium used by NATO in several operations.30 There is a growing amount of evidence that the dispersion of depleted uranium can be linked to the increased incidence of aggressive cancers such as leukaemia among the local population, military personnel, and peacekeepers.31 25.

The environmental impact of the Kosovo War was transboundary.
Contaminations were registered within former Yugoslavia (North Macedonia, Serbia) but also in several other countries of southeast Europe, including Albania, Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Romania, and Ukraine.

The Danube basin, transboundary waterways, and groundwater have all been affected.

Environmental impact also resulted from population displacement and the refugees’ camps set up, mainly in Albania and North Macedonia.

26.
26.

In 2001, the Assembly adopted a report entitled “Environmental impact of the war in Yugoslavia on south-east Europe”.32 The rapporteur Mr Serhiy Kurykin pointed out that States involved in the operations “disregarded the international legal rules” (Articles 55 and 56 of Protocol I (1977) to the Geneva Conventions (1949) and Principle 24 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992)) “intended to limit environmental damage in armed conflict”.
In the Assembly’s view, the Kosovo War has revealed “the inability of contemporary international law” to prevent or lessen violations of fundamental human rights in any future conflict.

These rules should be “strengthened and enforced”.


In its Recommendation 1495 (2001), the Assembly called for the drawing up of a new European convention, “notably to ensure compliance with Articles 55 and 56 of Protocol I (1977) to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, on the prevention of environmental damage as a result of military force or crisis-defusing measures”.
However, in the report on “Armed conflict and the environment” of 2011,33 the rapporteur adopted a 27. different approach, arguing that it was “not necessary to draw up a new convention concerned exclusively with protecting the environment in time of war”.
He proposed “to make proper use of existing treaties”, notably by relaunching “the ENMOD Convention in order to restrict military climate change programmes” and implementing the “Red Cross Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in Times of Armed Conflict in national military training programmes” (as stated in Resolution 1851 (2011)).

At the same time, the Assembly recommended to “support the drafting of a treaty to ban phosphorous weapons”.

4.2.
4.2.

Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine 28.

Since February 2014, a protracted armed conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine has been going on with substantial environmental spill-overs.

Following the illegal annexation of the Crimean Peninsula at the north of the Black Sea by the Russian Federation, Ukraine blocked the North Crimean Canal that was ensuring 85% of the water supply in the Crimean Peninsula.

Since then, Crimea has suffered unprecedented water shortages.
To compensate for the loss of water from the canal, multiple wells have been drilled in Crimea causing salinisation of groundwater and soil, and the subsequent loss of agricultural crops.

The exceptional weather conditions in 2020 – with the lack of snow over the winter and a spring without rain – exacerbated the situation.

“Incidence of haematological malignancies in Kosovo – A post ‘uranium war’ concern”, published online on 29.
Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment, 19 December 2005, ICJ Reports 2005, p. 116, para.

248.

30.

See www.dw.com/en/uranium-risks-haunt-kosovo-survivors/a-16366645-0.

31.

4 May 2020, Hatixhe Latifi-Pupovci, Miranda Selmonaj, Blerina Ahmetaj-Shala, Mimoza Dushi, Violeta Grajqevci.

32.

Doc.

8925 (report of the Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities, Rapporteur: Mr Serhiy Kurykin, Ukraine, NR).

33.

Doc.
33.

Doc.

12774 (report of the Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities, Rapporteur: Mr Rafael Huseynov, Azerbaijan, ALDE).

12 Doc.

15674 Report 29.

Another consequence of the water shortage was the drying up of an acid reservoir located near the “Crimean Titanium” plant, a chemical producer of titanium dioxide.34 The drying up has led to the intense release of sulphurous anhydride in the air.
Sulphurous anhydride is a very harmful air pollutant causing irritation and impairment of respiratory organs.

In contact with water, it becomes a sulfuric acid that contributes to acid rain phenomena.

This can lead to the acidification of surface waters causing soil degradation and harmful effects on plants and animals.

30.
30.

While the environmental situation in Eastern Ukraine was already precarious due to the operation of about 5 300 heavy industry enterprises (including coke, ferrous metallurgy and chemical plants, mines, oil refineries, power generation stations, etc.)

in that area, the military conflict has significantly worsened the pollution of air, land, and water with toxic chemicals.
Electricity breakdowns due to military fighting caused frequent shutdowns of ventilation systems and water pumps across industrial facilities and coalmines in the region, leading to leaks of toxic substances and accidents.

For instance, a release and explosion of methane in the Zaysadko mine in Donetsk during the shelling of the nearby airport (March 2015) killed 33 of the 200 miners then underground.
Similarly, fire in the Avdiivskyi plant in May 2015 as a result of shelling caused a massive leak of coke gas containing benzol, toluene, naphthalene, hydrogen sulphide, ammonium, and methane.
Yet another aspect is the chemical pollution of agricultural land and waterways with heavy metals and nitrates from weapon explosions and spills of mine waters, fuels, and lubricants.35 The Conflict and Environment Observatory recorded more than 500 accidents and operational disruptions in Eastern Ukraine’s industrial sites over the 2014-2017 period, while 60 out of 135 protected natural sites have been damaged.36 31.
The current escalation of hostilities by the Russian Federation into all-out war has spread the damage to infrastructure and the environment across many parts of Ukraine.

We currently do not have the full overview of the massive destruction that is still going on.
However, one immediate concern relates to the safety of Ukraine’s nuclear power plants: the country’s 15 nuclear reactors (including 8 that are currently in operation) and the closed but not decommissioned Chernobyl nuclear plant are at risk of accidental or intentional damage from missile attacks or disruptions in the maintenance operations.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), several electricity supply cuts to the 32.
Chernobyl plant (including the radioactive waste storage facilities) have been repaired after the Russian armed forces took control of the site.

The IAEA has estimated that several out of the seven indispensable pillars for nuclear safety “have been compromised or challenged” in Chernobyl during the full scale war of aggression against Ukraine that began on 24 February” 2022.
Moreover, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant – the biggest in Europe – has been controlled by Russian forces since 4 March; two of the four plant’s power lines and the administrative buildings have been damaged by warfare.

The IAEA describes the current situation in Ukraine as unprecedented, difficult and challenging, which 33.
“will become unsustainable” at certain sites such as Zaporizhzhia.37 The latest IAEA mission to Zaporizhzhia sought to evaluate damages at the power plant and the state of the security systems in place as heavy fighting continued in the surrounding area.
It noted, on 5 September 2022, that “there have been numerous shelling incidents at or near the [Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant], causing damage at the facility and raising widespread concern about the risk of a severe nuclear accident potentially jeopardizing human health and the environment”.38 34.
The Assembly’s Resolution 2463 (2022) “Further escalation in the Russian Federation's aggression against Ukraine” has strongly condemned the “illegal occupation and militarisation of the nuclear power plant in Zaporizhzhia” and considered that “the leadership of the Russian Federation has increased threats of nuclear warfare”.
Those threats were deemed to be “in breach of international law and incompatible with the responsibilities of a nuclear power holding a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council”.

In early October 2022, Russia announced the annexation of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in violation of international law.

“The environmental impact of military actions in eastern Ukraine and the annexation of the Crimea”, Svitlana 34.

See https://uacrisis.org/en/68485-environmental-disaster-crimea.

35.
35.

Andrushchenko, 24 May 2016.

36.

See https://ceobs.org/country-brief-ukraine/.

37.

Update 20 – IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine, 13 March 2022, www.iaea.org/newscenter/ pressreleases/update-20-iaea-director-general-statement-on-situation-in-ukraine, and Summary Report by the Director General, 24 February – 28 April 2022, www.iaea.org/nuclear-safety-and-security-in-ukraine.

38.
38.

Update 98 – IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine, 5 September 2022, www.iaea.org/newscenter/ pressreleases/update-98-iaea-director-general-statement-on-situation-in-ukraine.

13 Doc.

15674 Report 35.


In this context we should note that Article 56 of the Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol 1), provides for specific reinforced protection for all “works and installations containing dangerous forces”.
This expressly includes nuclear power stations and other installations located at or in the vicinity of such stations which “shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population”.
However, such special protection for a nuclear power plant may cease “if it provides electric power in regular, significant and direct support of military operations” and if a military attack “is the only feasible way to terminate such support”.

4.3.

The issue of environmental refugees 36.


As the motion for a resolution at the origin of this report notes, “armed conflicts contribute to the global climate change crisis” and “wars also cause significant depletion of natural resources, which in turn leads to humanitarian catastrophes and food crises”, significantly contributing “to the rise of the number of refugees in the world”.
This Assembly has considered the issue of environmental refugees in the context of climate change and urged better protection of victims of both natural and man-made disasters.39 In a further step, the Assembly adopted, in January 2022, a resolution and a recommendation on the impact of climate change on children’s rights which recommends that member States should collaborate towards establishing a legal status of environmental refugees “at international and European levels and adequately protect the victims of forced migration due to climate change and environmental degradation, in particular children”.40 Such a legal status should also cover environmental refugees fleeing a military conflict.
5.

Paving the way towards the recognition of ecocide at international level 37.

As discussions in committee have shown, there is growing interest and support to incorporate the notion of ecocide into the international legal order.
Indeed, several States have already added this concept to their domestic law, mostly in their national Criminal Code.41 Political support towards the international establishment of ecocide in the context of the Rome Statute of the ICC is also growing impressively, be it through political declarations by Heads of States and national Ministers42 or through parliamentary initiatives.43 Regional implementation of the concept of ecocide has also been announced by the Nordic Council of Ministers in June 2022 and was called for by the European Parliament in its Resolution 2021/2181(INI) of 17 February 2022 on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter.
The latter “encourages the EU and its Member States to promote the recognition of ecocide as an international crime under the Rome Statute of the ICC”, asks the European Commission to “study the relevance of ecocide to EU law and EU diplomacy” and calls on the EU and its member States to “take bold initiatives to fight the impunity of environmental crimes at a global level”.

38.
38.

However, as national and regional understandings of ecocide might differ, incorporating ecocide into the international legal order implies the need to agree on the meaning of this notion.

Although to this day, there is no internationally established definition of ecocide, some work on the subject has already been accomplished.
This notably includes the much-acclaimed proposal of a definition by the international Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide, commissioned by the Stop Ecocide Foundation.44 Some common features can also be identified in all existing domestic legal definitions of 39.

Resolution 2307 (2019) “A legal status for ‘climate refugees’” and Doc.

14955 (report by the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons; rapporteur: Ms Marie-Christine Verdier-Jouclas, France, ALDE).

40.
40.

Resolution 2415 and Recommendation 2219 (2022) “Inaction on climate change – a violation of children's rights” and Doc.

15436 (report by the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development; rapporteur: Ms Jennifer De Temmerman, France, ALDE).

41.
41.

A crime of ecocide is established in the Criminal Code of Vietnam (which was the first State to do so, in 1990), Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Georgia, Belarus, Ukraine, Republic of Moldova, Armenia, as well as in two states of Mexico (Chiapas and Jalisco), and in the French Environmental Code (as a “délit”).
In 1972, following the Vietnam war, the Prime Minister of Sweden Olof Palme was the first to use the word ‘ecocide’ 42. to refer to serious destruction of nature, and called for it to be addressed at the international level.

The discussion was reopened under the impulse of Vanuatu and the Maldive States in December 2019, during the 18th session of the ICC’s Assembly of States Parties.
Since then, members of the government of France, Belgium, Finland, Canada, Luxembourg, Samoa, Bangladesh, Kenya and Panama have supported proposals to recognise ecocide in the Rome Statute of the ICC and at national level.

43.

Parliamentary motions and resolutions were notably passed in Spain, Denmark, Belgium, Chile, Scotland, and Brazil.

Parliamentary initiatives regarding ecocide are still being discussed in other States, including Iceland, Mexico, and Bangladesh.

14 Doc.

15674 Report ecocide.


Thus, we should note that the concept of ecocide, in all adopted and proposed definitions, applies in both peace time and war time.

I find that it is highly pertinent for the Council of Europe to refer to the first legal definition of ecocide implemented in domestic law, namely Article 422 of the Vietnamese Criminal Code.45 This definition inspired most of the later national steps of incorporating ecocide into domestic laws.
Moreover, the description of the environment as a “source of living” establishes a clear link with human rights.

This Assembly should therefore advocate for the concept of ecocide to be implemented and made 39. operational through the ongoing revision processes of relevant legal instruments at European level, including the EU Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of the environment through criminal law46 and the Council of Europe’s Convention on the Protection of Environment through Criminal Law (ETS No.
172).

Member States of the Council of Europe should also support the effort of recognition of ecocide as an international crime through the amendment of the Rome Statute of the ICC.

The momentum could be increased by adding the concept into domestic law and practice.
For States having already established ecocide in domestic law, the focus should be on making this crime “operational”, by providing means to prosecute and making it a priority in the prosecuting guidelines, especially in countries where the opportunity of prosecution exists.

6.

Conclusions and recommendations As we can see from the above, the existing legal framework is patchy but expanding.

The Council of 40.
The Council of 40.

Europe could seize the momentum of enhanced political attention to the vital link between human rights and the environment and revise, update, or complete selected legal instruments so as to ensure a more adequate protection of environment in the context of armed conflicts.
This committee (and subsequently the Assembly) should advocate for the relevant international legal framework to be invoked and interpreted in a more open- ended manner so as to offer more comprehensive protection of both the environment and human health in cases of armed conflicts.

We should in particular offer strong support for the ILC draft principles as adopted in 2022 and promote their practical implementation through the member States of the Council of Europe.
I believe that different legal instruments and mechanisms could be better combined to overcome 41. practical application problems.

Indeed, as Mr Antoine Bouvier, a jurist with the ICRC, pointed out, “the existing law provides adequate protection as long as it is correctly implemented and respected”, but States need to collectively ensure “a better enforcement of existing international obligations”.

That said, there are some limitations inherent in the interplay between fields of law.
Conducting a study on the possible interplay between existing international criminal law and environmental harm occurring during armed conflicts would be of strong interest.

The possibility to invoke existing war crimes should be a major focus of such a study.

The 44.

This panel published, in 2021, proposed amendments to the Rome Statute to the ICC, accompanied by an interpretation guide.

It notably proposes to add the following Article 8ter on ecocide to the Rome Statute: “1.
For the purpose of this Statute, “ecocide” means unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused by those acts.

2.

For the purpose of paragraph 1: a.

“Wanton” means with reckless disregard for damage which would be clearly excessive in relation to the social and economic benefits anticipated; b.
“Severe” means damage which involves very serious adverse changes, disruption or harm to any element of the environment, including grave impacts on human life or natural, cultural or economic resources; c. “Widespread” means damage which extends beyond a limited geographic area, crosses state boundaries, or is suffered by an entire ecosystem or species or a large number of human beings; d. “Long-term” means damage which is irreversible or which cannot be redressed through natural recovery within a reasonable period of time; e. “Environment” means the earth, its biosphere, cryosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, as well as outer space.” 45.
Article 422 of the Vietnamese Criminal Code: “Crimes against humanity 1.

Any person who, whether in peacetime or wartime, commits genocide against [the] population of an area, destroys sources of living [or the] cultural or spiritual life of a nation or sovereign territory, upsets the foundation of a society in order to sabotage it, or commits other acts of genocide, or destroys … the environment shall face a penalty of 10–20 years’ imprisonment, life imprisonment, or death.

2.
2.

[If t]his offence is committed under pressure or order[s] given by superior officers, the offender shall face a penalty of 10–20 years’ imprisonment.” 46.

Currently, the proposal only mentions ecocide in the recitals (point 16).
The European Economic and Social Committee, a consultative body of the EU, recommended an explicit reference to be included in the operational part of the Directive as well (October 2021, see: www.eesc.europa.eu/nl/our-work/opinions-information-reports/opinions/improving- environmental-protection-through-criminal-law).

15 Doc.
15 Doc.

15674 Report Council of Europe could serve as a laboratory of new legal developments and take the lead in this study while involving other organisations (the ILC, the ICRC, the Conflict and Environment Observatory, PAX,47 etc.)

already working on similar subjects.

42.

Moreover, the Council of Europe should continue reflections on the possibility of developing a new “ecocide” criminal offense at international level.
This could be discussed during the revision procedure of the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Environment through Criminal Law (ETS No.

172).

When considering this subject matter, special attention should be paid to the kind of behaviours that must be sanctioned, the entities that should be held liable, the damage threshold, the characterisation of intent and the enforcement issues.
The threshold of environmental damage should in particular be defined precisely, using the latest work and the ICRC’s updated Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict, as well as examples.

This definition effort would help lower the obstacle constituted by the interpretation of threshold in practice (namely, what constitutes “significant harm”, or “widespread, long-term, and severe damage”).
The suppression of this threshold instead of a clear (or clearer) definition could also be an option to consider.

43.

Regarding the issue of enforcement of the existing legal framework, we should advocate for the development of review and monitoring mechanisms based on the relevant provisions of the Rome Statute (of the International Criminal Court) and international humanitarian law.

44.

The Council of Europe could also encourage the development of new tools.

The Bern Convention (ETS No.


104), for instance, could serve as a forum to discuss new policies for a better protection of wildlife and natural habitats in times of armed conflicts.

The mapping of areas of particular environmental importance or sensitivity, based on existing protected areas (such as world heritage sites or natural reserves), in anticipation of any form of armed conflicts should be strongly recommended.

In case a military conflict breaks out, these areas should become demilitarized zones.
The Standing Committee governing the Bern Convention could publish recommendations regarding the protection of environmentally sensitive areas during armed conflicts, study the feasibility of an additional Protocol to the Convention to this end, and also create a review mechanism to ensure that the recommendations are implemented by States parties.
These recommendations should be further transposed into domestic law, be incorporated into military doctrine, and be shared among member States towards developing good practice.

The Committee of the Bern Convention could work together with the ICRC on this topic.

45.

The drafting of a new regional legal instrument or treaty could also be discussed under the Council of Europe’s auspices.
In that case, the proposal should clarify and fill the identified gaps of the existing legal regime (namely, on damage threshold, enforcement and liability, and the due diligence principle).

Even if such a proposal would only bind the States parties in the end, it may contribute to reinforcing customary humanitarian law dealing with environment protection and may inspire other forms of co-operation.
Moreover, the European Court of Human Rights should be encouraged to use the functional impact-model with jurisdiction whenever the question of the extraterritorial application of human rights arises in situations of armed conflict or occupation.

Under the functional impact-model, jurisdiction would be invoked in situations where the impact is direct and reasonably foreseeable.

The purpose of this effort would be to fill the legal vacuum leading to “legal blackholes” and arbitrariness.

46.
46.

It is indeed of crucial importance to continue building on good practices in order to establish or reinforce new customary law principles.
Therefore, member States of the Council of Europe, as well as observer States and States whose parliament enjoys observer or partner for democracy status, should ratify existing legal instruments, including the ENMOD Convention, actively participate in the revision process of the Council of Europe’s convention 172, and employ sufficient means to ensure proper monitoring and implementation of commitments.
Moreover, it has been observed that, on the ground and when in doubt, belligerents primarily refer to military manuals.

Hence, member States should adopt adequate operational documents and keep them up to date with the international legal framework.

Finally, national authorities need to pay more attention to loopholes identified in the existing legal 47. framework when envisaging upcoming work.
Specific attention should be paid to the issue of environmental refugees, the lack of a clear and well-developed international framework regarding situations of occupation, as well as issues of compliance with international humanitarian law in the context of internal armed conflicts.

Regarding the latter, it is of crucial importance to engage with the key actors on the ground (ICRC, third States 47.
PAX is an organisation based in the Netherlands that works with various partners, including the UN organisations, “to document the environmental impact of new and ongoing conflicts, and to build better responses in order to reduce threats to public health and environmental risks for civilians”; see https://paxforpeace.nl/what-we-do/programmes/conflict- environment.

16 acting as mediators, NGOs) in order to promote knowledge of and compliance with international standards among non-state actors.
Working groups and coalitions could also be created on the specific issue of awareness raising on the environmental impact of armed conflicts regarding non-state belligerents and should bring together all relevant international organisations, States, strategic NGOs and civil society, the main actors on the ground and academic scholars.

Doc.

15674 Report 17 Speakers list / Liste des orateurs Issued at 15.40 / Distribuée à 15h40 Joint debate: Wednesday 25 January 2023 1.
The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges • GURMAI, Zita [Ms] (Hungary, SOC), Rapporteur; Committee on Equality and Non- Discrimination (Doc.

15673) 2.

The role and responsibility of men and boys in stopping gender-based violence against women and girls • STIENEN, Petra [Ms] (Netherlands, ALDE), Rapporteur; Committee on Equality and Non- Discrimination (Doc.

15678) 3.
15678) 3.

Finding solutions for marital captivity • BOER, Margreet De[Ms] (Netherlands, SOC), Rapporteur; Committee on Equality and Non- Discrimination (Doc.

15679) Débat conjoint : mercredi 25 janvier 2023 1.

La Convention d’Istanbul: progrès et défis • GURMAI, Zita [Mme] (Hongrie, SOC), Rapporteure; Commission sur l'égalité et la non- discrimination (Doc.

15673) 2.
15673) 2.

Le rôle et la responsabilité des hommes et des garçons dans l’élimination de la violence à l’égard des femmes et des filles fondée sur le genre • STIENEN, Petra [Mme] (Pays-Bas, ADLE), Rapporteure; Commission sur l'égalité et la non- discrimination (Doc.

15678) 3.

Trouver des solutions à la captivité conjugale • BOER, Margreet De[Mme] (Pays-Bas, SOC), Rapporteure; Commission sur l'égalité et la non-discrimination (Doc.
15679) Speakers on behalf of political groups / Orateurs au nom des groupes politiques ALDE / ADLE EC/DA / CE/AD UEL / GUE VASYLENKO, Lesia [Ms] Ukraine AIKEN, Nickie [Ms] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni STAMBACH-TERRENOIR, Anne [Mme] France SOC SCHWABE, Frank [Mr] Germany / Allemagne EPP/CD / PPE/DC KOVÁCS, Elvira [Ms] Serbia / Serbie Speakers list / Liste des orateurs 1 2 3 SOC CEGONHO, Pedro [Mr] Portugal EPP/CD / PPE/DC DAVIDOVICI, Natalia [Ms] Republic of Moldova / République de Moldova ALDE / ADLE GHAZARYAN , Sona [Ms] Armenia / Arménie F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 | Fax: +33 3 88 41 2733 Speakers list / liste des orateurs Speakers list / Liste des orateurs EC/DA / CE/AD NURULLAYEVA, Konul [Ms] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan SOC MARTINEZ SEIJO, Luz [Ms] Spain / Espagne EPP/CD / PPE/DC MEZENTSEVA, Mariia [Ms] GÜNAY, Emine Nur [Ms] Ukraine Türkiye NR / NI SOC PEÑA, Esther [Ms] Spain / Espagne ALDE / ADLE MUSTAFA, Fazil [M.] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan EC/DA / CE/AD HOWELL, John [Mr] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni SOC BAYR, Petra [Ms] Austria / Autriche EPP/CD / PPE/DC FILIPOVSKI, Dubravka [Ms] Serbia / Serbie SOC GRIFFITHS, Leslie [Lord] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni UEL / GUE CASTEL*, Laura [Ms] Spain / Espagne EPP/CD / PPE/DC CALVET, François [M.] France ALDE / ADLE GRIN, Jean-Pierre [M.] Switzerland / Suisse EC/DA / CE/AD FATALIYEVA, Sevinj [Ms] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan OTHER.DEL / AUTRE.DEL NR / NI SOC BOGUJEVCI , Saranda [Ms] Assembly of Kosovo* / Assemblée du Kosovo* TOROCZKAI, László [Mr] Hungary / Hongrie ALDE / ADLE BOUYX, Bertrand [M.] ESTRELA, Edite [Mme] Portugal France SOC LACROIX*, Christophe [M.] Belgium / Belgique EC/DA / CE/AD DECROIX, Eva [Ms] EPP/CD / PPE/DC KAMELCHUK, Yuriy [Mr] Czech Republic / République tchèque Ukraine France SOC SOC KARAMANLI, Marietta [Mme] ERIKSEN, Even [Mr] Norway / Norvège EPP/CD / PPE/DC MEIRELLES, Isabel [Mme] EPP/CD / PPE/DC FOURNIER,
 Bernard [M.] ALDE / ADLE ALDE / ADLE ZABURANNA, Lesia [Ms] FRESKO-ROLFO*, Béatrice [Mme] Monaco Portugal France Ukraine EC/DA / CE/AD NIIKKO, Mika [Mr] Finland / Finlande NR / NI SOC BAKUNETS, Pavlo [Mr] Ukraine ARSLAN, Sibel [Ms] Switzerland / Suisse EC/DA / CE/AD KARIMZADA, Parvin [Ms] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan UEL / GUE UNNELAND, Andreas Sjalg [Mr] Norway / Norvège OBS.
NR / NI HERNÁNDEZ RAMOS, Minerva [Ms] Mexico / Mexique BARDELL, Hannah [Ms] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni ALDE / ADLE TROY, Robert [Mr] Ireland / Irlande SOC BILALLI ZENDELI, Arta [Ms] North Macedonia / Macédoine du Nord 2 Speakers list / liste des orateurs Speakers list / Liste des orateurs 40 EC/DA / CE/AD GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR, Berglind Ósk [Ms] Iceland / Islande 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 SOC MONTEMAGGI, Marica [Ms] San Marino / Saint-Marin ALDE / ADLE KEMPPI, Hilkka [Ms] Finland / Finlande SOC CORBYN, Jeremy [Mr] United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni EC/DA / CE/AD SÁNCHEZ GARCÍA, José María [Mr] Spain / Espagne SOC TÜRK-NACHBAUR, Derya [Ms] Germany / Allemagne ALDE / ADLE BERG, Caspar Van den[Mr] Netherlands / Pays-Bas UEL / GUE UCA, Feleknas [Ms] Türkiye OBS.
SOC SOC SOC SOC SOC SOC BENAVIDES COBOS, Gabriela [Ms] Mexico / Mexique SAYEK BÖKE, Selin [Ms] Türkiye GJONAJ, Etilda [Ms] Albania / Albanie HAJDUKOVIĆ, Domagoj [Mr] Croatia / Croatie CACHIA, Naomi [Ms] Malta / Malte JENSEN, Mogens [Mr] Denmark / Danemark LUCKS, Max [Mr] Germany / Allemagne UEL / GUE ARSENIS, Kriton-Ilias [Mr] Greece / Grèce SOC FILATOV, Tarja [Ms] Finland / Finlande *Moved up 3 positions (Additional provisions relating to Assembly debates, Rules of Procedure, page 108, paragraph 10) / Placé trois rangs plus haut (dispositions complémentaires relatives aux débats de l’Assemblée, Règlement, p. 109, paragraphe 10).
*Following the Bureau decision of 12 September 2022, all reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population, shall be understood in full compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo / À la suite de la décision prise par le Bureau le 12 septembre 2022, toute référence au Kosovo, qu’il s’agisse du territoire, des institutions ou de la population, doit être comprise dans le plein respect de la résolution 1244 du Conseil de Sécurité des Nations Unies et sans préjudice du statut du Kosovo.
3 Provisional edition Wednesday 25 January 2023, afternoon Official report of debates Joint Debate: The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges/The role and responsibility of men and boys in stopping gender-based violence against women and girls/Finding solutions for marital captivity Ms Naomi CACHIA (Malta, SOC): Undelivered speech, Rules of Procedure Art.

31.2 Violence against women is not solely a woman’s burden to carry; It is society’s.
But often society and, crucially, us as legislators, have been too slow to act.

And unfortunately, sometimes it is too late.

And there is no way to turn back the clock for the women who have lost their life to domestic, or to gender-based violence.

But that should certainly, underline the urgency with which we should be acting.
And the political and legislative commitment, to fight inequality and prevent violence against women and girls, does not stop with the ratification and implementation of the Istanbul Convention; Where the Convention speaks about taking ‘the necessary legislative or other measures’, as it does in many of its articles, we need to ensure that states remain committed to re-evaluate their legislation, to re-evaluate the effectiveness of their institutions and policies, to ensure that such measures are indeed working towards the objectives of the Convention, and not simply remain a box-ticking exercise.
And so I welcome the resolution and recommendations being made in the report on the Istanbul Convention.

Last year in Malta, we made femicide, a distinct, criminal offence; an important step which recognises that ‘gender-based violence against women’ is a reality, that we must call out, condemn and punish.

But we also recognise that it is not enough, and we must continue to do more to strengthen preventative mechanisms.
For decades, we have spoken about the need to keep empowering women – and we must continue to do so.

But I’m afraid, sometimes, we’ve been sending the wrong message, when it comes to intimate partner violence perpetration, especially.

We cannot risk oversimplifying this issue.

We must continue to understand what the levels of contributing factors are, to becoming a perpetrator, or becoming a victim.
And this understanding must be reflected, systematically and holistically, in our strategies and awareness-raising campaigns.

And the Dublin Declaration on the Prevention of Domestic, Sexual and Gender-Based Violence is certainly another very important step in the right direction.

We need to give the same momentum to campaigns which educate men about their responsibility and their role in achieving gender equality.

Less victim-blaming, and more accountability.

In this report: 1.
In this report: 1.

Speeches in English, French, German and Italian are reported in full in English.

2.

Speeches in other languages are summarised from the interpretation and indicated by an asterisk (*).

3.

Speeches in German and Italian are available in full on the Assembly's website.

4.

The text of the amendments is available at the document centre and on the Assembly’s website.

Only oral amendments or oral sub-amendments are reproduced in the report of debates.
5. Corrections should be handed in at Room 1081 not later than 24 hours after the report has been published.

F - 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: +33 3 88 41 2000 | assembly.coe.int https://pace.coe.int And so I welcome the report on the role of men and boys in stopping gender-based violence; because men, and here I must specifically call on men in positions of power, must be our allies in this fight to break the cycle of violence.
We need to keep speaking about the importance of financial autonomy; of providing victims with immediate shelter and ensuring victims of violence get help on time, help that is sensitive to their situation, and a support system to help them regain the independence that they deserve.

Women are tired, we are angry.

We have had enough.

And states must recognise how crucial it is to prioritise the aims of the Istanbul convention, and the Dublin Declaration.
We cannot waste any more time – we cannot lose any more lives.

I would also have liked to see more men participate in this debate – but I thank the men who have.

Men should be championing this cause alongside us women.

For as long as they don’t own these struggles, as long as they feel like this burden is not theirs to carry, then I’m afraid the obstacles we are discussing in these reports will continue to accumulate.
Finally, I have to conclude by expressing my gratitude to the rapporteurs: Zita, Petra and Margaret; you certainly inspire, and stand out to me, because of your resilience and constant commitment to the cause, so thank you.

2 Doc.
2 Doc.

15673 05 January 2023 The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges Report1 Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination Rapporteur: Ms Zita GURMAI, Hungary, Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group Summary The Convention on the Protection and Prevention of Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, the Istanbul Convention, remains the best international framework for protecting women from gender-based violence and preventing domestic violence.
In the decade since its opening for signature, the convention has considerably influenced changes in national laws, has given greater visibility to the urgent need to address violence against women and domestic violence, and brought changes in policies.

Despite these achievements, alarmingly high levels of violence and tragic femicides persist, harming and killing women and girls in all their diversity, especially in the context of intimate partner violence.
The Parliamentary Assembly urges those member States not yet having ratified the Istanbul Convention and the European Union to do so.

It calls on States Parties to the convention to step up their implementation of its provisions, including on the basis of the evaluation reports by the Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, GREVIO.
Violence against women and domestic violence must also be a priority in the Action Plan of the 4th Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe in Reykjavik in May 2023.

1.

Reference to Committee: Doc.

15386, Reference 4617 of 24 January 2022. https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Doc.

15673 Report Contents Page A.

Draft resolution ........................................................................................................................................ 3 B.
Draft recommendation ............................................................................................................................. 5 C. Explanatory memorandum, by Ms Zita Gurmai, rapporteur ..................................................................... 6 1.

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.
Scope and objectives of the report ......................................................................................................6 3.

Progress since 2019 ........................................................................................................................... 7 3.1.

Growing the convention .............................................................................................................. 7 3.2.
Building a corpus of data and experience ................................................................................... 8 3.3.

The Gender Equality Strategy 2018-2023 ...................................................................................8 4.

Stubborn and emerging risks facing the Istanbul Convention ............................................................. 9 4.1.
Contextual factors ....................................................................................................................... 9 4.2.

Deliberate misrepresentations and backlash .............................................................................. 9 5.

The Parliamentary Assembly and the Istanbul Convention ............................................................... 11 5.1.
Parliaments promoting the convention ...................................................................................... 11 5.2.

MPs as legislators .....................................................................................................................12 5.3.

Parliamentary oversight of implementation – essential for progress on the ground .................. 13 6.
Challenges at national level: a case study of Türkiye ........................................................................13 7.

Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................... 14 2 Doc.

15673 Report A.

Draft resolution2 Gender-based violence as an extreme form of violation of human rights is present in all member States 1. of the Council of Europe.
It is a consequence of persistent inequalities between individuals and groups at all levels, whether social, economic or legal.

Although men and boys are also victims, women and girls are disproportionately affected by gender-based violence.

The risk of violence is multiplied by social and intersectional factors such as disability, ethnic origin and sexual orientation.

2.
2.

According to United Nations estimates, 736 million women in the world have suffered physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence, non-partner sexual violence, or both (not including sexual harassment), at least once in their life, which represents 30% of women aged 15 and above.
According to first findings, gender-based violence increased during the Covid-19 pandemic due to successive lockdowns which trapped victims in closed spaces with their aggressors, and at the same time complicated women’s and girls’ access to protection and assistance, in what has been termed a “shadow pandemic”.
Recognising the need for comprehensive systems for the prevention of and protection against gender- 3. based violence, and for policies to eliminate violence in particular against women and girls, the Council of Europe adopted its Convention on the Protection and Prevention of Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (CETS No.

210, “Istanbul Convention”), opened for signature on 11 May 2011, which entered into force on 1 August 2014.
The convention now counts 37 ratifications, and 8 signatures not yet followed by ratification.

4.

The Parliamentary Assembly welcomes the high number of ratifications of the Istanbul Convention to date, which gives some optimism for future progress in eliminating gender-based violence.
It is impressed by the influence the convention has had on national legislations to fight gender-based violence, which have been adapted to ensure conformity with the convention, and by the changes it has inspired in policies and awareness-raising work.
The Assembly congratulates the Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO) and the Committee of the Parties for their work so far, in the far-reaching 2016-2023 baseline evaluation cycle, as well as its first third party intervention before the European Court of Human Rights and first General Recommendation on the digital dimension of violence against women.
Despite these achievements, alarmingly high levels of violence and tragic femicides persist, harming 5. and killing women and girls from all walks of life and in all their diversity, especially in the context of intimate partner violence.

Backlash against and backsliding of women’s rights are commonplace and often originate in political discourse aimed to maintain inequalities and impose ever tighter restrictions on democracy and human rights.

6.
6.

The Assembly points out that gender-based violence comes at a cost, which the European Institute for Gender Equality estimated in 2021 to amount to €366 billion a year, of which 79 % is linked to violence against women.

Physical and emotional impacts make up 56% of this cost, criminal justice services 21% and lost economic output 14%.
In the interests of all of society, action must therefore be stepped up to end the inequalities which lead to violence and to empower people in situations of vulnerability by giving them full access to their rights.

7.

Referring to its previous Resolution 2289 (2019) “The Istanbul Convention on violence against women: achievements and challenges”, the Assembly reiterates the recommendations set out in that text.
In addition, with regard to promoting its ratification, the Assembly: 7.1. urges Azerbaijan to sign and ratify it without further delay; urges the parliaments of Armenia, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania and 7.2. the Slovak Republic to increase their efforts to promote and engage in procedures for ratification to follow up on their signature; urges Türkiye, the country that gave its name to the convention and was among the first 7.3. ratifications, to reconsider its withdrawal and return to the convention; 7.4. encourages the European Union to overcome the legal obstacles to ratification as a means of ensuring the implementation of its provisions in all European Union member States and of promoting it in others; 2.
Draft resolution adopted unanimously by the committee on 1 December 2022.

3 Doc.

15673 Report 7.5. encourages Israel, Kazakhstan and Tunisia to follow up on the invitation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to accede to the convention, and encourages other non-member States, observers and partners for democracy to do so as soon as possible.

8.
8.

With respect to the prevention of violence against women and girls and domestic violence, the Assembly calls on all States Parties to the Istanbul Convention to fully implement its provisions as an assurance of solid, protective laws and policies relating to prevention, protection and prosecution embedded in a set of integrated policies.
To this end it calls on the parliaments of States Parties to the Istanbul Convention to: carry out regular assessments of national legislation and propose revisions of laws where they 8.1. are not in conformity with the provisions of the convention; 8.2. make sure that legislation is efficient in ensuring protection against violence against women and girls, including domestic violence, and prosecution of perpetrators of violence; ensure regular monitoring of implementation in accordance with Article 70 of the convention and 8.3. give adequate prominence to the baseline reports of GREVIO and the recommendations of the Committee of the Parties in parliamentary debates and hearings; organise awareness-raising campaigns both in their parliaments and in their constituencies, and 8.4. to report back to the Assembly annually in order to document these good practices; 8.5. bearing in mind the requirement under the convention for policies to place the rights of the victim at the centre of all measures, to ensure co-operation between all relevant stakeholders in design and implementation of policies and programmes, including women’s civil society organisations and diverse communities; include a gender perspective in the implementation and evaluation of the impact of the 8.6. convention as set out in its Article 6.
9.

With respect to dispelling deliberate misrepresentations around the ultimate objectives of the Istanbul Convention, the Assembly underlines that these are part of broader negative tendencies in today’s societies carried by anti-rights movements and aiming to curb the enjoyment of human rights by persons belonging to certain groups.
It asks all parliaments of Council of Europe member and observer States as well as parliaments which enjoy the status of observer or partner for democracy with the Assembly to: firmly assert that the convention focuses on women and girls in all their diversity as people who 9.1. are disproportionately affected by gender-based violence; acknowledge that the convention does not threaten the nuclear family or family values, nor does 9.2. it impose certain lifestyles; 9.3. further take into account that the convention does not encourage irregular or illegal migration when endeavouring to ensure that women victims of intimate partner violence are not dependent on the residency status of their aggressors; 9.4. recognise that domestic legislation may be effective but that the convention provides a blueprint for national legislation and an efficient system of evaluation and assistance in implementation, and that sharing of best practices and trans-border and international co-operation are important in combating violence against women and domestic violence.
The Assembly welcomes the priority given to preventing and combating violence against women and 10. domestic violence in the report of the High Level Reflection Group on the Council of Europe’s role in responding to new realities and challenges facing Europe and the world, published in October 2022, which will contribute to the themes taken up by the 4th Summit of Heads of State and Government announced by the Committee of Ministers for 16-17 May 2023.
Recalling that it has constantly called for the organisation of a new summit since 2017, the Assembly 11. requests that the recommendations in the report be followed up by the Committee of Ministers and that the priority given by the High Level Reflection Group be adequately reflected in the action plan of the 4th Summit.
Finally, the Assembly decides to hold an annual exchange to take stock of progress with ratification and 12. implementation of the Istanbul Convention, as part of its monitoring responsibilities under the convention.

4 Doc.

15673 Report B.

Draft recommendation3 Referring to its Resolution ... (2023) “The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges”, the 1.
Parliamentary Assembly congratulates the Committee of Ministers for its constant support for the Convention on the Protection and Prevention of Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (CETS No.

210, “Istanbul Convention”), which has contributed to its ratification by 37 member States to date.

2.
In the light of the absolute need to do more to eliminate violence against women and domestic violence by promoting the Istanbul Convention, as a unique and essential tool in shaping preventive and protective legislation and policies and punishing perpetrators of gender-based violence, as well as of the need to dispel deliberate misrepresentations of the treaty, the Assembly calls on the Committee of Ministers to: promote ratification of the Istanbul Convention in those countries having not yet ratified it, and to 2.1. encourage States having ratified it to lift any reservations made on accession where this is possible; 2.2. promote feminist foreign policies as a means to attain more representative, inclusive policy making and multilateral action in combating gender-based violence on the basis of the normative international framework; 2.3. in continuity with the recommendations made in October 2022 by the High-level Reflection Group on the Council of Europe’s role in responding to new realities and challenges facing Europe and the world, ensure that priority is given in the Action Plan of the 4th Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe in May 2023 to combating violence against women and domestic violence through the implementation of the Istanbul Convention; take action to ensure implementation of the Dublin Declaration of Council of Europe Ministers on 2.4. the prevention of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence adopted in September 2022; ensure that the new Gender Equality Strategy (2024-2029) gives priority to combating and 2.5. preventing violence against women, building on the successes of the current strategy 2018-2023; 2.6. give renewed support to the Council of Europe’s activities on gender equality and on combating violence against women, as well as the Assembly’s Parliamentary Network Women Free from Violence, including through financial contributions by member States.
Finally, the Assembly proposes a new Organisation-wide awareness-raising campaign on the aims and 3. impact of the Istanbul Convention and its contribution towards women’s rights and gender equality in Europe.

3.

Draft recommendation adopted unanimously by the committee on 1 December 2022.

5 Doc.

15673 Report C. Explanatory memorandum, by Ms Zita Gurmai, rapporteur 1.

Introduction 1.
Introduction 1.

In 2019, I was rapporteur for the Parliamentary Assembly’s very first report on the implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (CETS No.
210, “Istanbul Convention”), “The Istanbul Convention on violence against women: achievements and challenges”.4 The report took stock of the first achievements of the Istanbul Convention, and made a number of recommendations, for instance on co-operation with the Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO) in implementing and monitoring activities, as well as on prevention and protection services to be provided to those at risk and to victims, and on awareness- raising and training for professionals in the area.
2.

The call to prepare a second report was made on 23 June 2021 when, at the initiative of former Assembly President, Rik Daems, and as a response to the withdrawal from the convention by Türkiye, the Assembly held a high-level event and interactive debate marking a decade since its adoption, entitled “The Istanbul Convention: 10 years on”.
All speakers underlined the vital importance of the Istanbul Convention, praised the progress achieved, reaffirmed their support and called for more ratifications and effective implementation, undertaking to counter misconceptions and backlash.
Concluding the event as General Rapporteur on violence against women and Coordinator of the Network Women Free from Violence, I pointed to the importance of political will to change society and to the need for champions of the cause of putting an end to violence, both men and women.

The motion for a resolution drafted after the event stated that the leading role should be played by the 3.
Assembly’s General Rapporteur on violence against women “and supported by the Parliamentary Network Women Free from Violence”, which led to my appointment as rapporteur.

As Coordinator of the Network, I was supported by the advice and experience of the members of the Network during all stages of preparation of this report.

The President of the Assembly, Tiny Kox, has also been an important ally in promoting this work at the highest level.

4.
4.

Following the 11 May celebration of the opening for signature of the convention, the 23 June 2021 event and the Assembly’s participation in the United Nations Generation Equality Forum (Paris, 30 June-2 July 2021)5 were two milestones marking a decade of action framed by the Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention.

Through its President, the Assembly made a pledge to the forum, to step up its efforts to promote the Convention by all means.

2.

Scope and objectives of the report 5.


The Istanbul Convention remains the most innovative and groundbreaking international legal instrument which sets out the right of women to live free from violence as a human right.

One of most relevant of many unique aspects of the convention to this report is its explicit provision for the active participation of parliamentarians in the operating and monitoring of the treaty.
In its Article 70, national parliaments and the Council of Europe’s Assembly are called upon to participate in monitoring at national level and carry out regular stock-taking in the Assembly.

Therefore, the Assembly has a duty to encourage involvement on the part of each of its member State 6. parliaments, and to push for the fulfilment of the important expectations stemming from the convention placed on parliamentarians.
These are to engage in positive action towards ratification and implementation, including on the basis of the findings and recommendations by the experts in the framework of the monitoring mechanism of the Istanbul Convention.
The present report looks at the efforts made so far by parliamentarians nationally and internationally to further the aims of the convention, and highlights those which have achieved the best and most visible results – either in State’s legislative and policy frameworks to stop violence, or which evidence on the ground shows the positive effects in preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence.

See Doc.

14908 and Resolution 2289 (2019).


See chapter 5.1. below for more information on the high-level event and the participation in the Generation Equality 4.

5.

Forum.

6 Doc.

15673 Report 7.

Secondly, the title of the report indicates from the outset that the focus should be on examining progress and pointing to the major challenges encountered over the eight years since the convention’s entry into force.
An exhaustive list of achievements would certainly have impressed, but I believe that detailed focus on some areas of excellence, and on other areas where new strategies or stronger action is needed, will surely be more useful at this juncture.
My work on this report included a fact-finding visit to Türkiye, during which I exchanged with women’s 8. rights organisations and national judicial and executive authorities in an effort to see how measures to protect women from violence had developed since withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention as well as to promote Türkiye’s return to the convention, and organised a hearing in the committee with the participation of Assembly President Tiny Kox, the President of the Committee of the Parties Ambassador Marie Fontanel, Permanent Representative of France to the Council of Europe, and the President of the GREVIO, Iris Luarasi.
9.

In continuity with the Istanbul Convention’s provision for input by the Assembly, the Assembly also wishes to contribute its experience and the influence of its members to the Council of Europe’s future action in a broad manner.

I hope that the report will provide food for thought for the next Council of Europe Gender Equality Strategy, which will be introduced after the present strategy (2018-2023) comes to an end (see chapter 3.3. below).

3.

Progress since 2019 3.1.

Growing the convention 10.


Much has happened since the 2019 report and debate.

First of all, and on an extremely positive note, four more countries (Liechtenstein, the Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and the United Kingdom) ratified the Convention between June 2021 and August 2022 and Kosovo*6 took the decision to apply it within its territory.

Three non-member States (Israel, Kazakhstan and Tunisia) have now been invited by the Committee of Ministers to accede.
There is still a real hope for European Union ratification in the foreseeable future and the dream of accession by all member States no longer seems a pure fantasy.

The unfortunate withdrawal of Türkiye from the convention in 2021 was naturally disappointing, but the present total of 37 ratifications or accessions should be celebrated as a significant achievement, and some of the 8 signatures not yet followed by ratification may soon lead to progress.

11.
11.

The Istanbul Convention’s monitoring mechanism has increased its momentum: at the time of adoption of this report, GREVIO has published “baseline” evaluation reports on 29 member States and carried out evaluation visits to a further 3 States.

It has also published two milestone documents: the Mid-Term Horizontal Review of GREVIO baseline evaluation reports,7 and its first General Recommendation, on the digital dimension of violence against women.

12.
12.

Many criminal codes have been aligned with the convention, with new offences on stalking, female genital mutilation, sexual harassment and forced marriage being introduced.
Several States Parties now have legal definitions of rape modelled on the consent-based definition of rape as any non-consensual sexual act, as required under Article 36 of the convention, or are in the process of introducing consent-based definitions: the latest countries to make changes in this respect were Denmark, Finland, Slovenia and Spain.
The GREVIO was also a founding member of the Independent Expert Mechanisms on Discrimination 13. and Violence against Women – the EDVAW Platform, created by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls and made up of seven global expert mechanisms working to combat violence against women and girls.

The GREVIO, represented by its President, Iris Luarasi, is currently chairing the platform.

14.
14.

Regarding the European Union, the European Parliament first asked the Commission to launch the procedure for EU accession to the Istanbul Convention in its Resolution on combating Violence against Women of 25 February 2014.

Since then, it has consistently underlined that ratification would be a powerful demonstration of the European Union’s commitment to eradicating violence against women and establishing a coherent European legal framework for doing so.
The von der Leyen Commission included the file as a priority *All reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population, in this text shall be understood in full 6. compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.

7.

Mid-Term Horizontal Review of GREVIO baseline evaluation reports, Council of Europe, February 2022.

7 Doc.
7 Doc.

15673 Report in its EU Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, but as progress remained blocked despite an opinion by the European Court of Justice that accession was possible, proposals for a new EU directive were published in March 2022.8 15.
The proposed directive uses the Istanbul Convention as a benchmark and its explanatory memorandum states that “The Istanbul Convention is the most extensive international framework to comprehensively address violence against women and domestic violence”, and further, that “For the Member States that are parties to the Istanbul Convention, the EU measures would support the Convention’s implementation”.

3.2.

Building a corpus of data and experience 16.


All of the documentation produced and gathered, as well as the on-site evaluation visits which enable member States to engage with the practical application of the treaty’s provisions, are accumulating to constitute a solid resource of practices, policies and case-law which allows areas needing increased attention to be identified.

17.
17.

In March 2020, the European Court of Human Rights and GREVIO launched a new HUDOC-GREVIO database to enable public users to search using filters by articles and keywords (for example forms of violence, target groups, etc.)
and retrieve information from GREVIO baseline evaluation reports and the respective final government comments; from recommendations issued by the Committee of the Parties as well as its conclusions; GREVIO activity reports; and now from GREVIO general recommendations since the first (on the Digital Dimension of Violence Against Women) was adopted in 2022.

The Court also produces factsheets on the convention’s remit.9 18.
In April 2020, GREVIO used for the first time its capacity to submit third-party interventions to the European Court of Human Rights.

In the case of Kurt v. Austria (application No.


62903/15), concerning the murder of an eight-year-old boy by his father despite reports of domestic violence by the mother, GREVIO’s submission focused in particular on the importance of applying a gendered understanding of domestic violence in order to ensure effective investigation, prosecution of perpetrators and protection of victims.

3.3.

The Gender Equality Strategy 2018-2023 19.


The Council of Europe designed a first strategy to bring together and reinforce its action in favour of gender equality, of which the Istanbul Convention is a central and integral part.

The strategy, implemented in the framework of the Gender Equality Commission, enables concrete institutional follow-up to be given to the GREVIO evaluation reports, in support of the measures recommended to and implemented by member States.
Activities in support of accession by States which are not yet Parties to the Istanbul Convention are also organised under the strategy, for instance legislative gap assessment with Azerbaijan, Latvia as well as Kosovo, with the possibility of organising technical assistance and awareness-raising action on demand, financed in part by the European Commission.

20.

These programmes have also allowed links to be preserved with government and civil society in Türkiye.
Multi-agency co-operation has been put in place with UN Women and the WAVE network (Women Against Violence Europe) of NGOs, providing support to align policy and peer exchanges in Georgia, Moldova, Azerbaijan and Armenia.

Programmes planned for 2023 in the Balkans will use GREVIO reports as a roadmap, as all countries concerned have ratified the convention.

21.
21.

The Council of Europe’s Human rights Education for Legal Professionals (HELP) courses include online courses on Access to Justice for Women and on Violence against Women for Legal Professionals, as well as on Domestic Violence for Law Enforcement (which exists in 23 languages), adapted on request to different groups and national contexts.
Measures of success of these courses is shown by the considerable takeup: in Spain, for instance, the course on violence against women has been integrated into all training for magistrates, and FRONTEX has shown interest in using the course.

22.

During its meeting in November the Gender Equality Commission, adopted Guidelines on the role of the men and boys in gender equality policies and in policies to combat violence against women.
At the same meeting, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights proposed including women’s reproductive Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating violence against women and 8. domestic violence, COM(2022)105 final, European Commission, 8 March 2022.

9. relevant cases of the European Court of Human Rights.
See the updated factsheets on domestic violence and on violence against women for a comprehensive overview of 8 and sexual health and rights in the next Gender Equality Strategy 2024-2029, and to pay special attention to women and girls facing marginalisation and intersectional discrimination.

I very much support her proposals and recommend them to the Assembly.

Doc.

15673 Report 4.

Stubborn and emerging risks facing the Istanbul Convention 4.1.

Contextual factors 23.


Unfortunately, in parallel to the considerable progress and achievements there have been serious setbacks for both the convention itself and thus for protection against gender-based violence.

The most regrettable of these for the Council of Europe’s direct outreach and effectiveness has been the withdrawal from the treaty of the very country which saw its opening for signature and gave the Istanbul Convention its name – Türkiye.
This has potentially negative implications for the combat against violence on the ground.

My fact-finding visit to Türkiye, described in detail below, gave me very substantial food for thought concerning the requirements for the protection of women from violence on a national level and the usefulness of belonging to the convention, using its normative framework, sharing good practices and benefiting from its monitoring system.

I would like to make a personal observation here.


The adversities faced by women all over Europe, but 24. more acutely in certain countries, have actually served to show just how important this treaty is for civil society everywhere, and how well known it is in non-specialist circles.

I do not know of any other Council of Europe convention that has been a slogan, even the focus and theme, of public demonstrations in the streets in defense of women’s rights (in Poland and in Türkiye, for instance).
This is paradoxically a measure of its success, and at the same time a demonstration of popular take-up and real need for progress on the ground.

25.

Another threat to the protection of women from violence which emerged during the recent period has been the Covid-19 pandemic.
The successive confinements around Europe, while proving the resistance and resilience of many, exacerbated the violent tendencies of others by obliging women and other persons with vulnerabilities (those with disabilities, LGBTI persons, especially young people dependent on their families) to stay behind closed doors with potential perpetrators in the domestic context.
The public health crisis revealed the fragility of measures of protection against violence, and the need to ensure that these measures are better suited and coordinated both in the public space and in private spheres.

As the pandemic recedes and Europe’s attention focuses on new crises as they develop, the lessons from Covid-19 about the need to prevent isolation and facilitate access to urgent assistance in domestic situations of violence should not be forgotten.

26.
26.

Lastly and most recently, open war has returned to Europe with the hideous aggression on Ukraine by Russia, resulting in the latter’s exclusion from membership of the Council of Europe on 14 March 2022.

The Istanbul Convention refers to Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)10 on the role of women and men in conflict prevention and resolution and in peace building.
It also recalls in its Preamble the “human rights violations during armed conflicts that affect the civilian population, especially women in the form of widespread or systematic rape and sexual violence and the potential for increased gender-based violence both during and after conflicts” and specifies that “[t]his Convention shall apply in times of peace and in situations of armed conflict.” 27.
The war continues and as its atrocities unfold, we see new proof of the fragility of human rights thought to be acquired, especially those of individuals and groups with vulnerabilities.

Women often physically embody the intersection of many different types of vulnerability, and thus are particularly at risk.
The report being prepared by Petra Bayr (Austria, SOC) will make specific recommendations on conflict-related sexual violence, including in relation to the Istanbul Convention, and Yevheniia Kravchuk’s report and resolution “Justice and security for women in peace reconciliation”10 gives indications as to how women must be empowered and protected in situations of conflict, in order to occupy their rightful and full place in peacetime societies.

4.2.

Deliberate misrepresentations and backlash 28.


Misrepresentations and misinformation about the Istanbul Convention are common, especially in those countries where traditional values and cultures make evolving and adapting to modern challenges particularly complicated and where conservative and populist political forces seek to preserve patriarchal societies (which 10.

Doc.

15525 and Resolution 2450 (2022).

9 Doc.

15673 Report restrict the rights of women but also of men).
Research has shown that “there is a highly organised, well- funded, transnational movement working to undermine women’s rights”:11 this is important to know, in order to understand the context and origin of the intense criticism, misinterpretation, and distortion of the aims of the convention.

GREVIO’s first activity report drew attention to this phenomenon, identifying it as a distraction from the combat against violence against women.
It has certainly given rise to backsliding and backlash which can only put victims at even greater danger.

29.

The convention is the first international treaty to contain a definition of gender, recognising that women and men are not only biologically female or male, but that there is also a socially constructed category of gender that assigns particular roles and behaviours to women and men, and which can contribute to making violence against women acceptable.
Establishing a differentiation between the terms “sex” and “gender”, as well as posing certain problems of interpretation12 is labelled by detractors as promoting a “destructive gender ideology”, whereas the aim is to work on those social constructs with negative consequences without replacing any biological definition.

Another misleading narrative is around the convention and gender identity.

Its intention is to protect all 30. women and girls from violence, including LBTI women.
It does not regulate legal gender recognition but ensures that all women and girls, including those exposed to intersectional discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity, benefit from the convention’s checklist of measures to ensure their safety and support.

Other opposition towards recognising non-binary identities is not limited to the Istanbul Convention but is a phenomenon of today’s polarised societies.
Non-binary identities are a part of our modern world and access to equal rights will have to evolve and adapt to include those identities.

The Istanbul Convention concentrates on women – in all their diversity – as disproportionately targeted by gender-based violence for the simple fact that they are women.

31.
31.

The Istanbul Convention is also said to “threaten the nuclear family and traditional family values”, whereas it does not express any such views and ratification does not mean forcing men or women into a certain lifestyle.

It merely states that women who are subjected to gender-based and domestic violence have the right to receive protection and the support they need to leave a violent relationship.
False claims also assert that the convention encourages illegal migration, which arises from the provisions of its Chapter 7 (Articles 59 to 61, on residence status, gender-based asylum claims and non-refoulement) aimed to separate the residence status of women victims of violence from that of their aggressors.

32.

Finally, some countries claim that they already have sufficient domestic legislation.
The convention covers the elimination of all types of violence against women and domestic violence, from which no country is free; the convention provides a blueprint for national legislation and has specific added value in this respect compared to previous international treaties.

The evaluation reports by GREVIO have shown that it sets standards, in legislation and policies, that national approaches have yet to attain.
Its comprehensive provisions enable States Parties to reach the necessary level of prevention, protection and support, and to ensure effective responses from law enforcement agencies and the judiciary to send the message that violence against women is unacceptable.

The efficient and constructive monitoring and the sharing of best practices as well as transnational cooperation are among the many advantages of ratification.

33.
33.

It is the duty of parliamentarians to counter these attempts to undermine the importance of the Istanbul Convention through awareness-raising activities and the use of elements of communication which can be understood by all, in order to contradict the negative narratives and promote better understanding.
During peer-to-peer seminars, parliamentarians looking to persuade their country to join the convention have regularly asked for help in framing arguments which will allow them to contradict the contradictors and debunk the myths.

34.
34.

Other policies and practices help to achieve the shift in priorities which is a pre-condition for reducing gender-based violence: some countries, for instance, like France, have initiated feminist foreign policies which are a significant step in achieving equality and establishing an integrated gender perspective.

I refer in this context to the excellent report of our colleague Petra Stienen, on the gender dimension of foreign policy.13 35.
In cases where member States cannot reconcile their policies and legislation with certain provisions but wish to ratify the convention, a system of reservations allows denunciation of one or more articles, provided these are duly justified.

They are subject to review for the purpose of possible renewal every five years.

These are differently perceived by stakeholders to the convention.

11.

See, for example Centre for Feminist Foreign Policy at www.centreforfeministforeignpolicy.org.

12.
12.

Some languages use the same word for both, which necessitates explanation of the concepts.

13.

Doc.

14627 and Resolution 2351 (2020) “The gender dimension of foreign policy”.

10 Doc.

15673 Report 5.

The Parliamentary Assembly and the Istanbul Convention 5.1.

Parliaments promoting the convention 5.1.1.

The Parliamentary Network Women Free from Violence14 Created in 2006, several years before the Istanbul Convention was adopted, the Parliamentary Network 36.
Women Free from Violence provides a vital parliamentary forum for the Council of Europe’s work to end gender-based violence, actively campaigning for ratification at national, European and global level and its effective implementation in practice.

It is widely known among partners such as the UN (UN Women) and the European Union, and through this is present around the table at the highest levels of international dialogue around women’s rights.

37.
37.

The network maintains a strong presence in all forums, including on social networks, and the voluntary financial contributions by parliaments and governments provide the means to develop tools and action, such as the handbook for parliamentarians on the convention.

The network also uses the opportunity of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women on 25 November to launch “mini-campaigns” in support of the convention.

5.1.2.
5.1.2.

High-level panel and debate, Wednesday 23 June 2021 – “The Istanbul Convention, 10 years on” 38.

On Wednesday 23 June 2021 the Assembly held the high-level panel and interactive debate on “The Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention): 10 years on”, chaired and moderated by the then President of the Assembly Rik Daems, and which gave the impetus to the present report.
Participants included Nadia Murad, Yezidi activist, winner of the 2016 Václav Havel Human Rights Prize, the 2018 Nobel Peace Prize and the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought; Council of Europe Secretary General Marija Pejčinović Burić; Prime Minister of Belgium Alexander de Croo; Anca Dana Dragu, President of the Romanian Senate; Elisabeth Moreno, French Minister for Gender Equality, Diversity and Equal Opportunities; and Dubravka Šimonovic, UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences.
Nadia Murad underlined the potential of the Istanbul Convention “to make meaningful change for 39. survivors like the Yazidis and women around the world by shifting the international norms around gender- based violence”.

She pointed out that in order to prevent sexual violence in times of war a strong foundation of gender equality must be created in times of peace.

For Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo, author of a book entitled The Age of Women: Why 40.
Feminism Also Liberates Men, the Istanbul Convention was a means for women and girls to know their rights and how to enforce them.

The first woman President of the Senate of Romania, Anca Dana Dragu, described the revision of Romanian legislation and public policies after ratification of the convention, including new partnerships with civil society.
Elisabeth Moreno, Minister Delegate to the Prime Minister of France for Gender Equality, Diversity and Equal Opportunities, told the audience that France had prioritised the universalisation of the Istanbul Convention as one of the main goals of its feminist diplomacy.

Dubravka Šimonovic, United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, was 41. working with the Istanbul Convention, amongst others on framework model legislation on the criminalisation and prosecution of rape.
Council of Europe Secretary General Marija Pejčinović-Burić stressed that no single government could recreate the protection provided by this multilateral treaty, with its unique, independent international monitoring mechanism enabling difficult, but positive, change to come about.

5.1.3.

Generation Equality Forum, France and Mexico, 28 June-1 July 202115 42.
In 2021 Mexico and France co-hosted the United Nations Generation Equality Forum, marking 25 years since the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing and its Action Plan, the Beijing Platform.

Organisations, NGOs and the private sector were invited to make pledges for action to empower women and advance and protect their rights.
The events provided an opportunity for the Assembly to renew its commitment to ending VAW, and President Rik Daems participated in the official ceremony opened by French President Emmanuel Macron.

14.

See pace.coe.int/en/pages/network-violence-women.

15.

See forum.generationequality.org.

11 Doc.

15673 Report 43.

The Assembly made a 5-year undertaking related to VAW which was one of the six “action coalitions” of the forum, wholly oriented around the Istanbul Convention.
Goals are to push for signature and ratification of the convention by all Council of Europe member States and to ensure full and effective implementation of the convention in the States Parties to the convention.
Action, to be implemented through the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination and the Parliamentary Network Women Free from Violence, includes awareness-raising activities with parliamentarians highlighting the progress made by the convention in combating violence against women, the organisation of information and peer-to-peer training seminars in national parliaments using the handbook for parliamentarians on the convention which was revised in 2019,16 and encouragement to parliamentarians to fully apply Article 70 of the convention providing for parliamentary monitoring.
A monitoring mechanism has been set up to follow implementation of the commitments to the Forum.

5.1.4.

Tools and concerted action The revised handbook for parliamentarians has been a successful tool for awareness-raising and 44. promotion, and the basis for the peer-to-peer seminars and workshops in national parliaments.
These were no longer possible during 2020 and 2021 due to Covid restrictions, but are currently being resumed, with a workshop in Rabat, Morocco, on 5 December 2022, working on the legislative and policy changes needed for accession.

During the period several online webinars were organised on different aspects of violence against women, co-organised by the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination and the Parliamentary Network Women Free from Violence.

45.
45.

This dynamic should be maintained, in particular through the work of the committee and the Parliamentary Network, and is also in conformity with Article 13 of the convention which requires Parties to promote or organise awareness-raising campaigns, in co-operation with women’s organisations in particular.
It is essential to maintain high visibility and to capitalise on the already widespread existing global recognition of the Istanbul Convention among partner organisations and importantly the public at large.

This is the way forward to adding to the Istanbul Convention’s four pillars of prevention, protection, prosecution and policies, the 5th “P”, which is parliaments, as legislators and “guardians of compliance” to quote the text itself.

5.2.
MPs as legislators In its 2022 Mid-term Horizontal Review of GREVIO baseline evaluation reports,17 the independent 46. group of experts on the convention noted that ratification has inspired a number of countries to changes their policies and legislation “expanding beyond the scope of domestic violence to address the various forms of violence covered by the convention.” One example is Spain, where measures have been taken to increase responses to forms of violence against women beyond domestic violence.
In Andorra, Austria, Malta, Monaco and Portugal, higher legislative and policy standards have been introduced, demonstrating for GREVIO “the transformative momentum created by the Istanbul Convention as much as the high degree of engagement among parties.”18 47.

Many other changes and promising practices in new legislation are showcased in the horizontal review, from cross-cutting provisions to focused areas of regulation.
In Belgium, for instance, a law of 12 January 2007 known as the Gender Mainstreaming Law provides for the integration of the principles of gender equality and non‑discrimination into public policies from the point at which they are devised to the point at which they are assessed and when they are implemented by the authorities and their staff.

This type of legislation has been adopted in several other countries.
In specific areas such migration, a number of countries have translated into law the right of a woman asylum seeker to request a female interviewer and interpreter – Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Serbia – where the law was amended following the ratification of the Istanbul Convention.
In France, an asylum reform undertaken following the ratification of the Istanbul Convention provided for the possibility for the applicant, in addition to being able to request a female interpreter and interviewer, to be accompanied in the asylum interview by a third party, such as a lawyer or a support worker from a specialist NGO.
Other legislation relating to articles of the convention has been introduced, including subjects such as victim and witness protection and support, prioritising investigations of domestic violence and sexual violence‑related offences, issues of consent and many more.

16.

See the English version of the handbook here and other language versions available online here.
Part of concrete action under the GEF commitment was to translate it into 11 languages (for the moment it is available in 10 languages and will be published in 3 more by the end of 2022).

17.

Mid-Term Horizontal Review of GREVIO baseline evaluation reports, op.

cit.

18.

Ibid.

: see page 17 on Article 2: scope of the convention.

12 Doc.

15673 Report 48.

These are just a few examples of the positive changes inspired by the convention and implemented through proposals for new laws.
However, from the sections of the mid-term review devoted to challenges for implementation, it is clear that much more remains to be done.

The conclusion of the review states this: “From the foregoing emerges clearly that, while concrete steps have been taken by all Parties towards the implementation of the convention, the road ahead is still riddled with challenges.
These can be surmounted, provided that there is sustained political commitment to breathe life into the convention and give it meaning at the national level.

This review, therefore, aims to serve as a stock‑taking exercise as much as a call to action, for governments who have been evaluated, and for those that await evaluation by GREVIO.” I call on all my fellow parliamentarians to take notice of this clear call for action.

5.3.
5.3.

Parliamentary oversight of implementation – essential for progress on the ground 49.

In its baseline evaluation report on Belgium, GREVIO identified as a good practice in line with Article 70, paragraph 1 of the convention, the emerging practice of submitting progress reports on the implementation of the National Action Plan regarding violence against women to the national parliament as well as the parliaments of the federated entities for review.
This should be generally promoted by parliamentarians and is part of the accompanying recommendations to this report.

The submission of reports to parliaments, priority given to discussion on the conclusions and legislative follow-up where relevant are essential phases in efficient implementation.

50.
50.

The Assembly should foresee an annual examination of action to implement the Istanbul Convention, inviting members to submit information on this action both in the framework of the reports of GREVIO and outside the evaluation cycles, with a view to enhancing institutional knowledge of its provisions and their application in States Parties, and improving implementation by broad sharing of practices and examples of legislative measures.
The recommendations of the Committee of Parties to the Convention should be included in this examination.

Without new visibility and priority given to implementation, the undeniable progress in protective and preventive measures shown by the supervisory mechanism will continue to be contradicted by the consistently shocking statistics on violence against women and domestic violence.

6.

Challenges at national level: a case study of Türkiye 51.
On 6-7 June 2022 I carried out a fact-finding mission to Istanbul and Ankara, which was invaluable in enabling me to gain a good overview of the national responses to violence against women in Türkiye, which in many areas correspond to those of other Council of Europe member States.
My visit to a country no longer Party to the convention may seem inappropriate, but one of my objectives was to promote the return of Türkiye, which I was able to do without experiencing any hostile reactions from the authorities with whom I met.

I certainly returned from the visit even more convinced of the advantages of membership of the Istanbul Convention while taking stock of policies in place to combat violence.

I will continue to do all in my power to encourage Türkiye’s renewed ratification.

52.
52.

I would especially like to thank the chairperson of the Turkish delegation to the Assembly, Mr Ahmet Yildiz, for facilitating my meetings in Ankara and for our substantial and open bilateral meeting.

My sincere thanks also to the delegation secretariat, in particular Ms Handan Karakaş for the efficient organisation of the mission.
I was also able to participate in a working lunch with members of the Turkish Parliament and of the delegation to the Assembly – Sena Nur Çelik, Emine Nur Günay, Feleknas Uca as well as Fatma Aksal.

In Istanbul and Ankara, I met with a large number of very dedicated and determined professional 53. women working for NGOs defending the rights of women throughout the country.
On the precise day of my visit to Ankara the Council of State, Türkiye’s highest administrative court, was holding hearings in the framework of over 200 lawsuits filed for the annulment of President Erdoğan’s decision to withdraw Türkiye from the Istanbul Convention.19 As a result I was able to profit from the presence of many activist women lawyers from all over Türkiye and to exchange with a group of 30 of them in the evening, after spending the day in meetings with the relevant authorities.
In Istanbul I was lucky to benefit from the premises of the Mor Çatı (Purple Roof) Women's Shelter Foundation20 in order to meet and exchange with the Foundation and other NGOs about their work and challenges.

19.

On July 19, the Council of State pronounced the withdrawal decision legal, despite the fact that the investigating judge, the prosecutor, and two of the court’s five judges stated that the President’s decision was unlawful.
See Eşik Platform’s statement, which promises appeals against the decision and “legal action including applying to the European Court of Human Rights”: “We Give Up NOT A WORD of the Istanbul Convention, despite the Council of State’s Decision!”, The Women’s Platform for Equality – EŞİK, 22 July 2022.

13 Doc.

15673 Report 54.


At the Mor Çatı Women's Shelter Foundation I met with representatives of the Istanbul Bar Association, the European Women’s Lobby, the Women's Coalition Coordination for Türkiye, the Women for Women's Human Rights-New Ways, the Women’s Library and Information Centre Foundation and the Red Pepper Association.
At my further meeting in Ankara I heard and exchanged with other European Women’s Lobby and Women’s Coalition representatives, including for women with disabilities, the Women’s Platform for Equality Eşik Platform, the Gay and Lesbian Cultural Research and Solidarity Association KAOS-GL, the Turkish Women’s Union (Türk Kadınlar Birliği), the Federation of Turkish Women’s Associations and the Hatice Demir Diyarbakir Bar Association.

55.
55.

I also met Emma Sinclair-Webb, Associate director and Türkiye director for Human Rights Watch, who presented a report just released entitled “Turkey fails domestic violence victims”21 and participated in the discussion.
I was able to learn from her about some of the threats to women’s rights in the country, and very much recommend the publication, which I was also able to promote during my meeting at the Ministry of the Family, where I received assurances that Human Rights Watch would shortly be invited to make a presentation.

56.
56.

My meetings with the Turkish authorities aimed to examine the current provisions for the protection of women against violence, in order to ascertain whether new national legislation brought into force recently is efficient in curbing violence against women, and whether it remains inspired by the provisions of the convention.
I met with Prosecutor Ms Emine Avcıoğlu, Mr Murat Çetinkaya Mr Ahmet Hamdi Taşyapan and Ms Elif Çelik at the Ministry for Justice, Dr Sibel Ozdemir, head of the Department of Combating Violence Against Women and Family of the Turkish National Police Force, Mr Şeref Malkoç, Chief Ombusdsperson of Türkiye, with Ms Fatma Benli Yalcin and Ms Celile Özlem Tunçak, Ombudspersons, Ms Fatma Aksal, Chairperson of the Committee on Equality of Opportunity for Women and Men, and Ms Öznur Çalık, Chairperson of the Research Committee of the Parliament on Violence Against Women, and finally with Ms Gülser Ustaoğlu, Head of Directorate on the Status of Women at the Ministry of Family and Social Policies.
57.

Obviously, when using the Istanbul Convention as the cursor, the positions of civil society and the national authorities are radically opposed about the need for belonging to the Convention.
In actual fact, I believe that on many of the issues discussed, especially those concerning measures, action and resources deployed on the ground, approaches could be less irreconcilable, and tragic shortfalls in the protection of women against violence could be better addressed through co-operation between civil society and national and regional authorities.

58.
58.

Cultural and political differences are, however, obstacles to dialogue and progress, as they are in Turkish society as a whole, especially when it comes to the protection against gender-based violence of specific groups such as women with disabilities, LBT women and minorities, and to all women’s access to fundamental sexual and reproductive health and rights.
The Istanbul Convention remains the best framework for protection, and in some regions of Türkiye local authorities and women’s organisations continue to use its provisions on which to model policies.

I would be extremely satisfied if the Turkish authorities came to realise that the convention has only advantages for the protection of women from violence and the prevention of domestic violence and took the decision to once more become a State Party.

7.
7.

Conclusions The Istanbul Convention is one of the Council of Europe’s youngest and most dynamic treaties.

It has 59. been a pleasure to take stock of how its outreach has developed over the last eight years since entering into force and continues to develop.

I congratulate all those stakeholders who have worked to ensure this success.

All member States of the Council of Europe should ratify and implement the convention if we are to 60. have a chance of reducing gender-based violence in Europe.
The Assembly and national parliaments must step up their efforts to promote the Istanbul Convention 61. and to firmly oppose its detractors.

20.

The Foundation carries out all-important work, including legal advice and assistance in addition to its practical work sheltering women.

Its regular submissions to the UN are a reference, for instance the report “Combating violence against women during the Coronavirus outbreak” submitted to the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls.
See en.morcati.org.tr.

21.

“Turkey Fails Domestic Violence Victims”, Human Rights Watch, 26 May 2022.

14 62.

The 4th Summit of Heads of State and of Government of the Council of Europe, announced for May 2023, will be a good opportunity for the Organisation to give renewed priority to the protection of women and girls against violence and to push for further progress in implementation of the Istanbul Convention as the best means of achieving this progress.
The Assembly trusts that this will be the case.

Doc.

15673 Report 15 2023 ORDINARY SESSION First part 23 – 27 January 2023 TEXTS ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY Provisional versions F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 | Table of contents Recommendations Recommendation 2244 (2023) Addressing the issue of Daesh foreign fighters and their families returning from Syria and other countries to the member States of the Council of Europe (Doc.
15591) Recommendation 2245 (2023) The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges (Doc.

15681) Recommendation 2246 (2023) Environmental impact of armed conflicts (Doc.

15674) Recommendation 2247 (2023) The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges (Doc.
15673) Resolutions Resolution 2475 (2023) Addressing the issue of Daesh foreign fighters and their families returning from Syria and other countries to the member States of the Council of Europe (Doc.

15591) Resolution 2476 (2023) Conflict-related sexual violence (Doc.

15677) Resolution 2477 (2023) Environmental impact of armed conflicts (Doc.

15674) Resolution 2478 (2023) Contact tracing applications: ethical, cultural and educational challenges (Doc.
15648) Resolution 2479 (2023) The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges (Doc.

15673) Resolution 2480 (2023) The role and responsibility of men and boys in stopping gender-based violence against women and girls (Doc.

15678) Resolution 2481 (2023) Finding solutions for marital captivity (Doc.

15679) Resolution 2482 (2023) Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine (Doc.
15689) Resolution 2483 (2023) The progress of the Assembly's monitoring procedure (January-December 2022) (Doc.

15682) Resolution 2484 (2023) The honouring of obligations and commitments by the Republic of Moldova (Doc.

15680) Resolution 2485 (2023) Emergence of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) and their necessary apprehension through European human rights law (Doc.

15683) Resolution 2486 (2023) Building the Open Council of Europe Academic Networks (OCEAN) (Doc.
15675) Recommendations 2244 to 2247 Recommendation 2244 (2023)1 Provisional version Addressing the issue of Daesh foreign fighters and their families returning from Syria and other countries to the member States of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly 1.

The Parliamentary Assembly refers to its Resolution 2475 (2023) “Addressing the issue of Daesh foreign fighters and their families returning from Syria and other countries to the member States of the Council of Europe”.

2.
2.

The Assembly recalls its support for the Council of Europe Counter-Terrorism Strategy (2018-2022), which has covered issues such as the gathering of evidence from conflict zones for the purpose of criminal prosecution, the prosecution of foreign terrorist fighters, deradicalisation, disengagement and social reintegration and the roles of women and children in terrorism.

The Assembly welcomes the adoption by the Committee of Ministers of its Recommendation CM/ 3.
Rec(2022)8 to member States on the use of information collected in conflict zones as evidence in criminal proceedings related to terrorist offences.

4.
The Assembly invites the Committee of Ministers to: 4.1. draft a recommendation on deradicalisation, disengagement and social reintegration of those involved in terrorist offences, on the basis of the ongoing collection of good practices from member States by the Council of Europe Committee on Counter-Terrorism (CDCT); 4.2. consider inviting the CDCT to examine the issue of cumulative prosecution of foreign terrorist fighters, for terrorism and other crimes under international criminal law and international humanitarian law, and also consider the interaction between anti-terrorism legislation and these branches of international law, and draft guidelines in this field; 4.3. encourage all member States to participate in setting up a special international tribunal or hybrid tribunal with jurisdiction over international crimes committed by Daesh foreign fighters, on condition that it may not impose the death penalty, and examine ways and means for the Council of Europe as a whole to play an active role in setting up and operating such a tribunal.
4.4. make it incumbent on the States to guarantee that children who are nationals of those States are not deprived of their nationality and may return with at least one of their parents.

The conditions of reception, including in the context of criminal justice, must as far as possible keep separation of child and parent(s) to a minimum where this is in the child’s best interest, and they must be applied on a “case-by-case” basis.

Assembly debate on 23 January 2023 (2nd sitting) (see Doc.
15591, report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and 1.

Human Rights, rapporteur: Mr Pieter Omtzigt; and Doc.

15672, opinion of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development, rapporteur: Mr Stefan Schennach).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 23 January 2023 (2nd sitting).
https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Recommendation 2245 (2023)1 Provisional version The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges Parliamentary Assembly 1.

Europe is facing extraordinary challenges.


The Russian Federation’s large-scale, protracted and brutal aggression against Ukraine is an affront to all the principles the Council of Europe stands for and to the foundations of the European multilateral architecture which has been built to avoid repeating the atrocities of the Second World War.
Russia's full-scale military aggression against Georgia in 2008 and subsequent occupation of Georgia's regions is part of the same aggressive policy, blatantly violating fundamental principles and norms of international law and rules-based international order.

The return of a large-scale war of aggression in Europe highlights that the solidity and resilience of 2.
European democracies, their respect for human rights and their adherence to the rule of law are the best guarantees for each other’s prosperity, security and peaceful future.

In this defining moment of European history, Council of Europe member States, at the highest political level, should reaffirm their unity around common values and their unfaltering commitment to multilateralism based on international law.
The Parliamentary Assembly, therefore, hails the decision of the Committee of Ministers to convene the 3.

4th Summit of the Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe in Reykjavik on 16-17 May 2023.
It commends the endeavours by the Irish and the Icelandic presidencies of the Committee of Ministers to achieve this result and expresses great appreciation for the role of the Secretary General, including her initiative, at the invitation of the Committee of Ministers, to set up a High-Level Reflection Group.
The Assembly welcomes the report of the High-Level Reflection Group as a significant contribution to the effort of reflection which is currently under way to prepare the Summit and supports its general thrust and main proposals.

4.

While Ukraine and Ukrainians are the direct victims of the illegal, unjustified and unjustifiable aggression by the Russian Federation, its repercussions are felt worldwide.
Europeans have started to pay the price of the war through higher living costs and an impending economic recession which will affect their lives as they emerge from the first waves of the Covid-19 pandemic.

This may contribute to further eroding trust in political systems and institutions, reinforcing the downward trend of the past few years.

5.

How to bridge the gap between people’s expectations and public delivery is a further test for European democracies.
People are calling for their rights to be protected, including against abuses by their own authorities.

They demand a healthy environment and action against climate change.

They want technology to improve the quality of their lives without controlling them.

People demand to have a greater say in political decision making and participate in the democratic processes, beyond elections.

They understandably expect politics and public institutions to be free from corruption.
They care deeply for justice, greater equality and inclusion, and better socio-economic prospects for themselves and future generations.

Assembly debate on 24 January 2023 (4th sitting) (see Doc.

15681 and addendum, report of the Committee on 1.

Political Affairs and Democracy, rapporteur: Ms Fiona O'Loughlin).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 24 January 2023 (4th sitting).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Recommendation 2245 (2023) 6.
The 4th Summit should have the ambition to set out a forward-looking agenda for the Council of Europe, putting people’s interests, concerns and expectations back to the forefront of the mission of the Organisation.

7.
7.

The Assembly therefore recommends that the Committee of Ministers prepare a Political Declaration and an Action Plan to be endorsed by the Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe during the forthcoming Summit, with a view to providing a new strategic vision, a fresh political impetus and new responses in the face of the present extraordinary challenges.

8.
8.

United around common values, the Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe should: affirm their unwavering support for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of 8.1.
Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders and stand in solidarity with Ukraine and Ukrainians; 8.2. condemn the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine as a serious violation of international law and a threat to international peace and security which has also resulted in gross and serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law and inflicted intensive damage and suffering to the victims and entire Ukrainian people as well as endangered and continues to endanger peace and security in Europe and the world; take a comprehensive approach to the issue of accountability of the Russian Federation in 8.3. relation to the aggression against Ukraine, by ensuring that no gaps at level of international and national accountability efforts persist and impunity is fully prevented, taking into account the urgency of the matter and pressing need for action and in particular: support and lead the initiative to set up an ad hoc international criminal tribunal to 8.3.1. investigate and prosecute the crime of aggression committed by the political and military leadership of the Russian Federation and call on the Council of Europe and the member States to provide concrete expert and technical assistance in its setting up and also call on the Council of Europe to have an active leading role in the establishment of such an ad hoc international criminal tribunal; 8.3.2. support the work of international courts and national courts having a mandate to investigate and prosecute genocide, war crimes, international humanitarian law violations and crimes against humanity committed in the context of the aggression; 8.3.3. including a register of the damage caused by the Russian aggression; support the setting up of a comprehensive international compensation mechanism, reaffirm that the pursuit of peace based upon justice and international co-operation is a vital 8.4. precondition for the preservation of human society and civilisation; 8.5. confirm their commitment to rules-based multilateralism as the pivot of the international order; reiterate their mutual engagement to make it possible for Europe to be a vast area of democratic 8.6. security, echoing the words of the Vienna Declaration which concluded the 1st Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe in 1993.
9.

The 4th Summit should ensure that the Council of Europe steps up its support to Ukraine, immediately and after the end of the war of aggression.

Well-functioning democratic institutions, respect for the rule of law and compliance with democratic standards together with stronger European integration are the best guarantee for the democratic security of Ukraine and Europe, and are as essential as the reconstruction effort.
Steps should be taken to increase the profile and visibility of the Council of Europe’s substantial assistance to and co-operation with Ukraine, as well as to ensure enhanced co-ordination and co-operation with other relevant international organisations, through the establishment of a Special Co-ordinator, under the authority of the Secretary General.

It should also demand that the Russian Federation withdraw from the territories of Georgia, the 10.
Republic of Moldova and Ukraine which are illegally occupied and under its control; reiterate the applicability of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No.
5) and other Council of Europe human rights treaties in these territories; encourage the Council of Europe to maintain contacts with civil society, non-governmental organisations, human rights defenders and independent journalists on the ground and to support other international human rights mechanisms which are accessible to people in these areas, including under the aegis of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the United Nations.

2 Recommendation 2245 (2023) 11.


Reaffirming the role of the Council of Europe as the leading intergovernmental organisation in Europe for all matters relating to human rights, democracy and the rule of law, the Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe should reiterate its pan-European vocation, unity and its nature as a community of values, which can be a beacon for anybody who promotes or aspires to human rights, democracy and the rule of law, wherever they are.
In this context, the Summit should express support for a policy of openness towards Belarusian and Russian individuals, groups and organisations who unequivocally uphold Council of Europe values and principles.

12.

The Summit should further develop the Council of Europe role as a political community by enhancing the political dimension of its work and ensuring an efficient articulation of functions and responsibilities with other institutions of the multilateral architecture.
In this regard, it should aim to upgrade the strategic partnership between the Council of Europe and the European Union, in line with Assembly Resolution 2430 (2022) “Beyond the Lisbon treaty: strengthening the strategic partnership between the Council of Europe and the European Union”, by: 12.1. giving a decisive push for finalising the negotiations for European Union accession to the European Convention on Human Rights; 12.2. inviting the European Union to join other Council of Europe instruments, including the Revised European Social Charter (ETS No.
163), the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (ETS No.
210, “Istanbul Convention”) and the partial and enlarged agreement establishing the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO); 12.3. enhancing political dialogue and co-operation, especially in the area of the rule of law; 12.4. calling on the European Union to envisage a structured role for the Council of Europe in the context of the European Union enlargement process; laying the ground for a revision of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Council of 12.5.

Europe and the European Union.

13.


The Summit should acknowledge the Council of Europe’s contribution to global governance and encourage the Organisation to project its values and standards beyond its membership, strengthening co- operation with interested States and organisations, whether in its geographical neighbourhood or its political proximity.
It should seek to profile the Council of Europe as a closer partner for the United Nations, its agencies and mechanisms with a view to supporting global governance, rules-based multilateralism and the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.

14.
14.

While democracy, human rights and the rule of law should remain its main objectives and areas of expertise, the Council of Europe should be renewed, strengthened and given new means to have an impact and stay ahead of developments, keeping up with societal change and citizens’ demands.
As regards human rights, the Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe should commit 15. to safeguarding and further strengthening the Convention system, including by: reaffirming the binding nature of the European Court of Human Rights’ judgments and decisions 15.1. on interim measures and their primacy over those of national jurisdictions; further strengthening the execution of judgments by strengthening relevant co-operation 15.2. activities and introducing a procedure for enhanced political dialogue in cases of non-compliance; 15.3. acknowledging and promoting the role of national parliaments, national human rights institutions and civil society organisations in monitoring compliance with the Convention and the Court’s judgments.
16.
With a view to responding to widespread and pressing public demands for governments to tackle climate change and prioritise long-term environmental sustainability over immediate economic concerns, climate change should be a separate item on the agenda of the Summit, allowing the Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe to: 16.1. take the lead as Council of Europe to establish environmental protection as a right while reiterating the commitment to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to limit the global temperature increase, in line with the Paris Agreement; 16.2. support the drafting a Council of Europe legally binding framework to guarantee the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, in line with Assembly Resolution 2396 (2022) “Anchoring the right to a healthy environment: need for enhanced action by the Council of Europe”, unanimously adopted by the Assembly; 3 Recommendation 2245 (2023) 16.3. ask for the creation of a Council of Europe committee acting as a platform to share information, promote best practice, provide legal advice and develop tools for evaluating policies and legislation in the area of environmental protection and the fight against climate change.
17.

The Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe should acknowledge and give a new impulse to the pioneering role of the Council of Europe in human rights protection and to its capacity to set legal standards, promote best practice and support domestic reform efforts in emerging areas of concern, including new generation rights.
They should back the Council of Europe work in the areas of artificial intelligence, data protection, gender equality and protection against gender-based violence and discrimination.

18.

Greater emphasis on social rights, which form an indivisible part of human rights, would enable the Council of Europe to address one of the main root causes of the backsliding of democracy, a worrying trend which has been witnessed in recent years.
To tackle this phenomenon, the Summit should also support an expansion of the Council of Europe’s activities aimed at enhancing citizens’ trust in democratic processes and public institutions, namely as regards: 18.1. strengthening good governance and the respect of the rule of law; 18.2. enhancing the quality and professionalism of the public administration; 18.3. strengthening the independence of the judiciary; 18.4. fighting against corruption; 18.5. reinforcing local democracy; 18.6. expanding opportunities for civil participation and deliberative democracy in public decision making; 18.7. tackling discrimination, intolerance and exclusion; 18.8. ensuring the integrity, resilience and adaptability of electoral processes and making sure that they are inclusive, representative and participatory.
19.

Heads of State and Government should reiterate their commitment to protecting the rights of persons belonging to national minorities, which is a key aspect of human rights protection and democratic participation, and a precondition for peace and democratic security.
The Summit should set out closer co-operation between the Council of Europe and the European Union in this area, including in the evaluation of EU candidate countries based on the Copenhagen criteria and the relevant standards developed by the Council of Europe.
Furthermore, in order to strengthen the coherence, impact and visibility of the Organisation’s activities 20. in the area of democracy and the rule of law, the Summit should: 20.1. ask for the elaboration of a democracy checklist identifying the essential criteria which govern a well-functioning democracy, to be used by member and other States as a reference document; 20.2. envisage the establishment of a Council of Europe Commissioner for Democracy and the Rule of Law as an independent body elected by the Assembly, entrusted with means and capacity for engaging systematically in a permanent dialogue with member States, providing early warning and rapid reaction, as well as offering relevant assistance, in close co-operation with key parts of the Council of Europe Secretariat and institutions, including the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, to help strengthen the democratic model throughout Europe.
21.
The Summit should ensure that the Council of Europe puts people at the centre by: 21.1. mainstreaming a youth perspective in all its activities; 21.2. creating new channels for civil society, non-governmental organisations and national human rights institutions to provide meaningful input into the work of the Organisation, especially in its dimensions of standard-setting, monitoring and co-operation; 21.3. adopting more open and transparent working methods; introducing a communication policy which effectively conveys the aims, objectives and impact of 21.4. the Council of Europe to the wider public.
4 Recommendation 2245 (2023) 22.
With a view to ensuring that the Council of Europe can count on the financial resources to effectively carry out its mission, the Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe should: 22.1. make a political commitment to increase the ordinary budget of the Council of Europe, in real terms; 22.2. ask the Committee of Ministers to review the scales of the contributions from member States with a view to raising the minimum contribution and ensuring greater fairness in the way in which member States finance the Organisation; 22.3. invite the Committee of Ministers to explore the possibility of the European Union contributing to the Council of Europe ordinary budget, in light of the strategic partnership between the two Organisations.
23.

The Assembly invites the Committee of Ministers and the Secretary General, within their respective competences, to translate the political guidance of the Summit into appropriate implementing measures and administrative reforms.

24.
24.

The Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers closely associate it to the process of reflection and preparation leading up to the Summit and to its follow-up, in continuation of the climate of dialogue and co-operation with the Committee of Ministers, the Secretary General and the other Council of Europe bodies and institutions.

25.

On its part, the Assembly resolves to continue to support the process and commits to taking into account the political guidance of the Summit in its work.
5 Recommendation 2246 (2023)1 Provisional version Environmental impact of armed conflicts Parliamentary Assembly 1.

The Parliamentary Assembly refers to its Resolution 2477 (2023) “Environmental impact of armed conflicts” and underscores the role of the Council of Europe as a guardian of human rights and the rule of law in times of peace and war.
It deplores the devastating effects that armed conflicts have on the environment as a source of living and insists on the co-application of human rights and humanitarian law during times of armed conflict, as confirmed by the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights.

2.
2.

The Assembly moreover underlines the indivisibility of human rights and considers that, with the increased acceptance that the right to a healthy environment constitutes a human right, the member States of the Council of Europe should take ambitious measures to improve the legal framework to adequately protect human living space, the environment, and the human right to life and to a healthy environment in the context of armed conflict.

3.
3.

The Assembly therefore recommends that the Committee of Ministers: urge member and observer States to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of 3.1.
Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environment Modification Techniques (ENMOD convention) and the Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), if they have not yet done so; 3.2. mandate a competent body to study the feasibility of drafting a new regional legal instrument or treaty under the Council of Europe’s auspices, with a view to identifying and filling the gaps identified in the existing legal regime for the protection of the environment and human rights to life and to a healthy environment in armed conflicts, wartime or occupation (notably regarding the damage threshold, the characterisation of intent, behaviours that must be sanctioned, entities that should be held liable, enforcement, the scale of liability and proper interpretation of the principles of proportionality, military necessity, and due diligence); urge member and observer States to make changes to the existing conventions on the 3.3. environmental protection of certain areas and to propose mechanisms for the implementation of their principles and for monitoring and reporting on the conventions in times of armed conflicts; 3.4. mandate the governing body of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (ETS No.
104, “Bern Convention”) to elaborate recommendations regarding the protection of environmentally sensitive areas during armed conflicts, to study the feasibility of an additional Protocol to the Convention to this end, and to consider creating a review mechanism to ensure that the recommendations are implemented by States parties (notably, transposed into domestic law, incorporated into military doctrine, and shared broadly with a view to developing good practice); 1.
Assembly debate on 25 January 2023 (5th sitting) (see Doc.

15674, report of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development, rapporteur: Mr John Howell).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 25 January 2023 (5th sitting).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Recommendation 2246 (2023) 3.5. ensure that the revised Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Environment through Criminal Law (ETS No.
172) applies also in the context of armed conflicts, wartime or occupation, and covers ecocide; 3.6. allocate sufficient means to ensure proper monitoring and implementation of commitments under the Council of Europe treaties, in particular the Bern Convention and the Landscape Convention (ETS No.
176); promote and disseminate the United Nations principles on the protection of the environment in 3.7. relation to armed conflicts; support the creation of a permanent international mechanism to monitor legal infringements and 3.8. address compensation claims for environmental damage resulting from armed conflicts; 3.9. encourage the European Court of Human Rights to use the functional impact-model with jurisdiction whenever the question of the extraterritorial application of human rights arises in situations of armed conflict or occupation; 3.10. encourage member States to map areas of particular environmental importance or sensitivity in anticipation of any form of armed conflicts and to foresee the demilitarisation of such areas, in case a military conflict breaks out; 3.11. call on member States to update their legal arsenal to criminalise and effectively prosecute ecocide, to establish domestic and/or regional solutions to provide relief to environmental refugees fleeing a military conflict, and to take concrete steps to propose amendment of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in order to add ecocide as a new crime; 3.12. elaborate upon the recommendations to the member States about the protection of critical infrastructure.
2 Recommendation 2247 (2023)1 Provisional version The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges Parliamentary Assembly 1.

Referring to its Resolution 2479 (2023) “The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges”, the Parliamentary Assembly congratulates the Committee of Ministers for its constant support for the Convention on the Protection and Prevention of Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (CETS No.
210, “Istanbul Convention”), which has contributed to its ratification by 37 member States to date.
In the light of the absolute need to do more to eliminate violence against women and domestic violence 2. by promoting the Istanbul Convention, as a unique and essential tool in shaping preventive and protective legislation and policies and punishing perpetrators of gender-based violence, as well as of the need to dispel deliberate misrepresentations of the treaty, the Assembly calls on the Committee of Ministers to: promote ratification of the Istanbul Convention in those countries having not yet ratified it, and to 2.1. encourage States having ratified it to lift any reservations made on accession where this is possible; 2.2. promote feminist foreign policies as a means to attain more representative, inclusive policy making and multilateral action in combating gender-based violence on the basis of the normative international framework; 2.3. in continuity with the recommendations made in October 2022 by the High-level Reflection Group on the Council of Europe’s role in responding to new realities and challenges facing Europe and the world, ensure that priority is given in the Action Plan of the 4th Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe in May 2023 to combating violence against women and domestic violence through the implementation of the Istanbul Convention; take action to ensure implementation of the Dublin Declaration of Council of Europe Ministers on 2.4. the prevention of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence adopted in September 2022; ensure that the new Gender Equality Strategy (2024-2029) gives priority to combating and 2.5. preventing violence against women, building on the successes of the current strategy 2018-2023; give renewed support to the Council of Europe’s activities on gender equality and on combating 2.6. violence against women, as well as the Assembly’s Parliamentary Network Women Free from Violence, including through financial contributions by member States.
Finally, the Assembly proposes a new Organisation-wide awareness-raising campaign on the aims and 3. impact of the Istanbul Convention and its contribution towards women’s rights and gender equality in Europe.

Assembly debate on 25 January 2023 (6th sitting) (see Doc.

15673, report of the Committee on Equality and Non- 1.

Discrimination, rapporteur: Ms Zita Gurmai).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 25 January 2023 (6th sitting).
https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolutions 2475 to 2486 Resolution 2475 (2023)1 Provisional version Addressing the issue of Daesh foreign fighters and their families returning from Syria and other countries to the member States of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly 1.
The Parliamentary Assembly recalls its Resolution 2091 (2016) “Foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq” and Resolution 2190 (2017) “Prosecuting and punishing the crimes against humanity or even possible genocide committed by Daesh”.
It reiterates its position that “individuals who act in the name of … Daesh… have perpetrated acts of genocide and other serious crimes punishable under international law” and that “there is conclusive evidence that Daesh has committed genocidal acts against members of the Yazidi, Christian and non-Sunni Muslim minorities”.

Many of these acts, such as enslavement, sexual slavery, rape, imprisonment, torture and murder, also amounted to war crimes and crimes against humanity.
It notes that both the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Syria in 2016 and the United Nations 2.

Investigative Team to Promote Accountability for Crimes Committed by Da’esh/ISIL (UNITAD) in 2021 concluded that Daesh committed genocide against the Yazidis.

The UNITAD has also identified evidence of crimes committed against other groups, such as Shia, Christians and other communities.

3.
3.

Numerous national parliaments have also formally condemned Daesh’s actions as genocide or crimes against humanity.

Several criminal courts in Council of Europe member States have convicted Daesh members for terrorism-related offences, war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Syria and Iraq.
In 2021 a German court convicted an Iraqi Daesh member for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, for cuffing a five-year-old Yazidi girl to a window in the scorching heat and letting her die in front of her mother, motivated by the intent to eliminate the Yazidi religious minority.

This is the first time that a court, anywhere in the world, has recognised as genocidal a crime committed against a Yazidi victim.

4.
4.

The Assembly also recalls that States have a general obligation under the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention) to prevent and punish acts of genocide, including complicity in genocide.
According to the International Court of Justice, the duty of prevention requires a State to employ all means reasonably available, taking into account its capacity to influence effectively the actions of persons likely to commit, or already committing genocide.
States therefore have a legal obligation to prevent genocide the very moment a State learns or should normally have learned of the serious risk of genocide, for instance by preventing the travel, recruitment and financing of foreign terrorist fighters who joined Daesh and who were likely to participate in the commission of genocide, and effectively prosecuting the perpetrators as a means to deter further crimes.

5.
5.

Since the outbreak of the Syrian armed conflict in 2011, thousands of foreigners from all over the world joined Daesh in Syria and Iraq, including with their families.

A considerable number of European citizens were among them.

In response to the phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters, United Nations Security Council Assembly debate on 23 January 2023 (2nd sitting) (see Doc.

15591, report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and 1.

Human Rights, rapporteur: Mr Pieter Omtzigt; and Doc.
15672, opinion of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development, rapporteur: Mr Stefan Schennach).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 23 January 2023 (2nd sitting).

See also Recommendation 2244 (2023).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2475 (2023) Resolution 2178 (2014) established and reinforced international obligations to prevent and criminalise the travel, recruitment, and financing of foreign terrorist fighters.
It also called on States to develop and implement prosecution, rehabilitation and reintegration for returning foreign terrorist fighters.

6.

The Council of Europe reacted by adopting the 2015 Additional Protocol to the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism (CETS No.

217), becoming the first international organisation to set up a regional legal instrument to implement the obligations imposed by the United Nations regarding foreign terrorist fighters.
However, this protocol, which came into force on 1 July 2017, has to date been ratified by only 24 member States.

7.

Although some Daesh foreign fighters voluntarily returned to their countries in Europe or Central Asia, thousands of them, including European citizens and accompanying family members, remained in Iraq and Syria.

Many are now held in detention in camps and prisons in northeast Syria, under the authority of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, and Iraq.
In Syria, the autonomous administration courts reportedly try only Syrian Daesh detainees but not foreigners (Iraqi and European).

Those interned in camps, including children, live in substandard conditions, exposed to violence, sexual abuse and (further) radicalisation.

Those held in Iraq are unlikely to receive a fair trial in compliance with international human rights standards and risk being sentenced to the death penalty.
In addition, Iraq has not yet incorporated international crimes in its domestic legislation, and Iraqi courts therefore can only prosecute suspected Daesh fighters under anti-terrorism legislation.

8.

The Assembly considers that the continued detention of Daesh foreign fighters in Syria or Iraq is untenable.

Their prosecution in Syria or Iraq is currently not an adequate and human rights-compliant solution.
It may also be counter-productive in terms of security concerns, given the risk of further radicalisation by Daesh in camps and the recurrence of prison breakouts, which may lead to an increase in the number of foreign fighters returning to Europe.

Council of Europe member States should therefore reconsider their position that national Daesh fighters should primarily be tried in the countries where the crimes were committed.

9.
9.

The Assembly is convinced that the best solution would be the prosecution of Daesh foreign fighters before an international tribunal, given the international nature of the crimes committed, including genocide, and also given that Daesh fighters come from over 100 countries.
Neither Syria nor Iraq are Parties to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the ICC Prosecutor declined in 2015 to open a preliminary examination in relation to offences allegedly committed by nationals of States Parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC.

There is a proposal for a hybrid tribunal within Iraqi national courts with assistance from international experts, as set out in Assembly Resolution 2190 (2017), but this has not yet received the necessary political support from the Iraqi authorities.
The Assembly thus regrets that there is still no international or hybrid judicial mechanism capable of trying Daesh fighters for international crimes committed in Syria and Iraq.

10.

Pending the setting up of an international or hybrid tribunal, prosecution of Daesh foreign fighters in their States of nationality, or in other member States providing for universal jurisdiction, is the most obvious alternative to pursue and ensure accountability for their crimes.
The Assembly acknowledges however the challenges national authorities face as well as the existence of legitimate security concerns of their citizens with regard to the return of individuals who have committed heinous crimes and joined a terrorist group engaged in an armed conflict abroad.

The Assembly considers that foreign fighters who are suspected of having taken part in genocide or in 11. other serious international crimes constitute a serious threat to society.
It is an ideology that drove them to commit such crimes, including genocide against the Yazidis, and this ideology will not disappear on its own.

The Assembly considers that, taking into account the ongoing threat posed by Daesh fighters, it is crucial to consider that their right to family life under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ETS No.

5) must be restricted if national security or other legitimate grounds under Article 8 paragraph 2 so require.
Furthermore, separation from their children may also be necessary for the best interests of the child.

The Assembly reiterates that children should in principle be repatriated with their mothers or primary care givers, unless it is not in the best interest of the child, as already recommended in Resolution 2321 (2020) “International obligations concerning the repatriation of children from war and conflict zones”, or if it is not in the best interest of society as a whole.
States should, however, have the possibility, following a determination of the best interest of the child, and of the interest of society as a whole in accordance with Article 8 paragraph 2 of the Convention, to repatriate foreign fighters’ children to their State of nationality with a view to reuniting them with other family members, without repatriating their parents.

2 12.
2 12.

The Assembly is extremely worried about the situation and the appalling conditions in which the survivors of Daesh crimes, including children, still live in Iraq or Syria, often in camps and without the possibility of a safe return to their areas of origin and homes.

Many, particularly Yazidi women and children, are still missing.

13.
On the basis of the foregoing, the Assembly calls on Council of Europe member States to: Resolution 2475 (2023) 13.1. give priority to the establishment of a special international tribunal or hybrid tribunal with jurisdiction over international crimes committed by Daesh foreign fighters, by actively contributing to the setting up of such a tribunal within the United Nations or other international organisations; 13.2. pending the setting up of such a tribunal, give priority to the prosecution by their national courts of suspected Daesh fighters and members who come within their jurisdiction or control, on the basis of the principle of active personality (for nationals) or universal jurisdiction; 13.3. provide for universal jurisdiction over international crimes covered by the Rome Statute of the ICC, and if this is already the case, expand its use by not limiting the initiation of preliminary investigations to cases where the suspects are located within their territory, following the example set by Germany; 13.4. prioritise where possible cumulative prosecution of Daesh foreign fighters for both terrorism- related offences and international crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, following recent examples in Germany and the Netherlands, duly reflecting the gravity and the different nature of the offences committed; 13.5. with respect to crimes committed against Yazidis and other affected minorities, prioritise genocide as a criminal charge, having regard to Daesh’s declared intention to destroy, in whole or in part, these groups, as stressed in Assembly Resolution 2190 (2017); 13.6. prosecute, in a non-discriminatory manner, avoiding gender stereotypes, all Daesh foreign fighters and members, including women, having regard to the actual role they may have played in the commission of crimes, as perpetrators, supporters, facilitators, recruiters or fund raisers; 13.7. if children are suspected of having committed criminal acts, prosecute only under internationally recognised juvenile justice
 and fair trial standards, in accordance with Resolution 2321 (2020) “International obligations concerning the repatriation of children from war and conflict zones” and the United Nations Key Principles for the Protection, Repatriation, Prosecution, Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Women and Children with links to United Nations Listed Terrorist Groups; 13.8. set up and adequately fund, specialised units or staff within prosecution, law enforcement and judicial co-operation services for the prosecution of foreign terrorist fighters; 13.9. make use of different types of evidence, including internet-based evidence and battlefield evidence, and ensure that such evidence is admissible for the successful prosecution of Daesh terrorist fighters, having regard to Recommendation CM/Rec(2022)8 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to member States on the use of information collected in conflict zones as evidence in criminal proceedings related to terrorist offences and in full compliance with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights; 13.10. make better use of evidence collected by United Nations investigative mechanisms such as UNITAD and the United Nations International Impartial and Independent Mechanism for Syria (IIIM), as well as by non-governmental organisations documenting atrocities in Iraq and Syria, and ensure that such evidence can be lawfully used in criminal proceedings in their jurisdictions; 13.11. contribute to the collection and preservation of evidence of Daesh crimes, including by making voluntary contributions, seconding national experts and signing co-operation agreements with UNITAD and IIIM; 13.12. make full use of existing mutual legal assistance tools between States in investigations and proceedings against Daesh foreign fighters, including under the relevant international, Council of Europe and European Union instruments, such as the possibility of setting up joint investigation teams like the one established in
 2021 between France and Sweden to support proceedings concerning crimes committed against the Yazidis in Syria and Iraq; 13.13. take due account of the rights and needs of victims and witnesses in criminal proceedings against Daesh foreign fighters, including by taking the necessary measures to reach out to victims and affected communities, such as interpretation, broadcasting of the hearings and engaging with non- governmental organisations representing them; 3 Resolution 2475 (2023) 13.14. insofar as they have not yet done so, ratify and fully implement the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism (CETS No.
196) and its 2015 Additional Protocol; 13.15. design and implement rehabilitation and reintegration strategies for all returning Daesh foreign fighters and their families, including, in particular, deradicalisation programmes specifically tailored for children and young adults.
These programmes are necessary for all persons and are not a substitute for prosecution and punishment; 13.16. consider bringing before the International Court of Justice, proceedings against States which allegedly failed to prevent and punish acts of genocide committed by Daesh, in order to hold those States to account under the Genocide Convention; 13.17. support the Iraqi authorities, UNITAD and other organisations in locating the missing Daesh victims and ensuring the safe and voluntary return of the survivors to their areas of origin.
14.

The Assembly also calls on: 14.1.

Iraq to adopt legislation on international crimes without further delay, with the assistance of UNITAD and other relevant stakeholders, and to actively participate in negotiations with a view to establishing a special international tribunal or hybrid tribunal; the ICC Prosecutor to reconsider the decision not to open a preliminary examination into crimes 14.2. committed by Daesh foreign fighters who are nationals of State Parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC; 14.3.
UNITAD and IIIM to continue their instrumental work of gathering evidence on crimes committed by Daesh members in Iraq and Syria and share such evidence with national courts to the extent possible; 14.4. online platforms to preserve content, and the metadata associated with this content, that potentially could provide evidence of genocide, war crimes and other human rights violations.

4 Resolution 2476 (2023)1 Provisional version Conflict-related sexual violence Parliamentary Assembly 1.
As well as devastating whole territories and destroying infrastructure, war inflicts lasting damage on the people around and over whom it is waged, whatever their role, leaving a trail of individual, collective and family trauma over decades and across generations.

Since February 2014, the Russian Federation has waged a war of aggression against Ukraine, which it relaunched on 24 February 2022 with a massive invasion of Ukraine.
In this regard Europe’s leaders are again called upon to address, on a national and multilateral scale, not only the conflict itself, but also the far-reaching negative consequences for society of the aggression of one country against another.

2.
The aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine led to mass conflict-related sexual violence committed by the Russian Federation’s armed forces and by affiliated armed groups against the civilian population of Ukraine and Ukrainian prisoners of war: in 11 months of the large-scale invasion of Ukraine, according to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine, 155 cases of conflict-related sexual violence have been recorded in Kyiv, Kherson, Kharkiv, Chernihiv, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Luhansk, and Mykolaiv regions.
The officially stated number of cases does not reflect the scale of crimes of the Russian Federation, which are much larger.

3.

So-called “conflict-related sexual violence”, in fact unrelated to any real conception of sexuality, is one of the worst atrocities of war, systematically used as a tactic to humiliate, violate and ruin the minds and bodies of victims, and in most cases intended to leave them alive to tell their story, with the intention of spreading fear and breaking the spirit of the oppressed.
Conflict-related sexual violence is a war crime in international law, can be a constitutive element of genocide and is certainly used as a means of ethnic cleansing, either to damage beyond repair the reproductive cycle of an “enemy” or to repopulate regions with the “true blood” of the would-be conqueror.

Although the majority of victims are women and girls, they are not the only targets, and conflict-related sexual violence is less gender-specific in the case of young children.

4.
4.

Today, in particular thanks to the work of the United Nations and its successive Security Council resolutions, conflict-related sexual violence is no longer considered to be an inevitable and indissociable by- product of war, but is identified as a preventable phenomenon, which can be combated through concerted international action, protective national policies, strictly enforced punishment for perpetrators, empowerment of vulnerable persons and survivor-centred reparation and rehabilitation programmes.
The Parliamentary Assembly condemns conflict-related sexual violence with its utmost strength and 5. reaffirms that its perpetrators must be brought to justice, both on the battlefield and in positions of leadership.

Determined action is needed to eliminate the phenomenon and deal with its consequences.
Referring to its Resolutions 2120 (2016) “Women in the armed forces: promoting equality, putting an end to gender-based violence”, and 2450 (2022) “Justice and security for women in peace reconciliation,” the Assembly calls on member States in peacetime to foster non-violent, resilient societies based on equality and equal access to rights for all, as a prerequisite for facing crises, reducing the tensions which risk escalating to open conflict and minimising its consequences.
It urges States not yet having done so to ratify the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (CETS No.

210, Assembly debate on 24 January 2023 (3rd sitting) (see Doc.

15677, report of the Committee on Equality and Non- 1.

Discrimination, rapporteur: Ms Petra Bayr).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 24 January 2023 (3rd sitting).
https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2476 (2023) “Istanbul Convention”), which under its Article 2.3 applies in times of peace and in situations of armed conflict, and which also contains specific provisions on migrant and asylum-seeking women who are victims of violence.

6.

Preventing conflict-related sexual violence begins long before the outbreak of armed conflict.
Therefore, the Assembly calls on member States and national parliaments to work on prevention in peacetime and in situations of conflict alike, in particular by: encouraging inclusive recruitment to the armed forces and the police in order to attain more 6.1. gender balance and thereby equality with a gender perspective in promotion, action and policies; introducing or reinforcing training in police forces and the army on assistance to victims of 6.2. gender-based violence, including the provision of safe spaces for survivors to recover and recount their experiences, as well as advice on access to legal assistance and to medical and psychological care.
There must be co-ordination between the different services, including with civil society organisations, and these services must be mindful of preventing the re-traumatisation of victims; 6.3. implementing in places where conflict still has tangible effects on communities, notably in the territory of the former Yugoslavia, transitional justice measures in order to bring about real political transformation, and countering narratives glorifying war criminals, and exploring the relation of this speech with prohibited and criminally sanctioned war propaganda and countering and prosecuting them also online, for instance; 6.4. honouring survivors of conflict-related sexual violence like Nadia Murad, Václav Havel and Nobel Peace Prize winner, who as champions and ambassadors for peace and reparation can attract political and financial support, while raising public awareness of particularly affected regions and people and the need to help them and to give them a voice; recognising the importance of culture as an agent of change: theatre, cinema, sport and other 6.5. cultural activities can do much to change mentalities and promote peaceful living together.
7.

The recognition of conflict-related sexual violence as a crime against humanity and a war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court has allowed prosecution of its perpetrators on the ground and in command, in combination with other crimes.

On the other hand, the national level is the most appropriate for holding individual perpetrators to account.
Universal jurisdiction is also an option, and the Assembly congratulates Estonia, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Romania, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland for having initiated universal jurisdiction investigations of war crimes in the context of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, or for having declared their intention to do so, and French prosecutors for having opened a war crimes investigation under national jurisdiction in the same context, for cases in which French citizens or residents have been possible victims or suspected perpetrators.
With respect to the prosecution of conflict-related sexual violence, the Assembly calls on member States to: sign and ratify the Rome Statute as the legal basis for the work of the International Criminal 7.1.
Court, if they have not already done so; use universal jurisdiction as a means of prosecuting perpetrators wherever they have committed 7.2. crimes of conflict-related sexual violence; use the international crime provisions under their respective national penal codes that explicitly 7.3. and implicitly cover conduct of conflict-related sexual violence, whenever perpetrators or victims are present on their territory, or acts that have a nexus to the crime are committed on their territory; use the 2021 Model Legislative Provisions and Guidance on Investigation and Prosecution of 7.4.
Conflict-related Sexual Violence of the Office of the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict to ensure that efficient investigations are carried out for use in courts, and to the same end, encourage and support civil society organisations to follow the Guidelines of the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court and Eurojust on Documenting international crimes and human rights violations for accountability purposes; work with international courts to ensure the efficient transfer of judgments to national 7.5. prosecuting authorities, which includes sharing access to databases of evidence collection; provide concrete expert and technical support, with the Assembly and the Council of Europe, for 7.6. the setting up of a special (ad hoc) international tribunal to prosecute the crime of aggression against Ukraine as conflict-related sexual violence is a result of this crime of aggression.
2 Resolution 2476 (2023) 8.

Documentation, reporting, evidence collection and research are essential in uncovering crimes and prosecuting perpetrators of conflict-related sexual violence.
These crimes are notoriously difficult to monitor due to under-reporting by survivors not wishing or not able to speak, because the harm done may be invisible and difficult to prove, and as infrastructure and services are often lacking in the conditions in which survivors find themselves, including war zones, regions of so-called “frozen conflicts”, etc.
Praising the work of NGOs such as Ukraine 5AM Coalition, finalist for the 2022 Václav Havel Prize, a 9. collective of technology experts collecting data in Ukraine since the first bombardments by Russia, the Assembly urges member States to: 9.1. ensure that solid and safe procedures for reporting sexual violence are in place in peacetime, following the provisions of the Istanbul Convention, in order for these to be operational when applied to sexual violence in conflict-related situations; 9.2. make sure that survivors of sexual violence are offered safe spaces for exchanging on their experiences, that witnesses are given adequate protection, that the different services involved in evidence collection use technological means admissible in courts to record evidence and are co- ordinated in order to avoiding obliging witnesses to repeat testimonies, thus avoiding re-traumatisation; 9.3. support, including financially, the development of electronic tools for survivors to record evidence of gender-based violence themselves, in particular during conflict, for instance the “Backup” application developed and piloted by the We Are NOT Weapons Of War NGO; ensure that the police are trained and habilitated to receive evidence at local levels, without 9.4. requiring higher levels of police and jurisdictional intervention at the first stages of judicial procedures.
Care for survivors must be immediate, holistic and centred on the needs of the persons concerned.

In 10. this respect the Assembly urges national authorities and international organisations to work together to: 10.1. support the International Criminal Court’s Trust Fund for Victims by financial contributions; transfer on request the frozen assets of perpetrators convicted by the International Criminal 10.2.
Court to the Trust Fund for Victims to fund reparations and programmes for survivors; 10.3. building on principles of transitional justice, to adopt survivor-centred gender-specific practices and ensure reparations are tailored to the age and situation of victims; 10.4. implement, with respect to all survivors, whether in national territories or having fled war in their country, the World Health Organisation’s Clinical Management of Rape Guidelines to ensure that medical providers apply survivor-centred approaches and follow the necessary health protocols aimed to protect women from unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.
11.

Survivor-centred measures must be tailored to the individual needs of survivors of conflict-related sexual violence wherever they find themselves, including access to information and abortion without barriers.
States must ensure women’s access to sexual and reproductive health and rights services by: 11.1. prioritising sexual and reproductive health services across the humanitarian and refugee response; taking effective action to address and remove restrictions on and barriers to access to 11.2. comprehensive sexual and reproductive healthcare, including time-sensitive and essential care; 11.3. strengthening the capacity and readiness of the health system, including health workers, to provide human rights-based, comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services as well as services for the prevention and management of sexual and gender-based violence; 11.4. ensuring that local experts and civil society organisations participate in the design of sexual and reproductive health and rights response efforts; 11.5. ensuring sustainable, long-term funding and flexible support to national health systems for sexual and reproductive health and rights programming, service provision and advocacy, to enable addressing systemic and structural barriers.
International organisations, non-governmental organisations, and 12. in peacekeeping operations are no exemption from using their positions of domination over vulnerable people, in particular exiles and displaced persons, to commit atrocious crimes of sexual violence, including trafficking and sexual slavery.
The Assembly calls on the United Nations to pursue its efforts to implement a zero- tolerance policy to eliminate sexual abuse and exploitation in its operations, including by locally recruited staff, and ensure that the NGOs working on programmes are covered by these policies.

their members working 3 Resolution 2476 (2023) 13.


Non-governmental organisations and civil society actors are key to accompanying survivors of conflict- related sexual violence, and act as early warning agents on the ground when tensions arise and situations deteriorate.
Therefore, the Assembly calls upon national parliaments to ensure that civil society, and especially rights organisations, women-led organisations and organisations dealing with gender-based violence and sexual and reproductive health and rights, are supported in their work and are given sustainable, flexible, long-term institutional financial support and infrastructure to function efficiently.

female peace advocates, women's 14.
Recognising an important contribution and significant potential of the United Nations in preventing conflict-related sexual violence, the Assembly welcomes initiatives to ensure impartial and objective decision making on issues involving conflict-related sexual violence and other international crimes, including the Political Declaration on Suspension of Veto Powers in Cases of Mass Atrocities launched by France and Mexico and signed by 104 UN member States, and other initiatives restricting the possibility to veto, as well as calls for binding commitments of a similar content.
Finally, the Assembly calls on member States to introduce laws that guarantee survivors of conflict- 15. related sexual violence individual and collective access to lifelong measures of inclusion, reparation and rehabilitation without undue bureaucratic or psychological obstacles, and to devote the necessary financial and human resources to these programmes, in the knowledge that pecuniary compensation for the consequences of the damage done is almost impossible.
4 Resolution 2477 (2023)1 Provisional version Environmental impact of armed conflicts Parliamentary Assembly 1.

Armed conflicts, wars and military aggression destroy human lives and leave deep scars on human living space.

Environmental damages resulting from armed conflicts can be multifaceted, severe, long-lasting and mostly irreversible.

They not only harm natural habitats and ecosystems but can also affect human health well beyond the conflict area and long after the conflict is over.
The human rights to life and to a healthy environment are thus undermined.

2.
2.

The existing international legal framework provides for direct and indirect protection of the environment in times of armed conflict to a certain extent, based on international humanitarian law instruments such as the United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environment Modification Techniques (ENMOD convention), and the Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I).
In addition, international law doctrine came to accept the interplay between international humanitarian law and international human rights law in the 1996 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the “Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons”.
The Parliamentary Assembly notes that the co-application of human rights and humanitarian law during times of armed conflict has also been confirmed by the United Nations Human Rights Committee (via general comments) and the European Court of Human Rights (via case law).

3.

The Assembly therefore considers that international human rights and humanitarian law imposes substantive and procedural obligations on States involved in armed conflicts.
With the increased worldwide acceptance that the right to a healthy environment constitutes a human right, there are grounds to affirm that States may have extraterritorial obligations arising in and from armed conflicts.

4.

The Assembly recalls that the norms of customary international law provide indirect protection of the environment during armed conflicts.
To this end, it welcomes the Red Cross Guidelines for Military Manuals Instructions (“ICRC Guidelines”) as updated in 2020 which contribute, practically and effectively, to raising awareness about the need for the protection of the natural environment against the impact of armed conflicts.

However, the environment is thus protected only in an incidental manner, subordinated to wartime requirements, and conditioned on humanitarian imperatives.

5.
5.

The Assembly commends the work of the International Law Commission (ILC) of the United Nations on the draft principles on the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts.

It welcomes the endorsement of these principles by the United Nations General Assembly on 7 December 2022 and encourages their widest possible dissemination across all European States and their global partners.

6.
6.

The Assembly notes that the Council of Europe has developed several legal instruments to protect the environment: the Convention on Civil Liability for Damage resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment (ETS No.

150), the Convention on the Protection of Environment through Criminal Law (ETS No.

172), the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (ETS No.

104, “Bern Convention”) and the Landscape Convention (ETS No.176).
However, these conventions either do not 1.

Assembly debate on 25 January 2023 (5th sitting) (see Doc.

15674, report of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development, rapporteur: Mr John Howell).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 25 January 2023 (5th sitting).

See also Recommendation 2246 (2023).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2477 (2023) explicitly cover or explicitly exclude damage caused by an act of war or military hostilities.
The currently ongoing revision of the criminal law convention (ETS No.

172), which is also open to non-member States, offers the possibility of establishing a new “ecocide” criminal offence at Council of Europe level.
The Assembly also notes that the Committee of Ministers Recommendation CM/Rec(2022)20 on human rights and the protection of the environment, adopted on 27 September 2022, mentions “the environmental harm stemming from armed conflicts”, reaffirms that “all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated” and urges steps to recognise the right to a healthy environment at the national level as a human right.

7.
7.

Severe destruction or deterioration of nature that could be qualified as ecocide may occur in times of peace or war.

It is necessary to codify this notion in both national legislation, as appropriate, and international law.

The Assembly therefore strongly supports efforts to amend the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, so as to add ecocide as a new crime.
It reiterates its call, contained in Resolution 2398 (2021) “Addressing issues of criminal and civil liability in the context of climate change”, as regards the need for “recognising universal jurisdiction for ecocide and the most serious environmental crimes” and introducing “the crime of ecocide into … national criminal legislation”.

8.
8.

The Assembly deplores the fact that despite an impressive international legal arsenal, important gaps subsist in protecting the environment in the context of armed conflicts and their aftermath.

The existing legal instruments lack universality in terms of ratifications, precision of terms used (such as for qualifying “widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects”), a comprehensive coverage of offences and a sufficiently broad scope of application.
Moreover, a permanent international mechanism to monitor legal infringements and address compensation claims for environmental damage is also missing.

9.

The Assembly urges Council of Europe member States to take all necessary measures to outlaw and prosecute the use of prohibited weapons in the course of armed conflicts that, among other ills, bring disproportionate environmental impact and render human life in the affected area impossible.
Considering that the Council of Europe has served as a laboratory of new legal developments to defend 10. the values of human rights and the rule of law in Europe and beyond, the Assembly believes that the Organisation should take the lead in elaborating new legal instruments to guide member States and beyond in preventing massive environmental damage and reducing the scale of such damage as far as possible during armed conflicts and their aftermath.
It should pave the way towards the international recognition of the crime of ecocide.
With this in mind, and referring to the above considerations, the Assembly calls on the member States of the Council of Europe, as well as observer States and States whose parliament enjoys observer or partnership for democracy status with the Assembly to: 10.1. build and consolidate a legal framework for the enhanced protection of the environment in armed conflicts at national, European and international levels by: 10.1.1. the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, if they have not yet done so; ratifying the ENMOD convention and Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions relating to 10.1.2. taking steps to support the creation of a permanent international mechanism to monitor legal infringements and address compensation claims for environmental damage resulting from armed conflicts; 10.1.3. supporting practical implementation of the principles on the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts adopted by the United Nations General Assembly and promoting their dissemination through relevant domestic institutions, diplomatic channels and international stakeholders; 10.1.4. promoting a more coherent and comprehensive reading of the existing legal rules for protecting the environment in armed conflicts; 10.1.5. updating their legal arsenal to criminalise and effectively prosecute ecocide and taking concrete steps to amend the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in order to add ecocide as a new crime; 10.1.6. supporting the establishment of standard methodologies for the collection of evidence for the environmental harm; 2 10.2. close gaps between different fields of law and the reality on the ground in order to adequately protect human living space, the environment, and human rights to life and to a healthy environment in the context of armed conflicts by: Resolution 2477 (2023) 10.2.1. strengthening State responsibility for environmental damage extending beyond their territorial limits, based on extraterritorial human rights obligations and the functional impact- model in situations where the impact is direct and reasonably foreseeable; 10.2.2. considering the drafting of a new regional legal instrument or treaty under the Council of Europe’s auspices, with a view to clarifying and filling the gaps identified in the existing legal regime (notably regarding the damage threshold, enforcement, liability, and the due diligence principle); 10.2.3. conducting a study, under the auspices of the Council of Europe, on the possible interplay between existing international criminal law and environmental harm occurring during armed conflicts, in particular as regards the possibility to invoke existing war crimes; 10.2.4. actively participating in the revision process of the Council of Europe’s convention No.
172 in order to ensure that the revised convention would apply also in the context of armed conflicts, wartime or occupation; 10.2.5. deploying sufficient means to ensure proper monitoring and implementation of commitments under the Council of Europe treaties, in particular the Bern Convention and the Landscape Convention; 10.2.6. ensuring that the relevant international legal framework is interpreted in a more open- ended manner, so as to offer more adequate protection of both the environment and human health; 10.2.7. mapping areas of particular environmental importance or sensitivity, based on existing protected areas (such as world natural heritage sites or natural reserves) and areas that might need to acquire a special protection status, in anticipation of any form of armed conflict, and foreseeing the demilitarisation of such areas in the case of a military conflict; 10.2.8. adapting national military manuals in the light of the updated ICRC Guidelines, the United Nations principles on the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts and the evolving international legal framework; 10.2.9. considering establishing domestic and/or regional solutions to provide relief to environmental refugees fleeing a military conflict, given the international legal vacuum on this matter; 10.2.10. promoting knowledge of and compliance with international legal standards protecting the environment among non-state actors involved in armed conflicts.
3 Resolution 2478 (2023)1 Provisional version Contact tracing applications: ethical, cultural and educational challenges Parliamentary Assembly 1.
The Parliamentary Assembly notes that over the past two years, data collection and processing by using digital public health technologies, such as contact tracing applications (CTAs), have been promoted worldwide by governments as well as private companies to mitigate the Covid-19 pandemic, identify subjects at risk of contamination or ensure compliance with confinement rules.

In May 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO) issued guidelines for their use and related ethical 2. considerations.
The Consultative Committee established by the Council of Europe Convention for the protection of individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal data (ETS No.

108, Convention 108), the Data Protection Commissioner and the Committee on Bioethics of the Council of Europe, also issued several statements, raising concerns and providing useful guidelines.
The Council of Europe 2020 Data Protection Report highlighted that, by adopting widely diverging systems, countries have limited the efficiency of the measures taken and the influence they could have exercised on actors in the digital market.

CTAs are available in app stores; their ethical and legal frameworks remain unclear, with risks related 3. inter alia to unlawful interference with the right to respect for private life, protected under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No.
5), as well as specifically through the guarantees set out in Convention 108 and its amending Protocol (CETS No.

223), Convention 108+.

Respecting the confidentiality of health data is a vital principle in the legal systems of all States Parties to the European Convention on Human Rights.
In particular, in order to respect the right to private life in Article 8 of the Convention, domestic law must afford appropriate safeguards to prevent the inappropriate communication or disclosure of personal health data.

4.
4.

In its Resolution 2338 (2020) “The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on human rights and the rule of law”, the Assembly noted that “a lack of public trust in such apps due to privacy-related concerns, resulting in low levels of installation or use, would seriously undermine their effectiveness”.
Hence, these applications need to be carefully evaluated and public authorities must monitor their implementation to ensure compliance with the right to private life and with the data protection standards laid down by Convention 108 and its modernised version, Convention 108+.

5.

The Assembly stresses that the collection and processing of personal and health data must be justified by legitimate public health objectives and be suitable and proportionate to achieving the intended goal.
The data collected via these applications should not be accessible to third parties that are not involved in public health management.

Data collection and processing must be transparent and concise, and reader-friendly information on the purpose of data collection, data storage and sharing must be easily available.

Data should only be retained to the extent and for the duration necessary.

Decisions on downloading and using applications must remain voluntary and respect personal autonomy.
Specific care must be taken in the design and application of these applications to ensure adequate safeguards for children, and in particular respect for Assembly debate on 25 January 2023 (5th sitting) (see Doc.

15648, report of the Committee on Culture, Science, 1.

Education and Media, rapporteur: Mr Duncan Baker; and Doc.

15660, opinion of Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, rapporteur: Mr Vladimir Vardanyan).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 25 January 2023 (5th sitting).
https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2478 (2023) their rights to privacy and the protection of their personal data.

Discrimination due to the digital divide should be avoided.

Furthermore, data protection authorities must be involved in the development, oversight, and audit of digital contact tracing systems.

6.

The effectiveness of such digital technologies largely pertains to the technical designs, implementation methods and the level of public trust.
Therefore, the Assembly considers that the lack of citizens’ involvement in the debate may explain the low adoption rates of the available applications in many Council of Europe member States.

In this respect, Resolution 2333 (2020) and Recommendation 2176 (2020) “Ethics in science and technology: a new culture of public dialogue” highlighted that it is essential to involve the general public in decisions which highly impact on their lives, especially during crises.
Digital epidemic surveillance is – and should only be – intended to prevent forward transmission and 7. break the chains of infection.

However, to date substantial scientific evidence of CTAs’ impact and effectiveness remains relatively limited.
CTAs which have been developed in most European countries do not collect identifiable health data, at 8. least not without explicit consent; moreover, sensitive health-related information, including when collected via manual contact tracing (for example in testing centres) cannot be shared with third parties, including the scientific community, without consent.

As with other, particularly digital, forms of data processing, it is important that consent is freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous.
9.

While this approach serves the purpose of protecting privacy, the fact that contact tracing and testing datasets cannot be processed and combined without citizens’ consent may hinder the ability of governments to analyse aggregated data, including user demographics or temporal, spatial and public health impact trends of CTA usage and exposure notifications.

10.
10.

The Assembly stresses that a timely and accurate assessment of the CTAs’ public health impact is a key prerequisite of an effective public health policy.

A continuous quality improvement of public health processes and interventions is essential.

In particular, digital epidemic surveillance must respond to an evolving situation, taking into account the changing transmission and immune-evasion properties of a virus.

11.
11.

Data protection standards must be considered as an advantage in conditions of uncertainty such as a pandemic.

However, these standards must be applied in a way that allows for the collection and use of sufficiently detailed data when this is necessary for the public health objectives, and provided that the appropriate safeguards are present.
The right balance between data protection standards and public health objectives must be struck not only to help fight the current pandemic but also to design future technology aimed at tackling future health crises.

12.
12.

The Assembly believes that technology can make a significant contribution to the promotion of public interests only by ensuring a careful balance of all interests at stake and by carrying out an in-depth assessment of the risks posed to human rights and fundamental freedoms in a democratic society.

13.
To that end, the Assembly calls on Council of Europe member States to: 13.1. ensure that recourse to digital public health technologies is part of a comprehensive national epidemiologic strategy, articulated in different tools, balancing all interests at stake and based on an appropriate evaluation of its real impact and effectiveness; 13.2. monitor the implementation of these new technologies as well as their compliance with data protection standards, and ensure that the collection and processing of personal and health data are justified by legitimate public health objectives and are adequate and proportionate to achieving the intended goal; this also implies that such data is only retained to the extent and for the duration necessary for those objectives; 13.3. consider the possibility of voluntary data donorship for contact tracing applications or other future technologies, which includes an opt-in for users who would like to consent to have their personal data anonymised and processed to collect evidence for scientific research and impact assessment, with appropriate safeguards to preserve privacy and to ensure consent is freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous; 13.4. keep the public well informed about public health interventions, in particular regarding the impact and effectiveness of new digital technology, including via parliamentary hearings and public information campaigns, with a view to raising citizens awareness, building citizens’ trust and strengthening the effectiveness of new technology; 2 Resolution 2478 (2023) 13.5. counter negative attitudes or low interest in the population through systematic, targeted information campaigns, both through the media and with civic initiatives in schools, that are context- specific, based on science, address doubts and concerns raised, debunk disinformation and highlight individual and collective responsibility for one’s own health as well as other people’s health; 13.6. encourage voluntary access to CTAs in resource-limited settings, for example through reduced mobile data costs, higher availability of and compatibility with low-cost devices and conditions facilitating the use of CTAs such as a help function, a tutorial, or testimonials of other users; 13.7. initiate, if not done yet, and promote globally the signature and ratification of the Convention for the protection of individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal data (Convention 108) and its Protocol (Convention 108+) which certainly contributes to the convergence towards a set of high- level standards in the area of the protection of privacy and personal data.
14.

The Assembly resolves to enhance co-operation with the Consultative Committee established by the Convention 108 to share best practices regarding the implementation of privacy and data protection principles and rules in public interest areas, and to identify areas of possible joint actions to raise awareness on, and enhance compliance with, international standards in the field.

15.
15.

The Assembly also encourages the European Union to continue developing co-ordinated solutions at European and international levels, including beyond the European Union, to promote safe international travel and global control of the Covid-19 pandemic as well as future threats to public health.

3 Resolution 2479 (2023)1 Provisional version The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges Parliamentary Assembly 1.
Gender-based violence as an extreme form of violation of human rights is present in all member States of the Council of Europe.

It is a consequence of persistent inequalities between individuals and groups at all levels, whether social, economic or legal.

Although men and boys are also victims, women and girls are disproportionately affected by gender-based violence.

The risk of violence is multiplied by social and intersectional factors such as disability, ethnic origin and sexual orientation.

2.
2.

According to United Nations estimates, 736 million women in the world have suffered physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence, non-partner sexual violence, or both (not including sexual harassment), at least once in their life, which represents 30% of women aged 15 and above.
According to first findings, gender-based violence increased during the Covid-19 pandemic due to successive lockdowns which trapped victims in closed spaces with their aggressors, and at the same time complicated women’s and girls’ access to protection and assistance, in what has been termed a “shadow pandemic”.

3.
3.

Recognising the need for comprehensive systems for the prevention of and protection against gender- based violence, and for policies to eliminate violence in particular against women and girls, the Council of Europe adopted its Convention on the Protection and Prevention of Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (CETS No.

210, “Istanbul Convention”), opened for signature on 11 May 2011, which entered into force on 1 August 2014.
The convention now counts 37 ratifications, and 8 signatures not yet followed by ratification.

4.

The Parliamentary Assembly welcomes the high number of ratifications of the Istanbul Convention to date, which gives some optimism for future progress in eliminating gender-based violence.
It is impressed by the influence the convention has had on national legislations to fight gender-based violence, which have been adapted to ensure conformity with the convention, and by the changes it has inspired in policies and awareness-raising work.
The Assembly congratulates the Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO) and the Committee of the Parties for their work so far, in the far-reaching 2016-2023 baseline evaluation cycle, as well as its first third party intervention before the European Court of Human Rights and first General Recommendation on the digital dimension of violence against women.

5.
5.

Despite these achievements, alarmingly high levels of violence and tragic femicides persist, harming and killing women and girls from all walks of life and in all their diversity, especially in the context of intimate partner violence.

Backlash against and backsliding of women’s rights are commonplace and often originate in political discourse aimed to maintain inequalities and impose ever tighter restrictions on democracy and human rights.
The Assembly points out that gender-based violence comes at a cost, which the European Institute for 6.

Gender Equality estimated in 2021 to amount to €366 billion a year, of which 79 % is linked to violence against women.

Physical and emotional impacts make up 56% of this cost, criminal justice services 21% and Assembly debate on 25 January 2023 (6th sitting) (see Doc.

15673, report of the Committee on Equality and Non- 1.

Discrimination, rapporteur: Ms Zita Gurmai).


Text adopted by the Assembly on 25 January 2023 (6th sitting).

See also Recommendation 2247 (2023).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2479 (2023) lost economic output 14%.

In the interests of all of society, action must therefore be stepped up to end the inequalities which lead to violence and to empower people in situations of vulnerability by giving them full access to their rights.

7.
7.

Referring to its previous Resolution 2289 (2019) “The Istanbul Convention on violence against women: achievements and challenges”, the Assembly reiterates the recommendations set out in that text.
In addition, with regard to promoting its ratification, the Assembly: 7.1. urges Azerbaijan to sign and ratify it without further delay; 7.2. urges the parliaments of Armenia, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania and the Slovak Republic to increase their efforts to promote and engage in procedures for ratification to follow up on their signature; urges Türkiye, the country that gave its name to the convention and was among the first 7.3. ratifications, to reconsider its withdrawal and return to the convention; 7.4. encourages the European Union to overcome the legal obstacles to ratification as a means of ensuring the implementation of its provisions in all European Union member States and of promoting it in others; encourages Israel, Kazakhstan and Tunisia to follow up on the invitation of the Committee of 7.5.
Ministers of the Council of Europe to accede to the convention, and encourages other non-member States, observers and partners for democracy to do so as soon as possible.

8.
8.

With respect to the prevention of violence against women and girls and domestic violence, the Assembly calls on all States Parties to the Istanbul Convention to fully implement its provisions as an assurance of solid, protective laws and policies relating to prevention, protection and prosecution embedded in a set of integrated policies.
To this end it calls on the parliaments of States Parties to the Istanbul Convention to: carry out regular assessments of national legislation and propose revisions of laws where they 8.1. are not in conformity with the provisions of the convention; 8.2. make sure that legislation is efficient in ensuring protection against violence against women and girls, including domestic violence, and prosecution of perpetrators of violence; 8.3. ensure regular monitoring of implementation in accordance with Article 70 of the convention and give adequate prominence to the baseline reports of GREVIO and the recommendations of the Committee of the Parties in parliamentary debates and hearings; organise awareness-raising campaigns both in their parliaments and in their constituencies, and 8.4. to report back to the Assembly annually in order to document these good practices; 8.5. bearing in mind the requirement under the convention for policies to place the rights of the victim at the centre of all measures, to ensure co-operation between all relevant stakeholders in design and implementation of policies and programmes, including women’s civil society organisations and diverse communities; include a gender perspective in the implementation and evaluation of the impact of the 8.6. convention as set out in its Article 6.
With respect to dispelling deliberate misrepresentations around the ultimate objectives of the Istanbul 9.

Convention, the Assembly underlines that these are part of broader negative tendencies in today’s societies carried by anti-rights movements and aiming to curb the enjoyment of human rights by persons belonging to certain groups.
It asks all parliaments of Council of Europe member and observer States as well as parliaments which enjoy the status of observer or partner for democracy with the Assembly to: firmly assert that the convention focuses on women and girls in all their diversity as people who 9.1. are disproportionately affected by gender-based violence; acknowledge that the convention does not threaten the nuclear family or family values, nor does 9.2. it impose certain lifestyles; further take into account that the convention does not encourage irregular or illegal migration 9.3. when endeavouring to ensure that women victims of intimate partner violence are not dependent on the residency status of their aggressors; 2 Resolution 2479 (2023) 9.4. recognise that domestic legislation may be effective but that the convention provides a blueprint for national legislation and an efficient system of evaluation and assistance in implementation, and that sharing of best practices and trans-border and international co-operation are important in combating violence against women and domestic violence.
10.

The Assembly welcomes the priority given to preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence in the report of the High Level Reflection Group on the Council of Europe’s role in responding to new realities and challenges facing Europe and the world, published in October 2022, which will contribute to the themes taken up by the 4th Summit of Heads of State and Government announced by the Committee of Ministers for 16-17 May 2023.
Recalling that it has constantly called for the organisation of a new summit since 2017, the Assembly 11. requests that the recommendations in the report be followed up by the Committee of Ministers and that the priority given by the High Level Reflection Group be adequately reflected in the action plan of the 4th Summit.
Finally, the Assembly decides to hold an annual exchange to take stock of progress with ratification and 12. implementation of the Istanbul Convention, as part of its monitoring responsibilities under the convention.

3 Resolution 2480 (2023)1 Provisional version The role and responsibility of men and boys in stopping gender-based violence against women and girls Parliamentary Assembly 1.
Gender-based violence against women and girls, which finds its origin in profound gender inequalities and is their expression, is widespread and harmful.

It affects society as a whole and should be recognised as a global human rights issue.

In Europe, it is estimated that one in three women is a survivor of gender-based violence.

No country and no sector are immune to this violence.

A few years ago, the #metoo movement went viral and contributed to a lifting of taboos.
It created more consciousness of the urgency of preventing and combating gender-based violence.

The fight against gender-based violence has been historically led by women and women’s rights 2. organisations.

However, men and boys, in all their diversity, also have an important role to play.

Men can be agents of change by speaking out against harmful practices, acting as role models and challenging sexism.
They are often the best placed to call on other men to be active in the fight against gender-based violence, and to set an example for future generations.

All genders, including men in all their diversity, can and should be allies and partners in the fight for gender equality and against gender-based violence.

3.

The Parliamentary Assembly recognises the responsibility of men and boys in preventing and stopping gender-based violence against women and girls and urges them to be proactive in this regard.
It acknowledges that not all men are perpetrators of gender-based violence but that the majority of perpetrators are men.
It welcomes the adoption of the Dublin Declaration on the Prevention of Domestic, Sexual and Gender-Based Violence on 30 September 2022 by thirty-eight Council of Europe member states, which committed to “ensuring that strategies aimed at preventing and combating violence against women also address the specific role of men and boys in preventing violence against women” and to develop specific measures aimed to involve them.
It recalls its Resolution 2027 (2014) “Focusing on the perpetrators to prevent violence against women”, its Resolution 2274 (2019) “Promoting parliaments free of sexism and sexual harassment” and its Resolution 2405 (2021) “Revision of the Code of conduct for members of the Parliamentary Assembly: introducing the explicit prohibition of sexism, sexual harassment and sexual violence and misconduct”.
The Assembly’s #NotInMyParliament awareness-raising initiative was launched to prevent and combat sexism, harassment and violence against women in parliaments.

4.

Men and boys are not a homogeneous group and masculinities are multiple.

Actions targeted at men and boys need to take this diversity into account.
The Assembly stresses that promoting mindful masculinities and respectful relationships, as well as the equal sharing of care responsibilities between women and men, will be a step towards more gender equality and will be beneficial to society.

Education and awareness-raising of men and boys can play an important part to this end.

Talking about the pyramid of violence could also be a starting point of discussion.

5.
5.

The Assembly recognises that men and boys can also be affected by gender stereotypes and models of harmful masculinity and stresses the importance of adopting a gender perspective that is inclusive.

Men, including men in positions of political, economic or social power, must be part of the response and participate Assembly debate on 25 January 2023 (6th sitting) (see Doc.

15678, report of the Committee on Equality and Non- 1.

Discrimination, rapporteur: Ms Petra Stienen).


Text adopted by the Assembly on 25 January 2023 (6th sitting).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2480 (2023) in changing mindsets, behaviours and social norms in order to prevent and combat gender-based violence.

Parliamentarians, as influential public figures and legislators, hold a special responsibility for contributing to gender justice and society’s mobilisation against gender-based violence.

6.
6.

The Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (CETS No.

210, “Istanbul Convention”) states in its article 12.4 that all members of society, especially men and boys, should be encouraged to contribute actively to preventing violence.

The Assembly has relentlessly called for the ratification and implementation of the Istanbul Convention.
It recalls that the fight against gender-based violence is closely connected to the fight against gender-based stereotypes and patriarchal values, and reiterates its full support for the convention.

The deconstruction of systems of patriarchal privileges will be a key step to reaching gender equality and ending impunity for perpetrators of gender-based violence.
The Assembly deplores the development of anti-gender movements which deny the reality of gender-based violence, and calls for a resistance against the backlash.

7.

The Assembly welcomes the adoption by the United Nations Human Rights Council of Resolution A/HRC/5/10 “Accelerating efforts to eliminate violence against women: engaging men and boys in preventing and responding to violence against all women and girls”.
It supports the Gender Equality Commission of the Council of Europe and welcomes its work towards adoption by the Committee of Ministers of guidelines on the place of men and boys in gender equality policies and in policies to combat violence against women.

8.
In the light of these considerations, the Assembly calls on Council of Europe member and Observer States, as well as on all States whose parliament enjoys observer or partner for democracy status with the Assembly to: 8.1. if it is not yet the case, ratify and implement the Istanbul Convention; adopt strategies or national action plans to prevent and combat gender-based violence and 8.2. include action with dedicated budget to address the responsibility and role of men and boys; adopt legislation on defining rape by the absence of consent, if not yet the case, in line with the 8.3. requirements of the Istanbul Convention which indicates that “consent must be given voluntarily as the result of the person’s free will assessed in the context of the surrounding circumstances” (Article 36); implement Committee of Ministers Recommendation CM/Rec(2019)1 on preventing and 8.4. combating sexism; launch awareness-raising campaigns on the responsibility of men and boys in preventing and 8.5. combating gender-based violence, including as bystanders; promote a gender-balanced representation in cultural, economic, media, public and political 8.6. sectors; 8.7. create, if it is not yet the case, preventive intervention and treatment programmes for perpetrators of gender-based violence against women and girls, based on existing international standards in this area; 8.8. provide comprehensive training for professionals, including members of the police, lawyers, judges, prosecutors, health care professionals and social workers, on all forms of gender-based violence against women and girls, detecting and responding to gender-based violence, on assistance to survivors and on the rights of victims; 8.9. adopt policies and measures encouraging the equal participation of men in care activities; improve data collection on gender-based violence in line with existing standards and good 8.10. practices in this area; 8.11. support research on the costs of harmful masculinity for society and on the costs of gender- based violence; 8.12. communicate on the harmful effects of gender-based violence on survivors and on society in general; 8.13. adopt an intersectional approach, taking into account all diversities and intersecting forms of discrimination, in the fight against gender-based violence; 8.14. encourage discussions on gender equality, sharing of care responsibilities and combating sexism and gender-based violence in workplaces; 2 Resolution 2480 (2023) 8.15. support male role models engaged in the fight against gender-based violence and in the promotion of mindful masculinities; 8.16. provide financial support to non-governmental organisations working on preventing and combating gender-based violence, including assistance to survivors, and additional financial support to non-governmental organisations promoting gender equality through combating harmful masculinities and launching activities on the responsibility of men and boys in this fight.
With regard to preventing and combating gender-based stereotypes, the Assembly calls on these 9.
States to: invest in education on gender equality from the youngest age, and in the training of teachers on 9.1. gender equality, and ensure that gender equality will be discussed at school on a regular basis; 9.2. develop toolkits questioning stereotypical gender roles; ensure the provision of comprehensive sexuality education including discussions on gender- 9.3. based stereotypes, the meaning of consent and respect in intimate relationships; ask sports clubs and federations to contribute to the fight against gender-based stereotypes and 9.4. to promote gender equality; 9.5. encourage the production of cultural programmes reflecting on gender roles and masculinities; encourage media outlets to react to sexist remarks and behaviours, take responsibility and step 9.6. up prevention efforts.
The Assembly calls on national parliaments to ensure that they are free of gender-based violence and 10. sexism and encourages them to organise awareness-raising events on the responsibility of men and boys in preventing and stopping gender-based violence and on mindful masculinities.

The Assembly calls on political parties to make the fight against gender-based violence a political 11. priority and to promote the participation of women in their decision-making bodies.
It also calls on them to adopt a zero-tolerance policy on gender-based violence and initiate seminars on preventing and combating it.

12.

The Assembly calls on all its members, including men, in all their diversity, to speak up against manifestations of gender-based violence, to be pro-active in prevention and fight against gender-based violence, to counter misogyny in politics and to initiate debates on gender equality in their national parliaments.
3 Resolution 2481 (2023)1 Provisional version Finding solutions for marital captivity Parliamentary Assembly 1.

Marital captivity arises when a person having entered into a marriage wishes to end it, but finds that they are unable to do so, either legally or in the eyes of their community.
It may concern cases where a marriage has been concluded and is recognised under the civil law in force in the country where the trapped spouse lives, as well as marital situations that are not recognised under the applicable civil law.

The phenomenon is little known but is estimated to affect tens of thousands of people – mostly women – in Europe every year.

Situations of marital captivity violate the human rights of those that they affect.
States therefore have a 2. duty to combat this phenomenon actively.

Marital captivity is an infringement on the trapped spouse’s personal autonomy, a basic principle of 3. human rights law.

Persons trapped in marital captivity lose their independence and their right to self- determination.

They often cannot start a new relationship or remarry, especially where they may be considered by their community to have committed adultery or bigamy.
They may be prevented from travelling, in particular if their marriage continues to have legal effect in a country where the husband’s approval is necessary to renew the wife’s passport.

The impact on children can also be devastating, as they grow up in an unsafe and unstable environment.

Moreover, a person who tries to put an end to this situation may find themselves alone and isolated from their own community, and may encounter serious violence and threats.
These can include the risk of so-called “honour”-based violence, which is a particularly egregious offence and prohibited under international law.

4.

The human rights issues at stake are wide-ranging.

Marital captivity may for example violate Articles 5 (right to liberty and security of the person), 8 (right to private and family life), 12 (right to marry) and 14 (prohibition on discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No.
5), as well as rights codified in the European Social Charter (Revised) (ETS No.

163) and in the United Nations International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Although it is not expressly prohibited under the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and 5. combating violence against women and domestic violence (CETS No.

210, “Istanbul Convention”), marital captivity may also violate a wide range of provisions under this convention.
Moreover, many of the measures that States are called upon to take under the Istanbul Convention in order to prevent, prosecute and provide protection from all forms of violence against women and domestic violence also provide highly effective means of combating marital captivity.

6.

To tackle marital captivity effectively and put an end to the human rights violations that it causes, States must address the full scope of situations potentially concerned.
These include cases where one party to a civil marriage is unable to put an end to it, for example due to obstacles to obtaining a civil law divorce, because of a conflict of laws between countries or risk of losing residency status in the country where they live, or because of coercion (notably psychological, physical or economic) exerted by the other party.
They may also include cases where a religious or customary marriage has been concluded (with or without a civil marriage), which one party is unable to end due to religious or customary law or practices.

Assembly debate on 25 January 2023 (6th sitting) (see Doc.

15679, report of the Committee on Equality and Non- 1.

Discrimination, rapporteur: Ms Margreet De Boer).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 25 January 2023 (6th sitting).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2481 (2023) 7.
The Parliamentary Assembly welcomes the fact that some States have begun to take measures to strengthen their legislation in this field, and that many measures taken to implement the Istanbul Convention may also provide solutions to some aspects of cases of marital captivity.
Civil society organisations, notably women’s rights organisations, organisations working with migrant women and feminist religious organisations, have also identified effective strategies for preventing marital captivity and means of responding to the needs of women unable to leave their marriage or marital situation.

8.
8.

Awareness of these important human rights issues remains too low, however, and there is a pressing need to take measures to prevent marital captivity and ensure that effective solutions are readily accessible to victims wherever it occurs.
In the light of these considerations, the Assembly invites Council of Europe member States as well as 9. observer States and States whose parliaments enjoy observer or partner for democracy status with the Assembly: 9.1. as regards strengthening the law in this area and its implementation, to: 9.1.1. ratify and implement the Istanbul Convention, if they have not yet done so; 9.1.2. withdraw any reservations already deposited; refrain from depositing reservations to Article 59 of the Istanbul Convention, and 9.1.3. spouse to lose their residency status; ensure that putting an end to a situation of marital captivity will not cause the trapped 9.1.4. captivity from arising due to inconsistencies between laws; step up their efforts and diplomacy to prevent transnational situations of marital 9.1.5. strengthen wherever necessary the criminal law provisions applicable to coercive or controlling behaviour, as well as those applicable to other forms of psychological, economic and physical coercion, in order to ensure that they effectively apply to all cases of marital captivity, whether or not there is a legally recognised marriage and including where the spouses no longer live together; 9.1.6. use these provisions effectively; train police and legal professionals to recognise situations of marital captivity and to 9.1.7. prosecuted, in order to put an end to impunity in this area; ensure that perpetrators of forms of marital captivity covered by criminal law are ensure that no-fault civil divorce is available to everyone and that civil divorce 9.1.8. proceedings are accessible to everyone, including by making legal aid available to all persons in situations of marital captivity, regardless of their residency status; 9.1.9. explore means of using the legal system to combine civil divorce proceedings with an obligation to co-operate with religious divorce proceedings, without placing the trapped spouse at risk of criminal proceedings if they seek to use these provisions; 9.2. as regards preventive measures, to: work
 together with religious and other communities, using a bottom-up, internormative 9.2.1. approach and involving interdisciplinary networks of experts as well as activists already working within these communities to combat marital captivity, in order to overcome religious attitudes and customary practices that favour marital captivity; 9.2.2. promote the use of prenuptial contracts to prevent situations of marital captivity from arising; actively support the efforts of religious communities and organisations seeking to 9.2.3. ensure that women migrating to a country to accompany their husband or in order to marry are fully informed, before they leave their country of origin and in their own language, as to their rights in the destination country and about how to seek support if necessary; 9.2.4. support the activities of civil society organisations working to reach out to and empower women most at risk of marital captivity, notably women who may be living in isolation from the broader community and migrant women whose residency status may be at risk if they put an end to their marriage; 9.2.5. accessible in all necessary languages about what marital captivity is and the solutions that exist; run awareness-raising campaigns on marital captivity and make information readily 2 Resolution 2481 (2023) 9.3. as regards measures to protect victims, to ensure that the full range of support measures set out in the Istanbul Convention is available to persons seeking to escape situations of marital captivity, and in this context, to ensure in particular that: 9.3.1. adequate structures are in place to assist victims of marital captivity, including telephone helplines for urgent calls and accommodation and shelters for women and girls who have had to leave their home; 9.3.2. security and independence; support provided to victims of marital captivity effectively guarantees their financial 9.3.3. autonomous residency permits; victims of marital captivity do not lose their residency
 status but are granted 9.4. as regards broader policy measures, to: 9.4.1. prevent and combat violence against women and girls and domestic violence; include the fight against marital captivity in their national policies and practices to 9.4.2. collect accurate and comparable data on marital captivity, broken down by gender and age, and carry out detailed studies on the causes and frequency of these practices and on the associated risk factors.
10.

The Assembly expresses its support for civil society organisations working to raise awareness of and combat marital captivity and calls for these organisations to be given stable and long-term backing, including financial resources.

3 Resolution 2482 (2023)1 Provisional version Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine Parliamentary Assembly 1.
The Parliamentary Assembly reiterates that the Russian Federation’s armed attack and large-scale invasion of Ukraine launched on 24 February 2022 constitute an “aggression” under the terms of Resolution 3314 (XXIX) of the United Nations General Assembly adopted in 1974 and are clearly in breach of the Charter of the United Nations.
The attempted annexation of the Ukrainian regions of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia, following the illegal so-called referendums organised by the Russian Federation in these regions in September 2022, is a further escalation of the aggression against Ukraine.

It clearly violates the principle of international law according to which no territorial acquisition resulting from the use of force shall be recognised as legal.
The Russian Federation will be considered as continuing its aggression as long as the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity and political independence of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders will be fully re-established.

The Assembly recalls that the ongoing aggression is a continuation of the aggression started on 20 February 2014, which included the invasion, occupation and illegal annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation.
The Assembly notes that the aggression constituted a serious violation by the Russian Federation of 2. the Statute of the Council of Europe (ETS No.1), which justified the unprecedented decision by the Committee of Ministers to exclude the Russian Federation from the Organisation, in line with the unanimous position expressed by the Assembly in its Opinion 300 (2022).

3.
3.

The Assembly also notes that Belarus has participated in the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine, as it has allowed its territory to be used by the Russian Federation for perpetrating acts of aggression against Ukraine.

Its role and complicity should be condemned by the international community and its leaders should be held to account.

4.
4.

The Assembly considers that the unprovoked acts of aggression committed by the Russian Federation and Belarus, given their character, scale and gravity, constitute manifest violations of the Charter of the United Nations, in particular of the prohibition on the use of force contained in Article 2(4).

They lack any plausible legal justification under jus ad bellum, such as self-defense.
These acts therefore meet the definition of the crime of aggression as set out in Article 8 bis of the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and under customary international law.

The Russian and Belarusian political and military leaders who planned, prepared, initiated or executed these acts, and who were in a position to control or direct the political or military action of the State, should be identified and prosecuted.
Without their decision to wage this war of aggression against Ukraine, the atrocities that flow from it (war crimes, crimes against humanity and possible genocide), as well as all the destruction, death and damage resulting from the war, including from lawful acts of war, would not have occurred.
As the United Nations Human Rights Committee has stated, States engaged in acts of aggression as defined in international law, resulting in deprivation of life, violate ipso facto the right to life guaranteed by Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Assembly debate on 26 January 2023 (7th sitting) (see Doc.

15689, report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and 1.

Human Rights, rapporteur: Mr Damien Cottier).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 26 January 2023 (7th sitting).
https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2482 (2023) 5.

The Assembly notes that the ICC does not have at present jurisdiction over the crime of aggression committed against Ukraine, given that neither the Russian Federation, Belarus nor Ukraine are parties to the ICC Statute and that the United Nations Security Council has not referred the situation to the ICC Prosecutor.
The likely exercise and abuse of the right to veto by the Russian Federation at the UNSC render such a referral highly implausible in the present circumstances.

The Assembly further notes that there is no other international criminal tribunal competent to prosecute and punish the crime of aggression committed against Ukraine.
Domestic prosecutions, in Ukraine and in other countries on the basis of the principles of territoriality or universal jurisdiction, face many legal and practical challenges, including in terms of perceived impartiality, legitimacy and immunities.

The Assembly therefore reiterates its unanimous call on member States and observer States of the 6.
Council of Europe to set up a special international criminal tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine, which should be endorsed and supported by as many States and international organisations as possible, and in particular by the United Nations General Assembly.
The proposal to create a special tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine has so far received the support of several national parliaments and governments, the European Parliament, the European Commission, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the Parliamentary Assembly of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
The Committee of Ministers has welcomed the ongoing efforts, in co-operation with Ukraine, to secure accountability for the crime of aggression.
The Assembly considers that the Council of Europe Heads of State and Government, at their 4th Summit in Reykjavik in May 2023, should give their political support to the creation of such a tribunal and provide Council of Europe’s concrete expert and technical support to the process of its establishment, in close co-ordination with other interested international organisations and States.
The Assembly considers that the Council of Europe should have an active leading role in the establishment of the special tribunal, participate in relevant consultations and negotiations and provide concrete expert and technical support for the process of establishment of the special tribunal.

The Assembly strongly supports the creation of a special tribunal that would have the following 7. features: 7.1.
Its jurisdiction would be limited to the crime of aggression committed against Ukraine and would extend ratione temporis to the aggression started by the Russian Federation in February 2014.

Its jurisdiction would include the role and complicity of the leaders of Belarus in the war of aggression against Ukraine.

Its statute would contain a definition of the crime of aggression in line with Article 8bis of the ICC 7.2.

Statute and customary international law.


Its statute would clearly state that personal immunities would not apply to incumbent State 7.3. officials, in line with the practice of other international criminal tribunals, and that functional immunities would in any event not be applicable to the crime of aggression.
The official capacity as a head of State or government, a member of government or parliament, an elected representative or government official should in no case exempt the accused person from criminal responsibility for the crime of aggression or justify a mitigated punishment.

This principle should apply to nationals of States non- parties to the constitutive treaty or agreement, in particular those of the aggressor State and its accomplice.
Its statute would contain a list of fair trial rights of the accused, as well as a reference to the 7.4. principles of legality and non bis in idem, in line with international human rights law and the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No.

5), as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights.

7.5.
7.5.

Its role would be complementary to the ICC’s jurisdiction and in no way limit or affect the latter’s exercise of jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity and possible genocide committed in the context of the ongoing aggression and its jurisdiction in general.
Both the ICC and the special tribunal should agree on practical and legal issues such as sharing of evidence, custody of suspects, developing common witness protection schemes, sequencing of trials of individuals prosecuted by both courts.

Its seat should be established in The Hague, with a view to ensuring complementarity and co- 7.6. operation with the ICC and other international courts and institutions.
States and international organisations supporting the special tribunal should provide to it 7.7. sufficient human and financial resources, ensuring its full independence and effective operational functioning while taking into account, in its structure, the fact that it will certainly not immediately or not permanently be able to operate at full capacity.

2 Resolution 2482 (2023) 8.


Pending the establishment of a special tribunal on the crime of aggression against Ukraine, the Assembly calls on member States and the Council of Europe to support and provide concrete expert and technical assistance to the process of setting up an Interim International Prosecutor’s Office to investigate the crime of aggression, in close co-operation with the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine.
Member States should co-operate closely with that Office and make sure in their internal legislation that close judicial co- operation with it is ensured.

Such an office could be based outside Ukraine, ideally in The Hague.

9.

In parallel to the creation of a special tribunal, the Assembly calls on member States and observer States that have not yet ratified the ICC Statute or the Kampala amendments to do so at the earliest possible date.
They should also take the necessary steps to amend the ICC Statute’s jurisdictional regime, either by allowing referrals to the ICC by the United Nations General Assembly when the UNSC is blocked, or by removing the existing limits on the jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in order to make it consistent with the other crimes subject to its jurisdiction.
These changes would reinforce the overall consistency, legitimacy and universality of international criminal justice, in particular with regard to the crime of aggression.

The proposal to create a special tribunal to respond to the ongoing criminal aggression against Ukraine and the long-term reform of the ICC Statute enabling the ICC to prosecute and punish similar (future) aggressions are not mutually exclusive and should be pursued in parallel.

10.
10.

The Assembly is outraged by the numerous reports of atrocities, gross human rights violations and violations of international humanitarian law committed by Russian forces or affiliated armed groups, and specifically the horrendous role of the Wagner Group, in the course of hostilities or in areas temporarily occupied by them during the ongoing war of aggression.
These include indiscriminate attacks against civilians and civilian objects, including hospitals, schools, nuclear power plants, energy and water infrastructure, and cultural heritage sites, in breach of the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution.
They also include summary executions of civilians; targeted killings; torture and ill-treatment of civilians and prisoners of war; enforced disappearances; abductions; rape and other forms of sexual violence; unlawful confinement of civilians; forcible transfer and deportation of Ukrainian citizens, including children, to the Russian Federation or Russian-occupied areas; use of explosive weapons in populated areas; looting; forced “passportisation” and conscription of Ukrainian citizens; and trials and death sentences against prisoners of war.
There are strong indications that many of these violations amount to grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and war crimes and that some may even qualify as crimes against humanity, as part of a widespread or systematic attack against the civilian population in Ukraine.

11.
11.

The Assembly utterly condemns these crimes and reiterates its call on the international community to send a clear message that perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity will be held to account and that impunity for such crimes is unacceptable.

This applies equally to low-ranking perpetrators and those who bear command responsibility for the crimes.
Both the Russian Federation and Ukraine have a primary responsibility under international law to investigate and prosecute such crimes and to bring the perpetrators to justice.
The Assembly notes that there is mounting evidence that the Russian official rhetoric used to justify the 12. full-scale invasion and aggression against Ukraine, the so-called “de-Ukrainianisation” process, carries characteristics of public incitement to genocide or reveals a genocidal intent to destroy the Ukrainian national group as such or at least part of it.
It recalls that the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, to which both Ukraine and the Russian Federation are parties, prohibits direct and public incitement to commit genocide and the attempt to commit genocide.
It also notes with the utmost concern that some of the acts committed by Russian forces against Ukrainian civilians could fall under Article II of the Convention, such as killings and forcible transfer of children of one group to another group for russification purposes through adoption by Russian families and/or transfer to Russian-run orphanages or residential facilities like summer camps.

The Assembly recalls that all States Parties to the Genocide Convention have a duty to punish 13. genocide.
As interpreted by the International Court of Justice, they also have an obligation to prevent genocide and a corresponding duty to act, which arises at the instant when the State learns of, or should normally have learned of, the existence of a serious risk that genocide will be committed.

14.
14.

The Assembly notes that international and domestic accountability mechanisms already exist in order to investigate, prosecute and, where appropriate, punish war crimes, crimes against humanity, and possible genocide committed during the ongoing war.
These include the ICC, which has jurisdiction over such crimes allegedly committed on Ukrainian territory; the criminal justice system of Ukraine; and the criminal justice systems of third States that have jurisdiction on the basis of the principle of universal jurisdiction or the principles of active or passive personality.

The Assembly welcomes the referral of the current situation in 3 Resolution 2482 (2023) Ukraine to the ICC Prosecutor by 43 States Parties to the ICC Statute.
It strongly supports the investigations opened by the ICC Prosecutor, the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine and third countries and welcomes the setting up of a Joint Investigation Team to co-ordinate relevant efforts.

15.
The Assembly calls on member States and observer States of the Council of Europe to: 15.1. fully support the investigation launched by the ICC Prosecutor into the situation in Ukraine, by sharing any evidence in their possession, and by providing in a sustainable manner adequate human and financial resources to the ICC enabling it to face its increased and unprecedented workload; 15.2. assist the Ukrainian authorities and, in particular, the Prosecutor General’s Office in their ongoing efforts to investigate alleged international crimes committed in Ukraine, by strengthening their capacities, by providing resources and expertise, including forensic experts, and where appropriate, by collecting, preserving and sharing evidence from potential victims and witnesses who have fled Ukraine, in accordance with human rights standards in order to ensure its admissibility in criminal proceedings; 15.3. provide expert support to the Ukrainian authorities in their efforts to investigate conflict-related sexual violence, which is often under-reported by victims; 15.4. make use of the principle of universal jurisdiction or other principles (active or passive personality) to investigate and prosecute alleged international crimes committed in Ukraine; 15.5. join or co-operate with the Joint Investigation Team set up by Ukraine and certain European Union member States under the auspices of Eurojust and with the participation of the ICC Prosecutor, with the aim of exchanging evidence and information in connection with the ongoing investigations on alleged crimes committed in Ukraine; 15.6. make use of Council of Europe and other international instruments on mutual legal assistance to the widest extent possible, for the purposes of collecting, transferring and using evidence in connection with alleged crimes committed in Ukraine, and if necessary envisage extending them; 15.7. support the work of Ukrainian and international non-governmental organisations, as well as human rights defenders and journalists on the ground, in the collection of evidence and documentation of alleged international crimes or the provision of different types of assistance to victims and witnesses, including with regard to the forcible transfer of children to the Russian Federation and Russian- occupied territories; 15.8. ensure increased co-ordination and coherence between all accountability mechanisms and actors involved, with a view to preventing duplication and enhancing efficiency; ratify the Rome Statute of the ICC and its amendments, including the Kampala amendments, if 15.9. they have not yet done so.
The Assembly calls on the Ukrainian authorities to strictly comply with their obligations under 16. international humanitarian law and to conduct thorough investigations of all alleged war crimes and violations of international humanitarian law allegedly committed by Russian or by Ukrainian forces and combatants, regardless of the affiliation of the perpetrator or the victim.
All trials before Ukrainian courts should be conducted respecting the right of the suspects to a fair trial under international human rights law and international humanitarian law.

To this end, the Assembly encourages the Ukrainian authorities to co-operate with international trial observers and to consider inviting international legal professionals to participate in upcoming trials.
Resulting convictions should be compatible with the principle of legality enshrined in Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which cannot be subject to derogation in time of war.

The Assembly also calls on the Ukrainian authorities to put a particular emphasis on activating all the 17. relevant procedures to gather information on and ensure the safe return of forcibly transferred Ukrainian children from the Russian Federation and Russian-occupied territories.

18.
18.

The Assembly welcomes the adoption on 14 November 2022 by the United Nations General Assembly of the resolution entitled “Furtherance of remedy and reparation for aggression against Ukraine”, which recognises that the Russian Federation must bear the legal consequences of all its internationally wrongful acts in or against Ukraine, including by making reparation for the injuries and losses caused by such acts.
This resolution further recognises the need for the establishment of an international mechanism for the reparation of related damage, loss or injury and recommends the creation by member States, in co-operation with Ukraine, of an international register of damage.

4 Resolution 2482 (2023) 19.


In this context, the Assembly reiterates its call on all member States of the Council of Europe to set up an international compensation mechanism, including an international register of damage, in co-operation with the Ukrainian authorities.
The Assembly stresses the Council of Europe’s comparative advantage due to the experience gained by the European Court of Human Rights and the Committee of Ministers in assessing and enforcing just satisfaction claims for serious human rights violations and considers that the Organisation should play a leading role in setting up and managing the future mechanism.

Such a mechanism would have the following features: 19.1.
It would be established by a multilateral treaty or agreement, open to all like-minded States, with the support of the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the European Union and other international organisations.

19.2.
19.2.

It would include as a first step a register of damage, which would create a record of evidence and claims on damage, loss or injury caused to all natural and legal persons in Ukraine, as well as the State of Ukraine, by violations of international law arising from the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine.

19.3.
19.3.

It would include at a later stage an international compensation commission, mandated to review and adjudicate the claims submitted and documented by the register, as well as a compensation fund, from which compensation awards would be paid to successful claimants.
The founding treaty or agreement would regulate matters such as the funding of the compensation fund, the enforcement of compensation awards, and how decisions by other international bodies and courts on reparation and compensation in connection with the Russian aggression, such as judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, could be enforced through such a mechanism.
The Assembly, while reiterating its previous recommendations addressed to the Russian Federation 20. since the outbreak of its aggression against Ukraine, calls on the Russian Federation to: 20.1. cease its aggression against Ukraine immediately and unconditionally; 20.2. completely and unconditionally withdraw its occupying forces, including its own military as well as proxies, from the internationally recognised territory of Ukraine; 20.3. comply strictly with its obligations under international law, including the Charter of the United Nations, international human rights law and international humanitarian law; 20.4. immediately stop attacks against civilians and civilian objects, including mass indiscriminate attacks, ensure full respect for the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution, and authorise the International Committee of the Red Cross to have full access for visits to prisoners of war; 20.5. immediately cease the forced deportation and transfers of Ukrainian civilians, including children, to the Russian Federation and the Russian-occupied territories, allow their safe return and, in the case of children, ensure that they are promptly reunited with their families; investigate effectively all allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity and possible 20.6. genocide committed by Russian forces and affiliated armed groups, and ensure as appropriate that all perpetrators and those bearing command responsibility are properly prosecuted and punished; 20.7. co-operate with the investigations and proceedings before the ICC and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and comply with their decisions, including the ICJ order of 16 March 2022 indicating that the Russian Federation should immediately suspend the military operations that it commenced on 24 February 2022 in the territory of Ukraine; 20.8. co-operate with the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine and comply with its recommendations; 20.9. co-operate with proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights, in relation to acts or omissions capable of constituting a violation of the Convention provided that they occurred up until 16 September 2022, in particular in the context of the inter-state case Ukraine v. Russia (X) concerning alleged mass and gross human rights violations committed by the Russian Federation in Ukraine since 24 February 2022, and of any related individual applications against the Russian Federation, and comply with the interim measures indicated by the Court under Rule 39 of its Rules of Court in the context of these proceedings.
21.
The Assembly furthermore invites: the European Court of Human Rights to further prioritise the examination of inter-state and 21.1. individual applications against the Russian Federation stemming from the ongoing war of aggression; 5 Resolution 2482 (2023) 21.2. the members of the United Nations Security Council to consider putting to a vote and not obstructing a Security Council resolution seeking referral of the situation in Ukraine to the ICC Prosecutor under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations; 21.3. the United Nations General Assembly to support and endorse the setting up of a special international criminal tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine and of an international compensation mechanism for the injury, damage and loss incurred by the State of Ukraine as well as by natural and legal persons in Ukraine, due to the Russian war of aggression; 21.4. the European Union to co-ordinate closely its efforts with the Council of Europe in ensuring a comprehensive system of accountability for the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine, including the crime of aggression, war crimes, crimes against humanity, possible genocide, and reparation of damages.
22.

The Assembly calls on Belarus and the regime in place to refrain from any further involvement in the aggression, including by allowing its territory to be used by the Russian Federation for perpetrating acts of aggression against Ukraine, and to comply with its obligations under international law.

23.
23.

The Assembly considers the inability of the United Nations and its Security Council to counter the Russian aggression due to an abuse of the right to veto to be an existential threat to international rule-based order and the democratic security of Council of Europe member States.
In this respect, the Assembly supports all efforts and discussions on unblocking the situation at the United Nations and making the United Nations more efficient, including a call to request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on potential limitations of the right to veto implicit in the Charter and general principles of law.

24.
24.

The Assembly should continue to follow developments relating to the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine and its legal and human rights aspects.

Once hostilities have ended, the Assembly should consider holding one of its part-sessions in Kyiv, as an expression of solidarity with Ukraine.

6 Resolution 2483 (2023)1 Provisional version The progress of the Assembly's monitoring procedure (January-December 2022) Parliamentary Assembly 1.
The Parliamentary Assembly acknowledges the work carried out by the Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee) in fulfilling its mandate as defined in Resolution 1115 (1997) (modified) on the “Setting up of an Assembly Committee on the honouring of obligations and commitments by member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee)”.
In particular, it welcomes the committee’s work in accompanying the 11 countries under a full monitoring procedure (Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Hungary, the Republic of Moldova, Poland, Serbia, Türkiye and Ukraine), the three countries engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue (Bulgaria, Montenegro and Northern Macedonia) in their efforts to comply fully with the obligations and commitments they entered into upon accession to the Council of Europe, as well as the countries subject to periodic monitoring of their membership obligations, which was completed in 2022 in respect of Hungary, Malta and Romania, and is currently carried out for France, the Netherlands and San Marino.
The Assembly notes the committee’s continued attention to the developments concerning relations 2. between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The Assembly takes note of the most recent urgent notice of the European Court of Human Rights sent to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe calling for the monitoring of Azerbaijan's implementation of its decision of 21 December 2022 regarding the Lachin Corridor, and calls for the immediate and full implementation of the interim measures decided by the Court.
The Assembly is also monitoring the situation around the Armenian prisoners of war and civilian captives who are still detained in Azerbaijan.

The Assembly calls upon Azerbaijan to immediately release all detainees.

3.
3.

It commends the Sub-Committee on Conflicts concerning Council of Europe Member States for the work it has undertaken during the reporting period with regard to the consequences of the war between the Russian Federation and Georgia, and in particular on recent developments in the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali/South Ossetia as well as on recent developments in the Transnistrian settlement process.

4.
4.

It confirms that as a result of the Committee of Ministers’ decision of 16 March 2022 to expel the Russian Federation from the Council of Europe with immediate effect, in reaction to the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the monitoring procedure for the Russian Federation was immediately closed as the mandate of the Monitoring Committee is limited to Council of Europe member States.

5.
The Assembly welcomes the positive developments and progress made during the reporting period in the countries under a full monitoring procedure or engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue, expresses its concern about some negative developments and remaining shortcomings and urges all these countries to step up their efforts to fully honour their membership obligations and accession commitments to the Council of Europe, while it stands ready and committed to co-operate and assist member States in this respect.
In particular: Assembly debate on 26 January 2023 (8th sitting) (see Doc.

15682, report of the Committee on the Honouring of 1.

Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe, rapporteur: Mr Piero Fassino).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 26 January 2023 (8th sitting).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2483 (2023) 6.
Regarding countries under a full monitoring procedure: with respect to Albania: the Assembly welcomes the return of the main opposition parties to the 6.1. work of the parliament following the parliamentary elections in 2021.

It calls upon the ruling majority and opposition to overcome the deep polarisation and systemic political crisis in the country.
The Assembly notes with satisfaction that the parliament has extended the constitutional deadline for the vetting of all judges and prosecutors in the country.

It takes note of the proposed new judicial map and encourages all stakeholders to ensure that this new map will not jeopardise the access of citizens to the justice system.
The Assembly welcomes the fact that all anti-corruption structures are now fully operational and hopes that this will result in an increased number of convictions for high level corruption, which remains a problem.

While welcoming the announcement of the authorities that they intend to remove the so-called anti-defamation package of amendments from the agenda of the parliament, it expresses its serious concern about the deteriorating media environment.
It calls upon the authorities to refrain from any actions and policies that could have a negative effect on freedom of expression and media freedom in the country; 6.2. with respect to Armenia: referring to Resolution 2427 (2022), the Assembly welcomes the marked progress in the democratic development of Armenia and calls on the authorities to complete the reform of the electoral framework, to continue the reform of the judiciary and to strengthen media freedom.
The Assembly resolves to continue to closely follow developments with regard to institutional balances and the establishment of a democratic culture; 6.3. with respect to Azerbaijan: the Assembly welcomes the authorities` declared commitment to political dialogue but regrets that in general, the situation in Azerbaijan has not improved and that a number of outstanding concerns with regard to the rule of law, pluralist democracy and human rights remain unaddressed.
They include serious concerns with regard to the independence of the judiciary, media freedom and freedom of expression, freedom of association and political freedom, as well as allegations of torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement officials and unsatisfactory detention conditions; 6.4. with respect to Bosnia and Herzegovina: the Assembly takes note of the holding of general elections and calls on the elected officials to proceed without delay with the formation of institutions at State and entity level and to adopt the critical reforms called upon by the European Union, the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).
The Assembly also calls on the newly constituted authorities to undertake the constitutional and electoral reforms to bring the Constitution into line with the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No.
5), complying with the Sejdić and Finci group of cases; 6.5. with respect to Georgia: with reference to Resolution 2438 (2022), the Assembly welcomes the progress made by Georgia in honouring its obligations and commitments and encourages all political forces to address the remaining recommendations and concerns expressed in this resolution.
In that respect it remains concerned about the extreme political polarisation in the country which affects the reforms and stakeholder participation in the reforms needed for further democratic consolidation and Euro-Atlantic integration of the country.

The Assembly urges the authorities to implement a thorough, independent evaluation of its reforms of the judiciary with a view to guiding future reforms to ensure a genuine independent judiciary in the country.
It takes note of recent developments with regard to the media and concerns expressed in that regard.

It encourages the authorities to take all possible steps to reduce the tensions in the media environment.
The Assembly reiterates its full support for Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders and its concern and condemnation of the illegal occupation and creeping annexation by the Russian Federation of the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali/South Ossetia.
It encourages the authorities to address the 12 recommendations of the European Union so that it can be given the candidate status for European Union membership that it rightfully aspires to; 6.6. with respect to Hungary: referring to Resolution 2460 (2022), the Assembly recalls its decision of 13 October to open a monitoring procedure to address the questions pertaining to the rule of law and democracy, including the excessive concentration of powers and use of special legal orders or cardinal laws, that have remained largely unaddressed.
It invites the Hungarian authorities to review their electoral framework in the light of the 2021 opinion of the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) and to improve the media environment, so as to ensure the fairness of the electoral procedure.

It calls on the Hungarian authorities to urgently revise the National Security Services Act and to repeal the legislation pertaining to the “dissemination of false information”.
Taking note of the steps taken to improve the functioning of democratic institutions, strengthen the 2 Resolution 2483 (2023) transparency of the legislative process and improve the anti-corruption framework, the Assembly strongly encourages the authorities to seek the expertise of the Council of Europe to ensure the compliance of these measures with previous Venice Commission and GRECO recommendations; 6.7. with respect to the Republic of Moldova: the Assembly acknowledges that the country has faced considerable new challenges following the outbreak of the war in neighbouring Ukraine, adding to the pandemic, the energy and economic crisis.
It applauds the Moldovan authorities for their management of the refugee crisis and the resilience and solidarity shown by the population.

The Assembly calls on the authorities to remain committed to the reforms undertaken to restore the rule of law and trust in State institutions in consultation with all stakeholders.

It welcomes the constructive co-operation established with the Venice Commission, in particular for the reform of the justice system and the prosecution office.
It encourages the authorities to adopt the new Electoral Code in line with the Venice Commission’s recommendations.
The Assembly refers to Resolution 2484 (2023) “The honouring of obligations and commitments by the Republic of Moldova” and invites the authorities to implement it; with respect to Poland: the Assembly underscores the exemplary role played by the country in 6.8. the context of the Russian aggression against Ukraine, and the extensive assistance provided to that country, including by hosting more than 1.4 million Ukrainian refugees on its territory.
At the same time, the Assembly remains seriously concerned with regard to the independence of the judiciary and with the adherence of the judicial system with European rule of law standards and norms.

It is deeply concerned about the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal that consider article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights incompatible with the Polish Constitution under certain conditions.
The Assembly reiterates its position that these judgments are an unacceptable challenge to the supremacy of the Convention and run counter to the obligation of all member States to fully implement the Convention and judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

It calls upon the Polish authorities to unconditionally execute the judgments of the Court, including by amending the Constitution if necessary.
The Assembly considers that the lack of independence of the National Council of the Judiciary is a key obstacle for the country to meet its rule of law commitments and calls line with Venice Commission for recommendations.
the National Council of the reform of the Judiciary in 6.9. with respect to Serbia: the Assembly welcomes the adoption in January 2022, by referendum, of the constitutional amendments to depoliticise the judiciary and the preparation of subsequent secondary legislation for their implementation in co-operation with the Venice Commission.

It encourages the Serbian authorities to take the Venice Commission’s recommendations fully into account.
The Assembly welcomes the adoption of amendments to the electoral legislation and the election of a more pluralistic parliament in April 2022 but urges the authorities to address long-standing issues such as: access to media, campaign finance, pressure on voters, and to adopt measures to allow for the public scrutiny and audit of voter lists.

Concerning the fight against corruption, the Assembly welcomes the progress noted by GRECO, notably the adoption of a code of conduct for parliamentarians.
It encourages the authorities to adopt an anti-corruption strategy and address the deficiencies in corruption prevention amongst persons with senior executive functions.

The Assembly remains concerned about the level of violence against journalists and the media environment.

Recalling the difficulties faced by the organisers of the Europride parade in September 2022, the Assembly urges the authorities to fully ensure freedom of assembly.
In addition, the Assembly expects the Serbian authorities to continue the peaceful dialogue with the Kosovo*2 with a view to solving all outstanding issues; 6.10. with respect to Türkiye: recalling Resolution 2459 (2022), the Assembly welcomes the decrease of the electoral threshold from 10 to 7%.
However it reiterates its concerns regarding the overall electoral environment, including electoral amendments adopted in April 2022 in light of the June 2022 opinion of the Venice Commission, the state of freedom of expression and the media, the independence of the judiciary and the pending procedure aimed at closing the second largest opposition party, the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP).
It calls on the Turkish authorities to put an end to the arrests of journalists and civil society activists, which further undermine the exercise of democratic rights.

Concerning the implementation of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, it calls on the Turkish authorities to ensure the implementation of the Kavala judgment, his release, and the release of his co-defendants.
It strongly encourages the Turkish authorities to co- * Throughout this text, all reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population shall be understood 2. in full compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.
3 Resolution 2483 (2023) operate with the Venice Commission to ensure the compliance of the legal and constitutional framework with Council of Europe standards and to implement its recommendations and, at the very least, to implement the electoral legislation in a spirit that will be conducive to ensuring a level playing field; 6.11. with respect to Ukraine: the Assembly notes that as a result of the Russian Federation’s military aggression, no normal monitoring of obligations and commitments can take place.
It lauds the Ukrainian authorities for their considerable efforts to ensure the continuing functioning of the democratic and rule of law institutions, in spite of the challenging situation caused by the war.

In that respect, the Assembly welcomes the ratification of the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence (CETS No.

210, “Istanbul Convention”) on 18 June 2022.


While welcoming the reforms and legislative initiatives that are being implemented, also in support of its EU candidate status, the Assembly urges the authorities to ensure, notwithstanding the difficult situation, democratic and rule of law norms and principles are maintained as much as possible.

The Assembly encourages the monitoring co-rapporteurs for Ukraine to continue to closely follow these developments.

7.
7.

Regarding the countries engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue: 7.1. with respect to Bulgaria: the Assembly is fully aware that a major political crisis triggered by the corruption scandals with which Bulgaria has been confronted since July 2020 and which have resulted in four consecutive early parliamentary elections, has inevitably had a negative impact on progress with regard to the implementation of recommendations made in the Assembly Resolution 2296 (2019).
A solution is needed to solve the electoral impasse and it requires compromise.

The Assembly stands ready to assist Bulgaria in this process.

It urges the authorities to address the outstanding concerns with regard to high level corruption, transparency in media ownership, human rights of minorities, and hate speech and violence against women.
At the same time, it welcomes the smooth organisation of elections with respect for fundamental freedoms; 7.2. with respect to Montenegro: recalling Resolution 2374 (2021), the Assembly commends the developments in the fight against corruption but regrets the failure to carry out the appointments to the Constitutional Court and Judicial Council required to improve the rule of law and the functioning of democratic institutions.
The Assembly calls on political parties to proceed with such appointments without delay and to implement the recommendations of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE/ODIHR) regarding the electoral process before the next presidential and parliamentary elections; 7.3. with respect to North Macedonia: the Assembly welcomes the signature of a bilateral agreement concerning the adoption of a negotiating Framework by the European Union Council in July 2022.
The Assembly encourages the political forces in North Macedonia to reach a political compromise to allow the country to pursue its EU integration path.
The Assembly also encourages the authorities to pursue the reforms launched to strengthen the rule of law, democracy and human rights, to release all the results of the census and, on the basis of the significant progress identified by the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, to ensure the practical implementation of the legislation for the protection of national minorities.
In the field of the judiciary, the Assembly encourages the country to implement GRECO’s July 2022 recommendations and notably to adopt the new Code of Ethics for MPs and its Guidelines.
Regarding the countries that are currently subject to the procedure for the periodic review of 8. membership obligations to the Council of Europe: with respect to Malta: with reference to Resolution 2451 (2022), the Assembly reiterates its 8.1. recommendation that the ruling majority and opposition consider a far-reaching reform of the Maltese Parliament with a view to establishing a full-time parliament that can provide proper parliamentary oversight and regain legislative initiative.
The continuing vulnerability of Malta’s public sector to corruption remains a point of concern.

In that context, the Assembly regrets that the Maltese authorities have not followed its recommendation to abolish the country’s “citizenship by investment” programme.
While the media environment remains a cause for concern, the Assembly welcomes the establishment of a Committee of experts on Media, headed by the former Chair of the Independent Investigation Commission into the murder of Ms Daphne Caruana Galizia and the government’s response to it, which is a signal that the authorities wish to address these concerns; 8.2. with respect to Romania: with reference to Resolution 2466 (2022), the Assembly welcomes the ongoing reform of the judicial system in Romania and expresses its confidence that three draft Justice Laws: on the status of Magistrates; on the Organisation of the Judiciary; on the Superior Council of Magistrates would take into account the Venice Commission’s recommendations requested by the Monitoring Committee.
It also notes with satisfaction the progress towards compliance with Council of 4 Resolution 2483 (2023) Europe standards in areas crucial for the functioning of democratic institutions, namely the judiciary and the fight against corruption.
It deplores, however, that some issues still raise some concerns particularly with regard to media freedom and insufficient transparency concerning the use of public funds by political parties to finance media in order to influence their content; 8.3. with respect to San Marino: the Assembly welcomes the recent reforms to strengthen the system of checks and balances and independence of the judiciary in the country.
The Assembly underscores that these reforms should not be considered the end of the road but a starting point for ongoing reforms to ensure the efficient functioning of democratic institutions and to address any concerns with regard to their vulnerability to conflicts of interest and corruption.
In this context the Assembly urges the Sammarinese authorities to ensure that laws and reforms are fully and consistently implemented to ensure their efficacity and tangible results in the eyes of the Sammarinese citizens.

9.

The Assembly reiterates its support for the efforts of the Monitoring Committee to ensure the monitoring of membership obligations of all Council of Europe member States in the framework of the periodic monitoring reports.
It is aware of specific conditions and procedural requirements linked to the preparation of these reports which mean that a single two-year reference period, in accordance with Article 26 of the Rules of Procedure is insufficient, and it resolves to address this question in the forthcoming general revision of its rules.
In this context, the Assembly welcomes the committee’s decision to revise its internal working methods with a view to being better able to respond to current events and developments in member States.

10.

The Assembly deplores the ongoing issue of the insufficient availability of monitoring rapporteurs.
It calls on political groups to ensure that availability to carry out the work of rapporteurs constitutes an important criterion when nominating members to the committee and candidates for rapporteurs and to make more frequent recourse to the circulation of rapporteurs’ positions among the groups to alleviate some of the shortages of rapporteurs for vacant positions.
At the same time, the Assembly invites the committee to reflect on a possible revision of the current single five-year-term limit for rapporteurs for a country under a full monitoring procedure or engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue to three three-year terms, which would allow for the possibility of recall and for the retention of available and competent rapporteurs for a given country.

11.
11.

The Assembly takes note that currently 13 out of 30 rapporteurs and only 28 out of 87 members of the committee are women.

The Assembly underscores the need for a more balanced gender representation in the nominations by the groups both for committee membership and rapporteur positions.

12.
12.

The Assembly notes with satisfaction the continued excellent co-operation with the Venice Commission which provides the committee with legal expertise on the functioning of democratic institutions in specific countries.

The Assembly invites the committee to pursue its reflections on ways to increase the efficiency and 13. impact of its work.

5 Resolution 2484 (2023)1 Provisional version The honouring of obligations and commitments by the Republic of Moldova Parliamentary Assembly 1.
The Republic of Moldova joined the Council of Europe in 1995.

In 2019, the Parliamentary Assembly highlighted efforts to “de-oligarchise” the country and depoliticise its judicial institutions, in Resolution 2308 (2019) “The functioning of democratic institutions in the Republic of Moldova”.

Since then, some major developments have altered the country’s political landscape: in November 2020, Maia Sandu became the first female President of the Republic, elected on the back of a clear pro-European agenda.
In July 2021, in the wake of a political and constitutional crisis, the President’s Action and Solidarity Party won a majority in a snap parliamentary election.

For the first time in its history, the Republic of Moldova is governed by a stable parliamentary majority held by a single party.

The elections also confirmed the electoral support for eradicating corruption and building efficient and transparent State institutions able to work in the public interest.
At the same time, this unprecedented political situation places a responsibility on the ruling party to ensure that democratic principles, the rule of law and the protection of human rights are fully upheld.

Since the summer of 2021, the authorities have embarked on a far-reaching programme of reform, 2. notably in the judiciary and the fight against corruption, to tackle the roots of “state capture” and thereby restore integrity and public trust in State institutions.

3.
3.

The authorities have made efforts to review the functioning of most State institutions and independent bodies and appoint new officials following parliamentary assessment procedures, triggering questions about the transparency and speed of the selection process.

The Assembly understands that taking the necessary steps to quickly restore the proper and transparent functioning of democratic institutions is a huge challenge without any ready-made solution.
However urgent and necessary the reforms may be, the Assembly urges the authorities to ensure that such changes are made in accordance with the rule of law and Council of Europe standards, and are drawn up with the involvement of the parliamentary opposition and civil society so as to facilitate sound law making and enable sustainable and strong institutions to be established.
In this respect, it welcomes the Moldovan authorities’ close co-operation with the Council of Europe, in particular with the Secretary General’s High-Level Working Group on the reform of the judiciary and the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), as well as their constructive approach to ensuring that the restructuring of the State, and in particular the judicial overhaul, are in line with Council of Europe standards.

4.
4.

The outbreak of the war in Ukraine on 24 February 2022 had major repercussions on the Republic of Moldova.

New logistical and national and external security challenges compounded difficulties in dealing with the Covid-19 pandemic, energy crisis and high inflation rates and exacerbated existing tensions in Moldovan society.

The country has seen a huge wave of refugee arrivals from Ukraine: over 700 000 have entered the country since February 2022 and almost 100 000 have stayed there.
This makes the Republic of Moldova the country that is hosting the largest number of refugees from Ukraine in relation to its population (2.6 million), presenting a major logistical challenge for the authorities and putting a considerable strain on their administrative bodies.

Assembly debate on 26 January 2023 (8th sitting) (see Doc.

15680, report of the Committee on the Honouring of 1.
Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe, co-rapporteurs: Mr Pierre-Alain Fridez and Ms Inese Lībiņa-Egnere).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 26 January 2023 (8th sitting).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2484 (2023) 5.

The Assembly commends the authorities’ efforts to manage these multiple crises, develop contingency plans for receiving refugees and address the humanitarian, socio-economic and educational challenges of welcoming refugee children.
It applauds the solidarity and resilience shown by the Moldovan people.
The Assembly calls on Council of Europe member States to support the country’s efforts and to consolidate their assistance, building on the guidance provided by the Secretary General’s Special Representative on Migration and Refugees in her report of June 2022, in particular to develop long-term solutions for women, children, the elderly and persons with disabilities, including for preventing and detecting all forms of trafficking in human beings and violence against women and for protecting unaccompanied and separated children from Ukraine.
6.

The on-going aggression of Ukraine by the Russian Federation has presented major public security challenges, prompting the authorities to take measures to protect State institutions and combat extremist activities, including the use of war symbols.
In its amicus curiae brief of October 2022, the Venice Commission found that banning the use of such symbols was acceptable since “the display of the symbols used by the Russian armed forces in the current war produce[d] an actual and immediate danger of disorder and a threat to national security and the rights of others, including those of Ukrainian war refugees” and that there was a “pressing social need” to impose a ban on such use.

7.
7.

The energy crisis, compounded by the conflict in Ukraine, and high inflation are hitting the population hard, as are the energy cuts caused by the bombing of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

The Assembly strongly condemns the weaponisation of gas supplies and the hybrid war being waged by the Russian Federation which violate the country’s sovereignty and the democratic functioning of its institutions.

8.
8.

In this context, the decision by the Council of the European Union to grant candidate country status to the Republic of Moldova on 23 June 2022 was a powerful response to the electorate’s aspiration to join the European Union and to the country’s efforts to shore up its democracy.

The Assembly believes that this negotiation process is conducive to driving forward the legal and democratic reforms needed to honour Council of Europe membership obligations.
Despite its difficult circumstances, the country has continued to implement its ambitious programme of 9. reform in co-operation with the Council of Europe, focusing on overhauling the judiciary and tackling corruption.

The Assembly notes that the lack of financial and human resources clearly hinders the satisfactory implementation of such holistic reforms within a limited time frame.

10.
10.

Where democracy is concerned: 10.1. the Assembly welcomes the efforts undertaken to consolidate democratic institutions and strengthen them against the risk of foreign interference.

It welcomes the adoption of a new Electoral Code on 9 December 2022 however without a broad political consensus.
It welcomes the progress noted by the Venice Commission and the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE/ODIHR) in their October 2022 joint opinion and invites all stakeholders to implement the new Electoral Code in good faith and in line with the Venice Commission recommendations.
It encourages moreover the authorities to implement the recommendations of the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) on the transparency of political party funding; 10.2. in this context, the Assembly urges the parliament to strengthen its rules on integrity and adopt a Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament and a Code of Parliamentary Rules and Procedures so as to help eradicate party switching, which has frequently been an underlying cause of political instability in the past; 10.3. the Assembly notes that the country has been facing protests organised by the Shor Party since 18 October 2022.
The Assembly calls on the political forces concerned to ensure the peaceful nature of these demonstrations and deplores the violence exerted against journalists on 23 October 2022.

Moreover it supports the authorities' efforts to investigate the allegations of illegal financing of these demonstrations and possible destabilisation of the country.
Following the government's referral to the Constitutional Court to verify the constitutionality of the Shor Party, the Assembly calls on the authorities to take full account of the Venice Commission's amicus curiae brief adopted in December 2022 on declaring a political party unconstitutional and the well-established case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the freedom of expression and association of political parties when ruling on this issue; 10.4. the Assembly calls on the authorities of the Republic of Moldova and of the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia (ATUG) to pursue their dialogue and welcomes the efforts made to enhance Romanian language learning.
It also calls on both parties to support the activities of the working group 2 tasked with ensuring Moldovan legislation is in line with the ATUG’s special status and urges the ATUG People’s Assembly to refrain from adopting legislation that contradicts national legislation, particularly in the area of LGBTI rights.

11.
11.

Where the rule of law is concerned: Resolution 2484 (2023) 11.1. the Republic of Moldova has embarked on a programme of major judicial reform, including of the Superior Council of Magistracy, Superior Council of Prosecutors, Prosecutor’s Office, Supreme Court of Justice and the Constitutional Court.
The Assembly welcomes the country’s extensive co-operation with the Venice Commission to ensure that the amendments comply with the Council of Europe standards, which has resulted in a number of opinions and amicus curiae briefs; 11.2. the Assembly also welcomes the adoption of constitutional amendments in September 2021, which commanded broad consensus and won the backing of the main political parties.
The constitutional reform represented a major step forward in depoliticising the judiciary and improving its independence, accountability and efficiency.

Some major changes were made, in particular with regard to the election and appointment of members of the Superior Council of Magistracy and the Superior Council of Prosecutors; 11.3. the Assembly applauds the reforms set in motion to enhance the integrity of the judiciary and restore trust in judicial institutions.
To this end, the authorities have introduced an integrity evaluation procedure to vet judges and prosecutors with a view to “cleansing” the system of those involved in large-scale corruption and organised crime.
The Assembly shares the Venice Commission’s position in this respect and calls on the authorities to ensure that the vetting of sitting judges is implemented in accordance with constitutional safeguards and due respect for judicial independence; it can only be justified in exceptional circumstances when ordinary methods of judicial accountability are not available; 11.4. the Assembly supports the steps taken by the authorities to dismiss judges and prosecutors who have failed to meet integrity requirements.
The Commission for the assessment of judges’ and prosecutors’ activities (hereinafter referred to as the “Pre-Vetting Commission”) set up in March 2022 and composed of national and international members, is responsible for checking that integrity requirements are met by candidates for key positions at the Superior Council of the Magistracy, the Superior Council of Prosecutors and their specialised bodies.
The Assembly encourages the authorities to ensure that the Pre-Vetting Commission has the necessary financial and human resources to discharge its duties, while noting that this will be a lengthy process that could affect the functioning of judicial institutions; 11.5. the reform of the Public Prosecution Service threw up some difficulties.
The Law on the Public Prosecution Service has been amended several times since 2019 to: (i) introduce a new procedure for appointing an interim Prosecutor General pending the selection of a permanent Prosecutor General; (ii) change the rules on the composition of the Superior Council of Prosecutors; (iii) lay down a new procedure for both appointing and dismissing the Prosecutor General (in July and September 2019); (iv) reorganise the Superior Council of Prosecutors; (v) set up new accountability mechanisms for the Prosecutor General; (vi) enable a specially created Evaluation Commission to carry out an ad hoc “performance evaluation” of the Prosecutor General once a year (in August 2021); and (vii) govern the procedure for selecting and appointing the Prosecutor General and the heads of the specialised prosecutors’ offices (in January 2022); in the opinion of June 2022, the Venice Commission found that the latest amendments to the 11.6.
Law on the Public Prosecution Service had addressed most of the key recommendations it had made in 2021 following the hastily passed raft of legislative amendments.
The Assembly welcomes the 2022 amendments that improve the composition of the Superior Council of Prosecutors – notably re- establishing the Prosecutor General as ex officio member of the Superior Council of Prosecutors, stipulate that findings of the Evaluation Commission, which now includes Superior Council of Prosecutors members, are of an advisory nature and leave the decision to dismiss the Prosecutor General on the grounds of unsatisfactory performance with the Superior Council of Prosecutors; 11.7. the arrest in October 2021 of former Prosecutor General Mr Stoianoglo, who has been under judicial supervision since December 2021, and his suspension from his duties have raised questions about the observance of procedural safeguards.
The Assembly calls on the authorities to ensure that the proceedings under way are completed in accordance with due process of law and that his performance is assessed according to the criteria of integrity and professionalism that derived uncontestably from the pre-existing rules, as the Venice Commission once again stressed in June 2022; 3 Resolution 2484 (2023) 11.8. corruption in the Republic of Moldova remains a pervasive phenomenon which the authorities are committed to addressing as a matter of priority.
There has been a slight improvement since 2016 in the Corruption Perceptions Index published by Transparency International, with the country ranking 105th in 2021, compared to 123rd in 2016; 11.9. with regard to corruption prevention in respect of judges and prosecutors, GRECO welcomed, in its December 2021 (fourth round) interim compliance report, the significant progress made in terms of the composition of the Superior Council of Magistracy resulting from the constitutional amendments adopted in September 2021.
On another positive note, legislation aimed at strengthening the independence and effectiveness of the National Integrity Authority and tightening the rules governing the declaration of assets and personal interests was adopted on 7 October 2021; 11.10. in accordance with GRECO’s findings, the Assembly notes with satisfaction the increase in the National Integrity Authority’s budget and its closer scrutiny of the declarations of assets and personal interests of parliamentarians, judges and prosecutors, which have resulted in administrative penalties and, where appropriate, referrals to the criminal investigation bodies.
However, it calls on the authorities to take the necessary steps to recruit and train the required number of staff and to adopt a comprehensive strategy for the National Integrity Authority; 11.11. there have been other major changes to Moldovan legislation since July 2021, including amendments to the Law on the declaration of assets and personal interests, the Law on the National Anti-Corruption Centre, the law on company ownership with a view to ending offshore secrecy, as well as the adoption of the Law establishing a mechanism of prosecution, trial and conviction in absentia; 11.12. the Assembly notes that steps have also been taken to tackle political corruption: parliament plans to amend the Constitution to stipulate that parliamentary consent will no longer be required for the detention, arrest, search and criminal prosecution of members of parliament for violations related to passive or active corruption, influence peddling, abuse of power, illicit enrichment and money laundering.
The Assembly encourages the parliament to continue its efforts to tighten the rules on the integrity of members of parliament and the regulations governing the funding of political parties and election campaigns.

in accordance with GRECO’s recommendations, to continue to tackle corruption, which requires the involvement of all stakeholders.

It also encourages the authorities, 12.


Where the protection of human rights is concerned: 12.1. the Assembly welcomes the meaningful and substantial progress made in the area of gender equality, including women’s accession to high political positions, which is a source of inspiration for all countries in the region; 12.2. the Assembly also commends the country for ratifying, on 31 January 2022, the Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (CETS No.
210, “Istanbul Convention”) and for adopting, on 17 November 2022, Law 316/2022 ensuring the rights of victims in the case of crimes related to sexual life and family violence.
In this respect, it notes with satisfaction the amicus curiae brief adopted by the Venice Commission in December 2021 and the subsequent decision of the Moldovan Constitutional Court clearly reasserting that the Istanbul Convention does not seek to impose a certain lifestyle or interfere with the personal organisation of private life, but seeks only to prevent violence against women and domestic violence.
The Assembly encourages the authorities to continue their efforts to implement the Convention, bring their legislation into line with it and adopt action plans on gender equality and on preventing and combating domestic violence and violence against women; in the field of the media, the Assembly notes a positive trend – in 2022, the country ranked 40th 12.3.

(out of 180 countries) in the Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index, compared to 89th in 2021, despite a highly polarised environment.
The Assembly welcomes the measures taken by the Audiovisual Council to promote media pluralism and high-quality information and invites the authorities to reinforce the fight against media concentration.

It notes however that the amendment to the Code of Audiovisual Media Services adopted in November 2021 also restored parliamentary control over the Audiovisual Council and the public broadcaster, Teleradio-Moldova, which could raise questions about the independence of these institutions.
The Assembly refers in this respect to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Manole and Others v. Moldova (2009) and calls on the authorities to ensure that the Audiovisual Council’s independence and integrity are strengthened in order to prevent undue political interference; 4 Resolution 2484 (2023) 12.4. the Republic of Moldova is a multi-ethnic State.
The Assembly commends the Moldovan people for ensuring that national minorities continue to live together peacefully despite unrest in the region and encourages the authorities to continue implementing the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (ratified in 1996, ETS No.
157) and the Strategy on the Consolidation of Interethnic Relations (2017-2027) “with a view to further developing a civic identity that is inclusive and firmly based on respect for ethnic and linguistic diversity as an integral part of Moldovan society”, as recommended by the Committee of Ministers in July 2021; 12.5. the Assembly also welcomes the discussions that have been initiated on how to promote the use of minority languages in Moldovan public media and encourages the authorities to ratify the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ETS No.
148), which the country signed in 2002.

13.

Regarding the situation in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova, the Assembly welcomes the restrained attitude Chisinau and Tiraspol adopted at the beginning of the war in Ukraine by making an appeal for calm.

It calls on both sides to keep the lines of communication open, despite a tense situation exacerbated by provocative statements by Russian officials and by the de facto authorities in Tiraspol.

14.
14.

The Assembly reiterates its readiness to support the efforts of the OSCE 5+2 (and 1+1) discussions and the steps taken by the Moldovan authorities to strive for the protection of human rights in the region, in particular through implementing the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, taking confidence- building measures and introducing the Council of Europe’s human rights standards.
In this respect the Assembly refers to the decision of the Committee of Ministers of 6-8 December 2022 concerning the violations of the rights of children, parents and staff members of Latin-script schools during the periods 2002-2004 and 2013-2014 in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova.
Ten years after the European Court of Human Rights Catan judgment, the Assembly, joining the Committee of Ministers, regrets the lack of any form of redress for the applicants and the continued failure of the Russian authorities to execute this judgment – which remains its unconditional obligation under the Convention – and calls for its implementation.
The Assembly also reiterates its call on the Russian Federation to withdraw its troops from the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova, whose presence pose a threat to the security of the country.

15.
15.

In conclusion, the Assembly welcomes the reforms undertaken to consolidate the country’s democratic institutions and recognises the difficulty and challenges involved, taking into account both the regional context which threatens its external security and also the integrity and functioning of those democratic institutions.
The Assembly therefore calls on Council of Europe member States to provide humanitarian and financial assistance and to support the efforts to bring about democratisation and promote the Organisation’s founding values.

The Assembly also calls on the Moldovan authorities, which have a stable parliamentary majority, to ensure respect for the rule of law and inclusive democracy and to pursue reforms that are part of a clearly expressed desire for European integration.
It asks the authorities to continue their co-operation with the Council of Europe, in particular to strengthen the independence of the judiciary and the public prosecution service and to consolidate anti-corruption laws.

The Assembly moreover encourages the authorities to pursue and implement their reform agenda based on the Council of Europe standards so as to establish solid and sustainable State institutions, which are a prerequisite for the good functioning of democratic institutions.
The successful continuation of this process would pave the way to a new phase of post-monitoring dialogue with the country.

In the meantime, the Assembly resolves to observe how the situation develops through its monitoring procedure.
5 Resolution 2485 (2023)1 Provisional version Emergence of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) and their necessary apprehension through European human rights law Parliamentary Assembly The Parliamentary Assembly notes that rapid technological progress in the field of artificial intelligence 1. is paving the way for the emergence, in the near future, of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS).

2.
2.

According to the definition of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the term LAWS encompasses “Any weapon system with autonomy in its critical functions.

That is, a weapon system that can select (i.e.

search for or detect, identify, track, select) and attack (i.e.
use force against, neutralize, damage or destroy) targets without human intervention.” LAWS, therefore, are neither remote-controlled systems in which a human retains control throughout, nor automatic systems in which a particular process has been programmed in advance so that their action is totally predictable.

3.

The emergence of LAWS has prompted concern on the part of numerous States as well as civil society.
54 non-governmental organisations have launched a campaign in favour of a preventive prohibition of research and development of these emerging technologies and, even more so, of the use of what they call “Killer Robots”.

This position of principle was adopted by the European Parliament in a resolution dated 12 September 2018.

4.
4.

The “arms race” logic implied in this field prompts some to see LAWS as the third military revolution in the history of international relations, after the invention of gunpowder and that of nuclear weapons.

Global military powers which fail to invest in this technology would therefore risk being left behind.

LAWS carry the risk of lowering the threshold for engaging in conflict, by lowering the risk of a country's 5. own troop losses.
LAWS also raise a fundamental issue of human dignity – allowing machines to “decide” to kill a human being.

The conformity of LAWS with international humanitarian law hinges above all on the possibility, or not, 6. of complying with the principles of distinction, proportionality and precautions in attack.

The principle of distinction between civilian and military targets could be complied with by LAWS 6.1. that are well designed and programmed to execute surgical strikes aimed solely at military targets.
Judgement calls as to whether an attack satisfies the principle of proportionality are made on the 6.2. basis of values and interpretations of the particular situation rather than on numbers or technical indicators.

Making such judgements, which reflect ethical considerations, requires human judgement which is unique.

It is for this reason that at least a minimum degree of human control is indispensable.

6.3.
6.3.

To comply with the principle of precaution, the course of action taken by LAWS must be predictable.

Users must be capable of adjusting or nullifying the effects of the weapons systems if necessary, something that is possible only if they can reasonably foresee how a weapons system will react.

Assembly debate on 27 January 2023 (9th sitting) (see Doc.

15683, report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and 1.

Human Rights, rapporteur: Mr Damien Cottier).


Text adopted by the Assembly on 27 January 2023 (9th sitting).

https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2485 (2023) 6.4.

The conformity of LAWS with international human rights law, and notably with the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No.

5), depends on clear regulation of their use.

Article 2 of the Convention requires that the right to life be protected by law.
This means that the State must introduce a legal framework defining the limited circumstances in which the use of these weapons is authorised.

The case law of the European Court of Human Rights relates to other types of weapons.

But the use of LAWS should not be subject to standards that are any less strict.

7.

From the viewpoint of international humanitarian law and human rights, regulation of the development and above all of the use of LAWS is therefore indispensable.
The crucial point is human control.

Respect for the rules of international humanitarian and human rights law can only be guaranteed by maintaining human control, to degrees that vary according to the stances taken by States and other actors of the international community.

Several levels of human control may be envisaged: significant control, effective control or appropriate levels of human judgement.

Human control must be maintained over lethal weapons systems at all stages of their life cycle.
Human control can be exercised at the development stage, including through technical design 7.1. and programming of the weapon system (ethics by design): decisions taken during the development stage must ensure that the weapon system can be used in the intended or expected circumstances of use, in accordance with international humanitarian law and other applicable international norms, in particular the European Convention on Human Rights.

7.2.
7.2.

Human control may also be exerted at the point of activation, which involves the decision of the commander or operator to use a particular weapon system for a particular purpose.

This decision must be based on sufficient knowledge and understanding of the weapon’s functioning in the given circumstances to ensure that it will operate as intended and in accordance with international humanitarian law and other applicable international norms.
This knowledge must include adequate situational awareness of the operational environment, especially in relation to the potential risks to civilians and civilian property.

7.3.

In order to ensure compliance with international humanitarian law and other applicable international norms, it may be thought necessary to exert additional human control during the operation stage, when the weapon autonomously selects and attacks targets.
Human intervention may be necessary in order to comply with the law and remedy shortcomings at the development stage and at the point of activation.

8.

Unlike humans, machines do not have feelings and are not moral agents.

If a person commits a war crime with an autonomous weapon, it is the human who commits the crime, using the autonomous weapon as the tool.

Humans must be not only legally accountable but also morally responsible for the actions of LAWS.
Some decisions pertaining to the use of weapons require legal and moral judgments, such as weighing likely civilian casualties against military advantages from conducting attacks.

These judgments must be endorsed by humans since they are also moral judgments and have legal scope.
The relevant provisions of international humanitarian law imply that such weapons systems must not be 9. used if they are likely to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, or if they are inherently indiscriminate, or if they are incapable of being used in accordance with law.

10.

On the assumption that future LAWS meet all the legal requirements of the laws of war when they operate normally, malfunctions of the system could cause an erroneous attack and thereby raise accountability issues.
It must be possible to establish legal responsibility in the event of a malfunctioning lethal autonomous weapons system by analysing compliance with the requirement of adequate human control.
It should be possible to link unlawful actions committed by a lethal autonomous weapons system resulting in violations of international humanitarian law and other international norms alternatively to the individual or groups of individuals at the origin of its design, manufacturing or programming or its deployment and ultimately to the user State.
In this regard, the user State has a particular responsibility to test and verify in advance the weapons it intends to use to ensure that they are predictable and reliable and not likely to commit violations of international humanitarian law through error, malfunction or poor design, and to verify the contexts in which their use is possible in accordance with law.
The Assembly notes that the questions of the compatibility of LAWS with IHL and human rights are 11. being discussed by States Parties to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), which have set up a Group of Governmental Experts (GGE).
Working on the basis of the “11 Guiding Principles on LAWS” adopted in 2019 and the Final Declaration of the 6th Review Conference of the States Parties to the CCW in December 2021, that Group continues to seek a consensus on the future regulation of this emerging technology.

2 Resolution 2485 (2023) 12.


At its July 2022 session, the GGE adopted a statement to the effect that it had reached agreement that the right of parties to an armed conflict to choose the methods and means of warfare was not unlimited and that international humanitarian law was also applicable to LAWS.

Any violation of international law, including a violation involving a lethal autonomous weapons system, incurred the responsibility under international law of the State concerned.
The Group further proposed extending its work into 2023.

13.

The Assembly notes that a group of European States has proposed a two-tier approach to the GGE: 13.1.

Firstly, the States Parties to the CCW should recognise that LAWS which cannot be used in conformity with international law, including international humanitarian law, are de facto banned; and that, consequently, LAWS operating completely outside any human control and a responsible chain of command are unlawful.

13.2.
Secondly, agreement should be reached on the international regulation of other weapons systems presenting elements of autonomy in order to guarantee conformity with international humanitarian law by: 13.2.1. ensuring appropriate human control throughout the life cycle of the system in question; 13.2.2. maintaining human responsibility and the obligation of accountability at any time, in all circumstances and throughout the life cycle, as the basis of the responsibility of the State and that of the individual, which may never be transferred to machines; 13.2.3. regarding security and safety.
implementing suitable measures to mitigate the risks and appropriate guarantees The Assembly supports this two-tier approach and considers that the emergence of LAWS requires 14. clear regulation of this technology to ensure respect for international humanitarian law and human rights and that the appropriate forum to agree on the future regulation of LAWS is the Conference of States Parties to the CCW and its GGE.
As to the legal form of such regulation, the goal should be a binding text in the form of a protocol to the 15.

CCW or even a specific international convention.

16.

Pending the emergence of the broad consensus needed to draw up such an instrument, a non-binding instrument should be prepared in the form of a code of conduct.
This instrument, which might be updated on a regular basis, could codify the guiding principles that are already broadly recognised and highlight the good practices adopted by given States Parties to the CCW.

The Assembly therefore calls on Council of Europe member States as well as observer States and 17.
States whose parliaments enjoy observer or partner for democracy status with the Assembly to take a constructive role in the discussions in progress within the CCW and its GGE with a view to regulating the emergence of LAWS and to support the two-tier approach mentioned above.
Should no consensus emerge within a reasonable period of time for the elaboration of a code of 18. conduct and subsequently for the preparation and negotiation of an international agreement within the meaning of paragraphs 14 and 15, or should such steps appear to have no chance of success, the Assembly invites Council of Europe member States as well as observer States and States whose parliaments enjoy observer or partner for democracy status with the Assembly to consider initiating such work at Council of Europe level.
3 Resolution 2486 (2023)1 Provisional version Building the Open Council of Europe Academic Networks (OCEAN) Parliamentary Assembly The globalisation of research and innovation has intensified over the last decade, particularly in terms 1. of collaborative research, technology development and mobility of researchers.

2.
2.

The Parliamentary Assembly firmly believes that universities and research institutes have a key role to play in addressing Europe’s challenges, such as upholding the primacy of the rule of law, the fight against corruption, the promotion of social rights, the end of gender-based violence, the need to address climate change, the challenges of biomedicine and the integration of migrants.
The full implementation of the values and standards enshrined in the Council of Europe convention 3. system requires resources, strengths and talents of all sectors of civil society, including scholars, scientists, schools, students, regional and local authorities, social workers as well as non-governmental organisations.

4.
4.

Apathy and disenchantment with these values and the rise of populism, nationalism and new ideas of what constitutes “the people” and “the elites” create social conflicts and continue to challenge the realisation of human rights in all European societies.

5.

The Assembly is convinced that the impact and visibility of the Council of Europe must first and foremost be measured on the ground.
Only the wide sharing of common values by society can guarantee the effective implementation of Council of Europe standards.

Researchers, students, social workers, and local authorities in various sectors can further embrace our shared values which in turn have an impact on their work and daily lives.

Everyone contributes because everyone benefits from the standards developed by the Council of Europe.

6.
6.

The Assembly notes that European universities and research institutes are hitherto still a largely untapped resource for the promotion of the Council of Europe convention system.

They remain the drivers of innovation and creative thinking and can be considered a universal heritage; they produce skilled human capital, including the next generation of European policy makers, facilitate policy discussions and drive change.

7.
7.

Universities have the potential of strengthening their role as human rights, democracy and rule of law incubators and of creating a fertile ground to support the implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No.

5) and all other Council of Europe conventions.

Their capacity of mobilising the collective intelligence of civil society at all levels should be reinforced.

8.
8.

The Assembly therefore welcomes the Open Council of Europe Academic Networks (OCEAN) initiative which aims at strengthening co-operation between the Council of Europe and universities and research institutions in a mutually enriching interaction.

Assembly debate on 27 January 2023 (9th sitting) (see Doc.

15675, report of the Committee on Culture, Science, 1.

Education and Media, rapporteur: Ms Marta Grande).

Text adopted by the Assembly on 27 January 2023 (9th sitting).
https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Resolution 2486 (2023) 9.

It wishes to praise the work of two existing networks which are already working on key priorities, namely the Academic Network on the European Social Charter and Social Rights (ANESC), set up in 2006 at Council of Europe level, and the Italian “Universities in network against gender violence” (UN.I.RE) network, set up in 2019 and entirely funded by the Italian Government.
These can serve as a model for future thematic networks working on other Council of Europe conventions, such as the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine (ETS No.

164, Oviedo Convention) and the Conventions under the Enlarged Agreement on the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO).

10.
In the light of the above, the Assembly calls on all Council of Europe member States to: recognise the role universities and research institutes have, and should be able to play, in 10.1. upholding Council of Europe values and entrenching them in the social fabric, and in facilitating the implementation of Council of Europe conventions and building greater unity between all member States; 10.2. raise awareness among universities and research institutes about the OCEAN initiative, via Ministries of Universities and Research, with a view to setting up national thematic networks, supported by an appropriate legal structure, or joining existing ones; 10.3. provide adequate financial support to such networks and encourage universities and research institutes to make available funds that are earmarked for the professional travel of academic staff and to the contribution of their expertise and work time; 10.4. consider making voluntary contributions to support the OCEAN initiative at European level, following the example of the Italian Government, with a view to strengthening expertise and capacity building, and contributing to the exchange of information, data, researchers, curricula and experiences at European and international level, also through international conferences, joint degrees, PhDs.
or other research programmes; 10.5. in line with Resolution 2352 and Recommendation 2189 (2020) “Threats to academic freedom and autonomy of higher education institutions in Europe”, pay special attention to integrate the assessment of academic freedom into the OCEAN initiative, providing a framework for regular evaluation and dialogue; 10.6. closely co-ordinate with the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) members, also in the framework of its Task Force on Enhancing Knowledge Sharing in the EHEA community.
The Assembly also calls on the European Union to consider supporting financially the OCEAN initiative 11. thereby sending a strong political signal, in particular with regard to the conventions which it has signed.

12.
12.

The Assembly stresses that parliamentarians may benefit from the expertise of the academia when it comes to scrutinise draft legislation against Council of Europe convention standards and oversee their governments’ action in the implementation of the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights.
Therefore, the Assembly also encourages national parliaments of all Council of Europe member States to: 12.1. contribute to the efforts to recruit universities, research institutes and individual academics, who are already providing expertise to relevant parliamentary committees; 12.2. organise parliamentary hearings with the participation of representatives of the academic world and relevant Council of Europe experts to encourage the creation of national thematic academic networks, under the OCEAN umbrella.
2 AS/Mig (2023) OJ 01 REV 2 23 January 2023 Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons Revised draft agenda This draft agenda, addressed to full members of the Committee and their alternates, is the convocation to the meeting Copy to secretaries of delegations and political groups Meeting documents will be published on PACE Apps (restricted access) of the meetings to be held in Strasbourg, Palais de l’Europe, on: – Tuesday, 24 January 2023, from 2 to 3.30 pm (room 9); – Thursday, 26 January 2023, from 8.30 to 10 am (room 9); Please also note on Thursday, 26 January 2023 (room 3) meetings of the Sub-Committees1 2.00-2.20 pm: Sub-Committee on Diasporas and Integration (separate draft agenda) 2.20-2.40 pm: Sub-Committee on Refugee and Migrant Children and Young People (separate draft agenda) 2.40-3.00 pm: Sub-Committee on Migrant Smuggling and Trafficking in Human Beings (separate draft agenda) A. Tuesday, 24 January 2023, from 2 to 3.30 pm (room 9) 1.
2.

3.

4.

5.
4.

5.

Opening of the meeting by the oldest member present Election of the Bureau of the Committee [List of members of the Committee] – – Election of the Chairperson Election of the Vice-Chairpersons Agenda [AS/Mig (2023) OJ 01 REV 2] Adoption of the agenda Minutes [AS/Mig (2022) PV 09] Approval of the minutes of the meeting held on 7 December 2022 in Paris Reconstitution and composition of the Sub-Committees [AS/Mig/List (2023) 01; list of candidates] 1 Subject to their reconstitution by the Committee.
F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | asmig@coe.int | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 AS/Mig (2023) OJ 01 REV 2 Consideration of the proposal to reconstitute the Sub-Committee on Diasporas and Integration, the Sub- Committee on Refugee and Migrant Children and Young People and the Sub-Committee on Migrant Smuggling and Trafficking in Human Beings 6.

7.

8.
Approval of the composition of the Sub-Committees Statement by the Chairperson of the Committee Integration of migrants and refugees: benefits for all parties involved Rapporteur : Mr Domagoj Hajduković (Croatia, SOC) [AS/Mig (2023) 02] Statement by the rapporteur on his fact-finding visit to Norway (10 -11 November 2022) Consideration of a preliminary draft report Addressing the specific challenges faced by the Belarusians in exile Rapporteur : Mr Paul Galles (Luxembourg, EPP/CD) [AS/Mig (2023) 01] Consideration of a draft outline Exchange of views with the participation of: – Ms Kristina Rikhter, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya's Advisor on legal affairs – Mr Vałdzis Fuhaš, human rights organization "Human Constanta" 9.
Request to be seized for opinion on: Health and social protection of undocumented workers (Rapporteur for report of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development: Ms Ada Marra, Switzerland, SOC) [Doc.

15194] B. Thursday, 26 January 2023, from 8.30 to 10 am (room 9) 10.
The situation of Ukrainian persons forcefully displaced or transferred to the Russian Federation or Ukrainian territories under the de facto control of the Russian Federation Rapporteur: Mr Paulo Pisco (Portugal, SOC) Exchange of views with the participation of: – Ms Oleksandra Matviichuk, Director, Centre for Civil Liberties, Ukraine // Nobel Peace Prize 2022 11.
European solidarity in the context of asylum and international protection Rapporteur: Lord Alexander Dundee (United Kingdom, EC/DA) [AS/Mig (2023) 03 REV] Consideration of a revised draft report and adoption of a draft resolution and a draft recommendation 12.
The theme of migration and asylum in the election campaign and the consequences on the welcoming and rights of migrants Rapporteur : Mr Pierre-Alain Fridez (Switzerland, SOC) Exchange of views with the participation of: – Mr Mats Lindberg, Directorate General of Democracy and Human Dignity, European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) 13.

Work programme [AS/Mig/WP (2023) 01] 13.1.

Consideration of the work programme; 13.2.


Call for candidates for report on: o Immigration, one of the answers to Europe's demographic aging [Doc.

15629] o Ensuring human rights compliant asylum procedures [Doc.

15601] 2 AS/Mig (2023) OJ 01 REV 2 13.3.

References for consultation: o Transfer and resettlement of asylum seekers [Doc.

15571] 13.4.
15571] 13.4.

References for taking into account in the preparation of other reports: o Protecting human rights and saving lives in the North Sea and the English Channel [Doc.

15630] 13.5.

References for information: o The right to movement: addressing the challenges faced by Turkish citizens and other non- EU citizens in visa applications to Schengen Area States [Doc.

15560] o Legal aspects of preventing the use of explosive weapons in populated areas and explosive contamination [Doc.

15583] 14.
15583] 14.

Other business – Call for nominations for the 2023 Václav Havel Human Rights Prize [Press release] 15.
Next meetings – Paris, 15 March 2023 (Council of Europe Office); – Strasbourg, during the second part-session 2023 of the Assembly (24-28 April); – Paris, 11 May 2023 (Council of Europe Office); – Strasbourg, during the third part-session 2023 of the Assembly (19-23 June); – 21 September 2023 (place tbc); – Strasbourg, during the fourth part-session 2023 of the Assembly (9-13 October); – Paris, 8 December 2023 (Council of Europe Office).
3 AS/Pol (2023) OJ 01rev2 20 January 2023 Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy Revised draft agenda 2 This draft agenda, addressed to full members of the Committee and their alternates, is the convocation to the meeting.

Copy to secretaries of delegations and political groups.

Meeting documents will be published on PACE Apps (restricted access) of the meetings to be held in Strasbourg on: .

Monday 23 January 2023, 14:15 – 15:15, room 9 .

Tuesday, 24 January 2023, 8:30 – 10:00, room 9 .


Wednesday, 25 January 2023, 14:00 – 15:30, room 9 .

Thursday, 26 January 2023, 14:00 – 15:30, room 9 Please also note meetings of the Sub-Committees1 Thursday, 26 January 2023, 8:30 – 9:30, room 3: Sub-Committee on External Relations (separate draft agenda) Thursday, 26 January 2023, 9:30 – 10:00, room 3: Sub-Committee on the Middle East and the Arab World (separate draft agenda) A. Monday, 23 January 2023, 14:15 – 15:15, room 9 1.

2.
2.

Opening of the meeting by the eldest member present Election of the Bureau of the Committee [List of the members of the Committee] • • Election of the Chairperson Election of the Vice-Chairpersons 3.

Agenda [AS/Pol (2023) OJ 01rev2] Adoption of the agenda 4.

Minutes [AS/Pol (2022) PV 13] Approval of the minutes of the meeting held in Paris on 13 December 2022 1 Subject to their constitution by the Committee.
F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 | Fax: +33 3 88 41 29 44 AS/Pol (2023) OJ 01rev2 5.

Reconstitution of Sub-Committees • • • Sub-Committee on External Relations Sub-Committee on the Middle East and the Arab World Sub-Committee on Democracy 6.

The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges Rapporteur: Ms Fiona O’Loughlin, Ireland, ALDE [Doc.
15681, AS/Pol (2023) 05] Approval of an addendum to the report and consideration of amendments to be tabled on behalf of the Committee 7.

Recent developments in Libya and in the Middle East: what consequences for Europe?

Rapporteur: Mr Piero Fassino, Italy, SOC [AS/Pol (2023) 04] Statement by the Rapporteur 8.
Call for candidates for the Institutional representation of the Committee • • Council for Democratic Elections of the Venice Commission (CDE) European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) Tuesday, 24 January 2022, 08:30 – 10:00, room 9 The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges Rapporteur: Ms Fiona O’Loughlin, Ireland, ALDE [Doc.

15681 and Addendum, Amendments] B.

9.


Consideration of amendments Deadline for amendments: Monday 23 January 2023, 16:00 Debate in the Assembly: Tuesday 24 January 2023, afternoon sitting 10.

Assessing the functioning of the partnership for democracy Rapporteur: Ms Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Netherlands, EPP/CD [AS/Pol (2023) 01, AS/Pol/Inf (2022) 15] Consideration of a draft report and adoption of a draft resolution 11.
Safeguarding peace and stability in the East Mediterranean Sea Rapporteur: Ms Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Netherlands, EPP/CD [AS/Pol(2023)03, AS/Pol/Inf (2022) 16] • • Statement by the rapporteur following her fact-finding visit to Ankara on 3 November 2022 and to Athens on 9 - 10 November 2022 Consideration of an introductory memorandum 12.

Composition of Sub-Committees [Lists of candidates] Approval of the composition of Sub-Committees 2 AS/Pol (2023) OJ 01rev2 13.
Appointment of the institutional representatives of the Committee • • Council for Democratic Elections of the Venice Commission (CDE) European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) 14.

Open discussion on current political issues C. Wednesday, 25 January 2023, 14:00 – 15:30, room 9 15.
Call for a national political reform process in Belarus Rapporteur: Mr Kimmo Kiljunen, Finland, SOC Hearing with the participation of: • • Mr Bjørn Berge, Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe Mr Pavel Sapelka, human rights defender, Viasna Human Rights Centre 16.
The challenge of far-right ideology to democracy and human rights in Europe Rapporteur: Mr Samad Seyidov, Azerbaijan, EC/DA [AS/Pol (2022) 02] • Hearing with the participation of: - - Dr Cynthia Miller-Idriss, Founding Director, Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab, American University, Professor, School of Public Affairs and School of Education, Washington (USA) (online intervention) Mr Nicholas Potter, journalist and researcher of the far right, at the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, Berlin • Consideration of an outline report D. Thursday, 26 January 2023, 14:00 – 15:30, room 9 17.
The situation in Iran (Open to the public2) Hearing with the participation of: - - - Mr Javaid Rehman, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran (online intervention) Mr Erwin van Veen, Senior research fellow, head of the Middle East research programme, Clingendael Conflict Research Unit Ms Mina Khani, Political Analyst and Freelance Writer 18.

Work programme [AS/Pol (2023) WP 01] 18.1.


Appointment of Rapporteurs for report - - - Interconnections between the Council of Europe and the European Political Community [Doc.

15635] Political consequences of the Russian Federation's aggression against Ukraine [Bureau decision] Foreign interference: a threat to democratic security in Europe [Doc.

15605] 2 Subject to a decision by the Committee.

3 AS/Pol (2023) OJ 01rev2 18.2.


Consultation of the Committee on the follow-up to be given Preventing abuse of the right to veto in the Security Council: a perspective by the member States of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe [Doc.

15628] 18.3.

Replies by the Committee of Ministers Consideration of the Committee of Ministers replies to Recommendation 2226 (2022) “Beyond the Lisbon Treaty: strengthening the strategic partnership between the Council of Europe and the European Union” [Doc.
15667] 19.

Other business [Press release] Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 2023: call for nominations 20.
Next meetings - - - - - - - 20 March 2023, Paris April part-session (24-28 April 2023), Strasbourg 11-12 May 2023, Seville (Spain), subject to the authorisation of the Bureau June part-session (19-23 June 2023), Strasbourg 12-13 September 2023, Paris (tbc) October part-session (9-13 October 2023), Strasbourg 12 December 2023, Paris 4 AS/Soc (2023) OJ01rev 18 January 2023 Asocoj01rev_2023 Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Revised draft agenda for the meetings to be held in Strasbourg Tuesday, 24 January 2023, from 8.30 to 10 am (room 2) Tuesday, 24 January 2023, from 2 to 3.30 pm (room 2) Thursday, 26 January 2023, from 2 to 3.15 pm (room 2) This draft agenda, addressed to members of the Committee and their alternates, is the convocation to the meeting.
Copy to Secretaries of Delegations and of Political Groups Meeting documents are published on pace-apps (restricted access) and the extranet website of the Parliamentary Assembly (restricted area for national delegations): http://assembly.coe.int/extranet.
[Network of Contact Parliamentarians for a healthy environment Wednesday, 25 January 2023, from 2 to 3.30 pm (room 3) Sub-Committee on the Europe Prize Thursday, 26 January 2023, from 8.30 to 8.45 am (room 2) Sub-Committee on the European Social Charter Thursday, 26 January 2023, from 8.45 to 9 am (room 2) Sub-Committee on Public Health and Sustainable Development Thursday, 26 January 2023, from 9 to 10 am (room 2) Sub-Committee on Children Thursday, 26 January 2023, from 3.15 to 3.30 pm (room 2)] Tuesday, 24 January, 8.30-10 am 1.
2.

3.

4.

Opening of the meeting by the oldest member present Election of the Bureau of the Committee Chairperson and Vice-Chairpersons Agenda [AS/Soc (2023) OJ01rev] Adoption of the revised draft agenda Minutes [AS/Soc (2022) PV08, AS/Soc (2022) PV08add] ✓ Approval of the draft minutes of the meeting held in Paris on 2 December 2022 ✓ Approval and declassification of the draft minutes of the public hearing on “Deliberate germline editing in human beings” held in Paris on 2 December 2022 5.
Constitution of Sub-Committees [Lists of the Sub-Committees] Approval of Sub-Committee lists F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: +33 3 88 41 2000 AS/Soc (2023) OJ01rev 6.

7.

8.
Public health emergency: the need for a holistic approach to multilateralism and health care Rapporteur: Ms Selin Sayek Böke, Türkiye, SOC [AS/Soc (2022) 26rev] Rapporteur’s report back on her fact-finding visit to the World Trade Organization in Geneva on 29-30 September 2022 & her participation in the World Health Summit on 16-18 October 2022 in Berlin Safeguarding democracy, rights and the environment in international trade Rapporteur: Mr Geraint Davies, United Kingdom, SOC [AS/Soc (2023) 06] Consideration of a preliminary draft report Committee’s work programme and priorities [AS/Soc (2023) 01, AS/Soc (2023) 02, AS/Soc (2023) 03] 8.1.
Institutional representation of PACE in 2023 – nomination of Committee representatives ✓ Committee of Experts on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law (PC-ENV) ✓ The European Centre for Global Interdependence and Solidarity – Council of Europe North-South Centre 8.2.
Appointment of Committee representatives to external events (subject to the availability of funds) ✓ European Committee on Democracy and Governance (CDDG) – Working Group on Governance (GT-G), 2-3 February 2023, Strasbourg ✓ 6th meeting of the Drafting Group on Human Rights and Environment (CDDH-ENV), 8-10 February 2023, Strasbourg/KUDO ✓ 44th session of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, 21-23 March 2023, Strasbourg ✓ 7th plenary meeting of the Steering Committee for the Rights of the Child (CDENF), followed by an international Conference on integrated Child protection systems organised by the Icelandic Presidency of the Committee of Ministers, 28-30 March 2023, Reykjavík 8.3.
Reports from Committee representatives to external events ✓ UNITE – Global Parliamentarians Network to end infectious diseases, 5-7 December 2022, Lisbon – Ms Carmen Leyte (Spain, EPP/CD) & Ms Nigar Arpadarai (Azerbaijan, EC/DA) ✓ Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) Workshop “Implementing human rights and environmental due diligence”, 6 December 2022, online – Mr Geraint Davies (United Kingdom, SOC) ✓ RTT/ROMACT event on children left behind in Bulgaria, 12 December 2022, Sofia – Mr Viorel-Riceard Badea (Romania, EPP/CD) 8.4.
Reply of the Committee of Ministers [Doc 15668, Recommendation 2239 (2022), AS/Soc (2023) 07] Consideration of the Committee of Ministers’ reply to the Assembly’s Recommendation on: ✓ The future of work is here: revisiting labour rights 8.5.

Reference transmitted to the Committee for consultation [Doc 15639] ✓ Abusive practices on depriving children from their family environment Tuesday, 24 January, 2-3.30 pm 9.
Environmental impact of armed conflicts Rapporteur: Mr John Howell, United Kingdom, EC/DA [Doc 15674, amendments] Consideration of possible amendments 2 AS/Soc (2023) OJ01rev 10.

11.
Health and social protection of undocumented workers Rapporteur: Ms Ada Marra, Switzerland, SOC [AS/Soc (2023) 08] Consideration of a preliminary draft report Taking into consideration the impact of the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic on the mental health of minors and young adults Rapporteur: Mr Simon Moutquin, Belgium, SOC [AS/Soc (2023) 05] ✓ Consideration of a preliminary draft report ✓ Public hearing with the participation of experts o Mx Anna Knobbout, member of the Advisory Council on Youth (CCJ) of the Council of Europe o NN (to be confirmed) Thursday, 26 January, 2-3.15 pm 12.
Committee’s work programme and priorities [AS/Soc (2023) 01, AS/Soc (2023) 02, AS/Soc (2023) 03] 12.1.

Reply of the Committee of Ministers [Doc 15684, Recommendation 2173 (2020), AS/Soc (2023) 09] Consideration of the Committee of Ministers’ reply to the Assembly’s Recommendation on: ✓ Combating trafficking in human tissues and cells 13.

Tissues of human origin [AS/Soc/PHSD (2023) 01] Approval of a committee declaration as proposed by the Sub-Committee on Public Health and Sustainable Development 14.
Right of the child to protection while using the internet Rapporteur: Mr Joseph O’Reilly, Ireland, EPP/CD [AS/Soc (2022) 49] Public hearing with the participation of experts ✓ Mr Uri Sadeh, Co-ordinator – Crimes against Children Unit, INTERPOL ✓ Ms Ana Balcells Cartagena, Legal and Policy Officer, DG CNECT.F.2 – Digital Services (Programme Office & Societal aspects), European Commission 15.
Network of Contact Parliamentarians for a healthy environment Statement by the Network Chairperson on the meetings held in Paris on 2 December 2022 and in Strasbourg on 25 January 2023 16.

Sub-Committee on the Europe Prize Statement by the Sub-Committee Chairperson on the meeting held in Strasbourg on 26 January 2023 17.

Sub-Committee on the European Social Charter Statement by the Sub-Committee Chairperson on the meeting held in Strasbourg on 26 January 2023 18.
Sub-Committee on Public Health and Sustainable Development Statement by the Sub-Committee Chairperson on the meeting held in Strasbourg on 26 January 2023 19.

Other business ✓ National developments ✓ Nominations for the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 3 AS/Soc (2023) OJ01rev 20.
Date and place of next meetings Plenary committee 16-17 (morning) March 2023, Marrakech, Morocco - - Second part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 24-28 April 2023, Strasbourg - Monday, 22 May 2023, Paris (Council of Europe Office) - Third part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 19-23 June 2023, Strasbourg - Tuesday, 19 September 2023, Paris (Council of Europe Office) - Fourth part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 9-13 October 2023, Strasbourg - Wednesday, 6 December 2023, Paris (Council of Europe Office) Network of Contact Parliamentarians for a healthy environment - - 17 (afternoon) March 2023, Marrakech, Morocco 18 March 2023, Ben Guerir, Morocco Sub-Committee on the Europe Prize - Second part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 24-28 April 2023, Strasbourg (date to be confirmed) - Third part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 19-23 June 2023, Strasbourg (date to be confirmed) 4 AS/Bur (2023) OJ 01 4 January 2023 Bureau of the Assembly Draft agenda This draft agenda, addressed to members of the Bureau of the Assembly, is the convocation to the meeting Copy to secretaries of delegations and political groups, and Heads of Secretariats of the Assembly’s general committees Meeting documents will be published on PACE Apps (restricted access) Date: 23 January 2023 – 8 am to 9.30 am Venue: Strasbourg (Room tbc) 1.
2.

Communication by the President [AS/Bur (2023) 01] Agenda [AS/Bur (2023) OJ 01] Draft decision: to adopt the draft agenda 3.

Minutes [AS/Bur (2022) PV 16] Draft decision: to approve the draft minutes of the meeting held on 9 December 2022 4.

Communication by the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe [Written communication] Draft decision: to take note of the communication by the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe 5.
First part-session of 2023 (Strasbourg, 23-27 January) 5.1.
Request for a debate under urgent procedure On 12 December 2022, the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights requested that the Assembly holds a debate under urgent procedure on “Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine”, on the basis of a report with the same title currently being prepared by the Committee Draft decision: to decide whether to recommend to the Assembly to hold this debate and, if so, to designate the committee(s) to which to refer the matter 5.2.
Request for a current affairs debate [There is currently no request] AS/Bur (2023) OJ 01 5.3.

Draft agenda [Doc.

15665 prov1] Draft decision: to update the draft agenda of the part-session 5.4.

Election of judges to the European Court of Human Rights Draft decision: to take note of the report drawn up by the Committee on the election of judges 6.
Progress report of the Bureau of the Assembly and of the Standing Committee (14 October 2022 to 23 January 2023) Rapporteur: Mr George KATROUGALOS (Greece, UEL) [Doc.

…] Draft decision: to approve the Progress report 7.

References and transmissions to committees [AS/Bur (2023) 02] Draft decision: to approve the proposals contained in the document, to be ratified by the Assembly 8.
Vice-Presidents of the Assembly for 2023 [AS/Inf (2023) 01] Draft decision: to take note of the list of candidates for Vice-Presidents of the Assembly 9.

Václav Havel Human Rights Prize Launch of the 2023 edition of the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize [Press release] Draft decision: to take note of the press release of the launch of the 2023 edition of the Prize 10.

Issues raised by committees 11.

Other business 2 AS/Bur (2023) OJ 01 Items possibly to be dealt without debate: 12.
Composition of the Monitoring Committee, the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs and the Committee on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights [Lists of members] Draft decision: to approve the lists of members 13.
Resolution 1376 (2004) relating to Cyprus [Letters] Draft decision: to approve the names of the “elected representatives of the Turkish Cypriot community” for 2023, in accordance with Assembly Resolution 1376 (2004) (subject to ratification by the Assembly through the addendum to the Progress report) 14.
Resolution 2094 (2016) on the situation in Kosovo* and the role of the Council of Europe [List of members] Draft decision: to approve the list of members of the delegation of the Assembly of Kosovo for 2023 (subject to ratification by the Assembly through the addendum to the Progress report) 15.
Dates and places of next meetings Friday 27 January 2023, 8.30 am (part-session) * All reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population shall be understood in full compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.
3 AS/Jur (2023) OJ 01 10 January 2023 ajoj01 2023 Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights Draft Agenda for the meetings to be held in Strasbourg (Palais de l’Europe) on: - Monday 23 January 2023 at 2-3pm (Room 10) - Tuesday 24 January 2023 at 8.30-10am (Room 10) - Wednesday 25 January 2023 at 2 -3.30pm (Room 10) - Thursday 26 January 2023 at 8.30-10am (Room 10) - Thursday 26 January 2023 from 2-3.30pm (Room 10) This draft agenda, addressed to full members of the Committee and their alternates, is the convocation to the meeting Copy to secretaries of delegations and political groups Meeting documents will be published on PACE Apps (restricted access) Monday 23 January 2023 from 2-3pm (Room 10) 1.
Opening of the meeting by the oldest member present 2.

Election of the Chairperson of the Committee 3.

Election of the three Vice-Chairpersons of the Committee 4.

Agenda [AS/Jur (2023) OJ 01] Adoption of the agenda 5.

Minutes [AS/Jur (2022) PV 10] Approval of the minutes of the meeting held in Paris on 12 December 2022 AS/Jur (2023) OJ 01 6.

Constitution of sub-committees Sub-Committee on Human Rights i. ii.
Sub-Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights iii Sub-Committee on the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights 7.

Addressing the issue of Daesh foreign fighters and their families returning from Syria and other countries to the member States of the Council of Europe Rapporteur: Mr Pieter Omtzigt, the Netherlands, EPP/CD [Doc.

15591 + amendements] Consideration of amendments to the draft resolution and to the draft recommendation 8.
Appointment of representatives of the Committee Appointment of members and substitutes to represent the Committee at meetings of the following bodies in 2023 in the framework of the Assembly’s institutional representation (proposals to be submitted to the Bureau): European Commission for Democracy through Law ("Venice Commission") i. ii.

Council for Democratic Elections (of the Venice Commission) iii.

Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) iv.


Moneyval v. Committee of Experts on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law (PC- ENV) 9.

Appointment of rapporteurs [Appointment procedure document Rapporteur table Doc.

15632] Appointment of a Rapporteur: Sanctions of persons on the "Kara-Murza list" Doc.

15632 10.
15632 10.

General Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders: Possible reappointment of Ms Thorhildur Sunna Ævarsdóttir (Iceland, SOC) (appointed on 25 January 2022 – first mandate effective as of 30 January 2022 Term of office: one year renewable, subject to a maximum of two years.

11.

Other business - Discussion of the proposal by Mr Emanuelis Zingeris (Lithuania, EPP/CD) during the meeting on 12 December 2022, Paris ***** Tuesday 24 January 2023 from 8.30-10am (Room 10) 12.
Composition of the sub-committees: [lists] Sub-Committee on Human Rights i. ii.

Sub-Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights iii.

Sub-Committee on the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights 2 AS/Jur (2023) OJ 01 13.
Possible debate under urgent procedure on “Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine (t.b.c pending decision of the Assembly) Rapporteur: Mr Damien Cottier,Switzerland, ALDE [AS/Jur (2022) … ] Consideration of a draft report and adoption of a draft resolution Wednesday 25 January 2023 at 2 -3.30pm (Room 10) ***** 14.
The implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights – 11th report Rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou, Cyprus, SOC [AS/Jur (2022) … ] Hearing regarding Hungary with the participation of: ZZ 15.

The implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights – 11th report Rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou, Cyprus, SOC [AS/Jur (2022) … ] Hearing regarding Turkey with the participation of: ZZ 16.
The implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights – 11th report Rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou, Cyprus, SOC [AS/Jur (2022) … ] Hearing regarding Ukraine with the participation of: ZZ 17.
The implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights – 11th report Rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou, Cyprus, SOC [AS/Jur (2022) … ] Mission reports by the Rapporteur from recent fact-finding visits to Romania and Azerbaijan Thursday 26 January 2023 from 8.30 -10am (Room 10) 18.
Possible debate under urgent procedure on “Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine (t.b.c pending decision of the Assembly) Rapporteur: Mr Damien Cottier,Switzerland, ALDE [Doc.

…+ amendments] Consideration of amendments to the draft resolution 3 AS/Jur (2023) OJ 01 ***** Thursday 26 January 2023 from 2 - 3.30pm (Room 10) 19.
Emergence of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) and their necessary apprehension through European human rights law Rapporteur: Mr Damien Cotter (Switzerland, ALDE) [Doc.

…+ amendments] Consideration of amendments to the draft resolution 20.

Participation of members in conferences, meetings, seminars etc Reports by the following representative: 75th Meeting of the Council of Democratic Elections, 15 December 2022: Mr Givi Mikanadze (Georgia, SOC) 21.
Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 2023: call for nominations [Václav Havel Human Rights Prize website Václav Havel information sheet] 22.

Hearings during the next meeting 23.

Other business 24.

Next meetings Plenary Committee: - - - - - - - 22 March 2023, Paris Office during the Assembly’s 2nd part-session of 2023 (24-28 April 2023) 22-23, May 2023, Limassol, Cyprus during the Assembly’s 3rd part-session of 2023 (19-23 June 2023 6 September 2023, Paris Office (t.b.c.)
during the Assembly’s 4th part-session of 2023 (9-13 October 2023) 1 December 2023, Paris Office (t.b.c.)
4 AS/Cult (2023) OJ 01rev1 24 January 2023 AAC OJ01rev_23 Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media Revised draft agenda of the meeting to be held in Strasbourg, Palais de l’Europe, on: Monday 23 January 2023 from 2.15 pm to 3.15 pm (Room 2) Tuesday 24 January 2023 from 2 pm to 3.30 pm (Room 6) Wednesday 25 January 2023 from 2 pm to 3.30 pm (Room 2) Thursday 26 January 2023 from 2 pm to 3.30 pm (Room 6) Please note: Monday 23 January 2023 (Room 2) From 2.45 pm to 2.55 pm: Meeting of the Sub-Committee on Culture, Diversity and Heritage From 2.55 pm to 3.05 pm: Meeting of the Sub-Committee on Education, Youth and Sport From 3.05 pm to 3.15 pm: Meeting of the Sub-Committee on Media and Information Society This draft agenda, addressed to members of the committee and their alternates, is the convocation to the meeting Copy to Secretaries of national delegations, of observer and partner for democracy delegations and of political groups Meeting documents will be published on PACE Apps (restricted access) Monday, 23 January from 2.15 pm to 3.15 pm (Room 2) 1.
Opening of the meeting by the oldest member present 2.

Election of the Bureau of the committee [AS/Cult (2023) 02prov] - - Election of the Chairperson Election of the Vice-Chairpersons 3.

Agenda [AS/Cult (2023) OJ 01rev] Adoption of the agenda 4.

Minutes [AS/Cult (2022) PV 07] Approval of the minutes of the meeting held on 5 and 6 December 2022; matters arising from the minutes F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: +33 3 88 41 2000 AS/Cult (2023) OJ 01rev1 5.
Appointment of General Rapporteurs Appointment of the: - - General Rapporteur on Science and Technology Impact Assessment General Rapporteur on Media Freedom and Safety of Journalists 6.
Assembly’s institutional representation Appointment of representatives to the: - - - - - European Centre for Global Interdependence and Solidarity - North-South Centre European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) Council of Europe Committee for Works of Art (C-ART) Europa Nostra - Pan-European Federation for Heritage Committee of the Parties of the Convention on Offences relating to Cultural Property 7.
Committee representation Appointment of a representative to the Network of Contact Parliamentarians for a healthy environment 8.
Reconstitution and composition of the sub-committees [AS/Cult (2023) 02prov] Reconstitution and approval of the composition of sub-committees [Suspension of the Plenary to elect the bureau for the sub-committees] From 2.45 pm to 2.55 pm Election of the Bureau of the Sub-Committee on Culture, Diversity and Heritage - Election of the Chairperson - Election of the Vice-Chairperson From 2.55 pm to 3.05 pm Election of the Bureau of the Sub-Committee on Education, Youth and Sport - Election of the Chairperson - Election of the Vice-Chairperson From 3.05 pm to 3.15 pm Election of the Bureau of the Sub-Committee on Media and Information Society - Election of the Chairperson - Election of the Vice-Chairperson Tuesday 24 January from 2 pm to 3.30 pm (Room 6) 9.
Contact tracing applications: ethical, cultural and educational challenges Rapporteur: Mr Duncan Baker (United Kingdom, EC/DA) [Doc.

15648; Doc.

15660] Deadline for amendments: Tuesday 24 January, at 10.30 am Debate in the Assembly: Wednesday 25 January, morning Consideration of amendments to the draft resolution 10.
Youth and the media Rapporteur: Ms Fiona O’Loughlin (Ireland, ALDE) [AS/Cult (2023) 04] Adoption of a draft resolution and approval of a report 2 Wednesday 25 January from 2 pm to 3.30 pm (Room 2) 11.
Emerging issues and priorities of the committee for 2023 [AS/Cult (2023) 03] Consideration of an information note and exchange of views with the participation of Mr Fakhraddin Ismayilov, Ambassador of Azerbaijan, Chairman of the Committee of Ministers' Rapporteur Group on Education, Culture, Sport, Youth and Environment (GR-C) AS/Cult (2023) OJ 01rev1 Thursday 26 January from 2 pm to 3.30 pm (Room 6) 12.
Building the Open Council of Europe Academic Networks (OCEAN) Rapporteur: Ms Marta Grande (Italy, NR) [Doc.

15675] Deadline for amendments: Thursday 26 January, 10.30 am Debate in the Assembly: Friday 27 January, morning Consideration of amendments to the draft resolution 13.

Promoting online education and research across national borders Rapporteur: Lord Alexander Dundee (United Kingdom, EC/DA) [AS/Cult (2023) 05] Adoption of a draft resolution and a draft recommendation and approval of a report 14.
Committee work programme1 [AS/Cult (2023) 01] 14.1 References to the committee and appointment of rapporteurs [AS/Cult/Inf (2023) 01] 14.1.1 Appointment of new rapporteurs - Risks and opportunities of the Metaverse, (Doc.

15636), for report 2 14.2 Declaration of absence of conflict of interests - Ms Nina Kasimati (Greece, UEL) rapporteur on The role of sites of remembrance: places of commemoration and education for democratic citizenship (Doc.
15471); - Ms Yevheniia Kravchuk (Ukraine, ALDE) rapporteur on Countering the erasure of cultural identity in war and peace (Doc.

15564); - Ms Tonia Antoniazzi (United Kingdom, SOC) rapporteur on Propaganda and freedom of speech in Europe (Doc.
15594); 14.3 Reports on recent meetings 14.4 Approval of rapporteurs’ fact-finding visits 14.5 Appointment of representatives for forthcoming events 14.6 Requests or information from rapporteurs 14.7 Draft motions for a resolution and a recommendation 14.8 Sub-committees Information on the meeting of the Sub-Committee on Culture, Diversity and Heritage, in Olympia, Greece, on 21 and 22 February 2023 1 This point can be treated at any time.

2 Subject to the reference to the committee.


3 AS/Cult (2023) OJ 01rev1 15.

Communication from the Chairperson of the Committee1 [PACE 003 (2023)] - Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 2023: call for nominations 16.

Other business 17.
Other business 17.

Next meetings Committee 23 March 2023, Paris 2nd part-session 2023 (24-28 April 2023) 1-2 June 2023, United Kingdom (tbc) 3rd part-session 2023 (19-23 June 2023) 4th part-session 2023 (9-13 October 2023) 4-5 December 2023, Paris Sub-Committee on Culture, Diversity and Heritage 21-22 February 2023, Olympia, Greece __________________________________________________ 1 This point can be treated at any time.
4 AS/Ega (2023) OJ 01 rev 20 January 2023 Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination Draft agenda (revised) This draft agenda, addressed to full members of the Committee and their alternates, is the convocation to the meeting.

Copy to secretaries of delegations and political groups.

Meeting documents will be published on PACE Apps (restricted access) All items will be taken in the order in which they appear on the agenda, with the exception of those for which a precise time is indicated.
All hearings are public unless specified otherwise.

of the meetings to be held in Strasbourg, Palais de l’Europe, on: – Monday, 23 January 2023, from 2.15 to 3.15pm (room 6); – Tuesday, 24 January 2023, from 8.30 to 10am (room 6); – Wednesday, 25 January 2023, from 2 to 3pm (room 6); – Wednesday, 25 January 2023, from 3 to 3.30pm (room 6): election of the Bureaux of the Sub-Committees (3 to 3.30pm); – Thursday, 26 January 2023, from 8.30 to 10am (room 6).
(CET) A. Monday, 23 January 2023, from 2.15 to 3.15pm (room 6) 1.

2.

3.

4.

Opening of the meeting by the oldest member present Election of the Bureau of the Committee [List of members of the Committee] – Election of the Chairperson; – Election of the Vice-Chairpersons.

Agenda [AS/Ega (2023) OJ 01 rev] Adoption of the draft agenda.

Minutes [AS/Ega (2022) PV 08; AS/Ega/Alliance (2022) PV 02] Approval of the draft minutes of the meeting of the committee held on 1 December 2022 in Paris.
Approval of the draft minutes of the meeting of the No Hate Parliamentary Alliance held on 1 December 2022 in Paris.

F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 AS/Ega (2023) OJ 01 rev 5.
Reconstitution and composition of Sub-Committees [AS/Ega/Inf (2023) 04; lists of members] Consideration of the proposal to reconstitute the Sub-Committee on Gender Equality, the Sub- Committee on the Rights of Minorities and the Sub-Committee on Disability, Multiple and Intersectional Discrimination.

Approval of the composition of the Sub-Committees.

6.
6.

Innovative approaches to sexual and reproductive health and rights Rapporteur: Ms Petra Stienen (Netherlands, ALDE) [AS/Ega (2023) 01] Consideration of a draft report and adoption of a draft resolution.

B. Tuesday, 24 January 2023, from 8.30 to 10am (room 6) 7.

8.

Statement by the Chairperson of the Committee Conflict-related sexual violence Rapporteur: Ms Petra Bayr (Austria, SOC) [Doc.

15677; amendments] Consideration of possible amendments to the draft resolution.
Deadline for tabling amendments: Monday 23 January, 4pm.

Debate in the Assembly will take place on Tuesday 24 January, morning.

9.

Terms of reference of general rapporteurs [AS/Ega (2023) 02] Approval of the updated terms of reference of the General Rapporteur on the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people.

10.

Work programme [AS/Ega/Inf (2023) 01; AS/Ega/Inf (2023) 02] 10.1.

Consideration of the work programme; 10.2.


Appointment of general rapporteurs on: – Violence against women [AS/Ega/Inf (2023) 05]; – Combating racism and intolerance [AS/Ega/Inf (2023) 06]; – The rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people [AS/Ega (2023) 02].

10.3.
10.3.

Appointment of rapporteurs for report on: – The reintegration of persons trapped in prostitution and human trafficking survivors, motion for a resolution tabled by Ms Anna Záborská and other members of the Assembly [Doc.

15570]; – Protecting women human rights defenders and people who defend women’s rights in Europe, motion for a resolution tabled by the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination [Doc.

15642].1 10.4.
15642].1 10.4.

Declaration of absence of conflict of interest by: – Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE), rapporteur for report on Institutional racism of law enforcement authorities against Roma and Travellers [Doc.

15561]; – Mr Christophe Lacroix (Belgium, SOC), rapporteur for report on Freedom of expression and assembly of LGBTI people in Europe [Bureau decision].

1 Subject to ratification of the reference by the Assembly in the Progress report.

2 AS/Ega (2023) OJ 01 rev 11.


Gender representation in the Parliamentary Assembly 11.1.

Gender breakdown in Assembly positions in 2022 [AS/Ega/Inf (2023) 03] Statement by the Chairperson and exchange of views.

11.2.

Implementation of PACE Resolution 2394 (2021) [Res 2394 (2021)] Exchange of views.

12.
12.

Commission on the Status of Women (CSW 67) (New York, United States, 6 - 17 March 2023) Participation in the CSW 67 (6-8 March 2023), at no cost to the Assembly and subject to the authorisation by the Bureau of the Assembly.

C. Wednesday, 25 January 2023 from 2 to 3pm (Room 6) 13.

The Istanbul Convention: progress and challenges Rapporteur: Ms Zita Gurmai (Hungary, SOC) [Doc.

15673 + amendments] Consideration of possible amendments to the draft resolution and draft recommendation.
Deadline for tabling amendments: Tuesday 24 January, 4pm.

Joint debate in the Assembly will take place on Wednesday 25 January, afternoon.

14.

The role and responsibility of men and boys in stopping gender-based violence against women and girls Rapporteur: Ms Petra Stienen (Netherlands, ALDE) [Doc.

15678 + amendments] Consideration of possible amendments to the draft resolution.

Deadline for tabling amendments: Tuesday 24 January, 4pm.
Joint debate in the Assembly will take place on Wednesday 25 January, afternoon.

15.

Finding solutions to marital captivity Rapporteur: Ms Margreet De Boer (Netherlands, SOC) [Doc.

15679 + amendments] Consideration of possible amendments to the draft resolution.

Deadline for tabling amendments: Tuesday 24 January, 4pm.

Joint debate in the Assembly will take place on Wednesday 25 January, afternoon.

16.
16.

Women in the economy: employment, entrepreneurship and gender budgeting Rapporteur: Ms Sena Nur Çelik (Türkiye, NR) [AS/Ega (2023) 03] Consideration of a draft questionnaire to be transmitted to the ECPRD.

17.

Closing the digital divide: promoting equal access to digital technologies Rapporteur: Ms Edite Estrela (Portugal, SOC) [AS/Ega (2023) 04] Consideration of an information memorandum.

18.
18.

Freedom of expression and assembly of LGBTI people in Europe Rapporteur: Mr Christophe Lacroix (Belgium, SOC) [AS/Ega (2023) 05] Consideration of an introductory memorandum.

3 AS/Ega (2023) OJ 01 rev 19.

Assembly’s institutional representation Appointment of a Committee representative and a substitute to the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) for 2023.

20.
20.

Commission on the Status of Women (CSW 67) (New York, United States, 6 - 17 March 2023) [List of members] Approval of the composition of the ad hoc Sub-Committee to participate in the event.
D. Wednesday, 25 January 2023, from 3 to 3.30pm (room 6): meetings of the Sub- Committee on Gender Equality, the Sub-Committee on the Rights of Minorities and the Sub-Committee on Disability and Multiple and Intersectional Discrimination for each of them to elect its Bureau (see separate draft agendas) E. Thursday, 26 January 2023, from 8.30 to 10am (room 6) 21.

Promoting equal access to justice [Doc.


15573; GEC Study on the impact of Covid-19 on women’s access to justice] Hearing with the participation of: – Ms Caterina Bolognese, Head of Gender Equality Division, Directorate General of Democracy and Human Dignity (DGII), Council of Europe; – a representative of the EU/CoE Joint Programme Roma Women’s Access to Justice, JUSTROM.

22.
22.

Steering Committee on Anti-Discrimination, Diversity and Inclusion, Council of Europe Exchange of views with Ms Sophie Élizéon, President of the CDADI.

23.
Appointment of representatives [Programmes] – Invitation to Mr Christophe Lacroix (Belgium, SOC), General rapporteur on the rights of LGBTI people, to address the conference on Advancing the human rights of intersex people to be hosted in the framework of Iceland’s Presidency of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and organised by the SOGI Unit in co-operation with the Permanent Representation of Iceland, on 26 January 2023, in Strasbourg (France) (at no cost to the Assembly); – Appointment of members to participate in the parliamentary seminar Women’s economic empowerment, on 15 February 2023, in Rabat, Morocco.
24.

Activities of the Parliamentary Network Women Free from Violence, the No Hate Parliamentary Alliance and the Parliamentary Platform for the rights of LGBTI people in Europe Communication by the General Rapporteurs.

25.
Reporting back – Mr Christophe Lacroix (Belgium, SOC), for his participation in the Annual Conference of ILGA Europe, in Sofia on 19-22 October 2022; – Ms Yevheniia Kravchuk (Ukraine, ALDE), for her participation in the first edition of the Women, Peace and Security Forum, in Pristina, Republic of Kosovo, on 22-23 October 2022; – Ms Zita Gurmai (Hungary, SOC) for her participation in the meeting of the Committee of the Parties to the Istanbul Convention on 6 December 2022; – Ms Béatrice Fresko-Rolfo (Monaco, ALDE) for her participation in the interparliamentary meeting of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality of the European Parliament, Brussels, on 8 December 2022.
 All reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population shall be understood in full compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.

4 AS/Ega (2023) OJ 01 rev 26.

Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 2023: call for nominations [Press release] Taking note of the press release.

27.

Other business 28.
Next meetings Committee: – Strasbourg, during the first part-session 2023 of the Assembly (23-27 January); – Paris, 24 March 2023 (Council of Europe Office) (tbc); – Strasbourg, during the second part-session 2023 of the Assembly (24-28 April); – 12 May 2023 (date and place tbc); – Strasbourg, during the third part-session 2023 of the Assembly (19-23 June); – Paris, 15 September 2023 (Council of Europe Office) (tbc); – Strasbourg, during the fourth part-session 2023 of the Assembly (9-13 October); – Paris, 7 December 2023 (Council of Europe Office) (tbc).
No Hate Parliamentary Alliance: – Vienna, 8 May 2023 (tbc).
5 SECRETARIAT AS/Bur (2023) CB 02 30 January 2023 To the Members of the Bureau of the Assembly Synopsis of the meeting held in Strasbourg on 27 January 2023 The Bureau of the Assembly, meeting on Friday 27 January 2023, in Strasbourg, with Mr Tiny Kox, President of the Parliamentary Assembly, in the Chair, as regards: − − − − − − Communication: took note of the statement by the President of the Assembly; Follow-up to the first part-session of 2023 (Strasbourg, 23-27 January): approved the follow-up proposals made by the Secretary General of the Assembly to texts adopted by the Assembly, as set out in Appendix 1; Election of a judge to the European Court of Human Rights: took note of the report drawn up by the Committee on the Election of Judges concerning the list of candidates in respect of Poland, including its recommendation to reject the list, subject to ratification by the Assembly through the progress report (Doc.
15685 Add.
4); Standing Committee in The Hague (2-3 March 2023): took note of the draft agenda; Standing Committee in Reykjavik (15 May 2023): took note of information provided by the Secretary General of the Assembly and decided to hold this meeting in the two official languages of the Assembly (English and French); References and transmissions to committees: approved the references and transmissions as set out in Appendix 2, subject to ratification by the Assembly through the Progress report; − Elections observation o Montenegro: Presidential election (19 March 2023): approved the list of members of the ad hoc committee to observe this election (appendix 3) and left it to the Presidential Committee to appoint its Chairperson; o Bulgaria: early parliamentary elections (2 April 2023): subject to receiving an invitation, decided to observe these elections and to set up an ad hoc committee composed of 20 members (SOC-6; EPP/CD-6; ALDE-4; EC/DA-3; UEL-1) as well as the two co-Rapporteurs of the monitoring committee; AS/Bur (2023) CB 02 o Türkiye: Presidential and parliamentary elections (14 May 2023, tbc): subject to receiving an invitation, decided to observe these elections, to set up an ad hoc committee composed of 40 members (SOC-12; EPP/CD-12; ALDE-7; EC/DA-7; UEL-2), as well as the two co-rapporteurs of the monitoring committee, and to conduct a pre-electoral mission; o Conference “Elections in times of crisis: challenges and opportunities” (Bern, 9-10 May 2023): decided to set up an ad hoc committee composed of 30 members (SOC-10; EPP/CD-9; ALDE-5 ; EC/DA-5 ; UEL-1) to represent the Assembly at the conference; • Issues raised by committees: − − − o Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination: took note of the updated terms of reference of the General Rapporteur on the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people; o Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy: took note of the letter by the committee informing of its decision to invite representatives of the democratic political forces for
 Belarus to its meetings during part-sessions and asked the Secretary General of the Assembly to look into the proposal that the same representatives could attend meetings of the other committees during the session week; Václav Havel Human Rights Prize: took note of the press release of the launch of the 2023 edition of the Prize; Progress report of the Bureau of the Assembly and of the Standing Committee (27 January to 23 April 2023): appointed Mr Ian Liddell-Grainger (United Kingdom, EC/DA) as rapporteur; Composition of the Monitoring Committee, the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs and the Committee on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights o Monitoring Committee: on the basis of proposals by : − − − − the SOC Group, nominated, Ms Naomi CACHIA (Malta) as member, the EPP/CD Group, nominated Mr Lulzim BASHA (Albania), Ms Khatia DEKANOIDZE (Georgia) and Mr Aleksandar NIKOLOSKI (North Macedonia) as members, the EC/DA Group, nominated Ms Beatrice TIMGREN (Sweden) and Ms Jo GIDEON (United Kingdom) as members, the ALDE Group, nominated Ms Valentina GRIPPO (Italy) as member; o Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs: on the basis of proposals by the EC/DA Group, nominated Ms Harriett BALDWIN (United Kingdom) and Ms Hélène LAPORTE (France) as members; o Committee on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights: on the basis of proposals by: − − the EPP/CD Group, nominated Ms Biljana PANTIĆ PILJA (Serbia) as member, the EC/DA Group, nominated Ms Sally-Ann HART (United Kingdom) and Ms Nigar ARPADARAI (Azerbaijan) as members; − Meetings elsewhere than Strasbourg or Paris: authorised o o o the ad hoc sub-committee of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination, to participate in the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW 67), in New-York, United States, on 6 March 2023; the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy, to hold a meeting in Sevilla, Spain, on 11-12 May 2023; the
 Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media, to hold a meeting in London on 1-2 June 2023; 2 AS/Bur (2023) CB 02 Isild Heurtin − Date and place of next meeting: − Thursday 2 March 2023, 10 am, The Hague − Monday 24 April 2023, 8 am, Strasbourg (part-session) − Friday 28 April 2023, 8.30 am (part-session) Copy to: Secretary General of the Assembly Directors and all staff of the Secretariat of the Assembly Secretaries of National Delegations and of Political Groups of the Assembly Secretaries of observer and partner for democracy delegations Secretary General of the Congress Secretary to the Committee of Ministers Directors General Director of the Private Office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Director of the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights Director of Communication Permanent Representations to the Council of Europe 3 AS/Bur (2023) CB 02 Appendix 1 – Follow-up to the first part-session of 2023 (Strasbourg, 23-27 January) Recommendation 2245 (2023) on The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges (paragraphs 24 & 25) ❖ Follow up: decided to ask the Rapporteur of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy, Ms Fiona O’Loughlin (Ireland, ALDE), to continue to follow the matter Debate on Recent tensions between Pristina and Belgrade ❖ Follow up: decided to seize the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy to take into account in the preparation of the report on “The situation in Kosovo*” Debate on Addressing the humanitarian consequences of the blockade of the Latchin corridor ❖ Follow up: decided to seize the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons for report Resolution 2482 (2023) on Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine ❖ Follow up: decided to seize the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights for report Resolution 2483 (2023) on The progress of the Assembly's monitoring procedure
 (January-December 2022) (paragraphs 9 and 10) ❖ Follow up: decided to seize the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs – in close co-ordination with the Monitoring Committee - to take into account in the preparation of the report on « Modification of various provisions of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure » * All reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population shall be understood in full compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.
4 AS/Bur (2023) CB 02 Appendix 2 – References and transmissions to committees A.

− REFERENCES TO COMMITTEES Doc.

15676, Motion for a resolution, Reparation and reconciliation processes to overcome past conflicts and build a common peaceful future – the question of just and equal redress: reference to Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights for report and to the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy for opinion B.

MODIFICATION OF A REFERENCE − C. − − D. − − − Doc.


15194, Reference 4555 of 25 January 2021, Health and social protection of undocumented workers: reference to the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development for report and to the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons for opinion REPLY AFTER CONSULTATION Doc.
15628, Motion for a resolution, Preventing abuse of the right to veto in the Security Council: a perspective by the member States of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe: reference to the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy to take into account in the preparation of the report on “The need for renewed, effective and inclusive Multilateralism” Doc.
15639, Motion for a resolution, Abusive practices on depriving children from their family environment: transmission to the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development for information REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS OF REFERENCES Doc.

15217, Reference 4563 of 19 March 2021 – validity: 19 March 2023, Deliberate germline editing in human beings: extension until 19 September 2023 Doc.
15223, Reference 4565 of 19 March 2021 – validity: 19 March 2023, Taking into consideration the impact of the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic on the mental health of minors and young adults: extension until 19 September 2023 Doc.
15269, Reference 4583 of 28 May 2021 – validity: 28 May 2023, Preventing addictive behaviours in children: extension until 28 November 2023 5 AS/Bur (2023) CB 02 Appendix 3 – List of members of the ad hoc committee for the observation of the presidential election in Montenegro (19 March 2023) Chairperson / Président.e Socialists , Democrats and Greens Group / Groupe des socialistes, démocrates et verts (SOC) Mr / M. Piero FASSINO, Italy, Italie Ms / Mme Lise SELNES, Norway / Norvège Mr / M. Adnan DIBRANI, Sweden / Suède Ms / Mme Margreet DE BOER, Netherlands, Pays-Bas Ms / Mme Marietta KARAMANLI, France Mr / M. Domagoj HAJDUKOVIĆ, Croatia / Croatie * Substitutes / suppléant.e.s Mr / M. Andi CRISTEA, Romania / Roumanie Ms / Mme Petra BAYR, Austria / Autriche Mr / M. Givi MIKANADZE, Georgia / Géorgie Mr / M. Gerardo GIOVAGNOLI, San Marino / Saint-Marin Group of the European People’s Party (EPP/CD) / Groupe du Parti populaire européen (PPE/DC) Ms / Mme Zdravka BUŠIĆ, Croatia / Croatie Ms / Mme Maria Gabriela HORGA, Romania / Roumanie Mr / M. Joe O’REILLY, Ireland / Irlande Ms / Mme Catia POLIDORI, Italy / Italie Mr / M. Serhii SOBOLIEV, Ukraine ...
Substitutes / suppléant.e.s Mr / M. Corneliu-Mugurel COZMANCIUC, Romania / Roumanie Ms / Mme Octavie MODERT, Luxembourg Mr / M. Paolo MONIZ, Portugal ** Mr / M. Davor Ivo STIER, Croatia / Croatie Mr / M. Chris SAID, Malta / Malte Ms / Mme Jorida TABAKU, Albania / Albanie Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) / Alliance des démocrates et des libéraux pour l’Europe (ADLE) Mr / M. Georges-Louis BOUCHEZ, Belgium / Belgique Mr / M. Jacques LE NAY, France Ms / MmeTamara VONTA, Slovenia/Slovénie * Ms / Mme Lesia ZABURANNA, Ukraine Substitutes / suppléant.e.s Mr / M. Arminas LYDEKA, Lithuania / Lituanie Ms / Mme Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA, Ukraine Mr / M. Jean-Pierre GRIN, Switzerland / Suisse 6 AS/Bur (2023) CB 02 European Conservatives Group and Democratic Alliance (EC-DA) / Groupe des Conservateurs européens et Alliance démocratique (CE-AD) Lord David BLENCATHRA, United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni Lord Richard KEEN, United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni Mr / M. Simone BILLI, Italy / Italie * Substitutes / suppléant.e.s Group of the Unified European Left (UEL) / Groupe pour la gauche unitaire européenne (GUE) Mr / M. Antón GÓMEZ-REINO, Spain / Espagne * ** Substitutes / suppléant.e.s Co-rapporteur.e.s AS/MON (ex officio) Mr / M. Damien COTTIER, Switzerland, Suisse ** Mr / M. Nicos TORNARITIS, Cyprus, Chypre ** * members of the pre-election delegation / membres de la délégation préélectorale **awaiting non-conflict of interest declaration / en attente de la déclaration de non-conflit d’intérêt 7 SECRETARIAT AS/Bur (2023) CB 01 23 January 2023 To the Members of the Bureau of the Assembly Synopsis of the meeting held in Strasbourg on 23 January 2023 The Bureau of the Assembly, meeting on Monday 23 January 2023, in Strasbourg, with Mr Tiny Kox, President of the Parliamentary Assembly, in the Chair, as regards: − − Communications: took note of the communications by the President of the Assembly, the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe; First part-session of 2023 (Strasbourg, 23-27 January):
 o Requests for debates under urgent procedure: took note of the requests to hold debates on ▪ Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine, tabled by the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights on the basis of a report with the same title currently being prepared by the Committee, decided to recommend to the Assembly to hold this debate, and to refer the matter to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights; ▪ Attacks against public service workers, tabled by the EC/DA Group, and decided to recommend to the Assembly not to hold this debate; o Requests for current affairs debates: took note of the requests to hold debates on ▪ Recent tensions between Pristina and Belgrade, tabled by the delegation of the United Kingdom, decided to recommend to the Assembly to hold this debate and appointed Mr John Howell (United Kingdom, EC/DA) as the first speaker; ▪ How to improve the Council of Europe’s cooperation with civil society, as a way to strengthen and protect human rights, democracy and rule of law, including in Belarus and the Russian Federation, tabled by the Norwegian delegation, and decided to recommend to the Assembly not to hold this debate; ▪ Addressing the humanitarian consequences of the blockade of the Latchin corridor, tabled by the Group EPP/CD, decided to recommend to the Assembly to hold this debate and appointed Mr Paul Gavan (Ireland, UEL) as the first speaker; Draft agenda: updated the draft agenda of the part-session; Election of judges to the European Court of Human Rights: took note of the report drawn up by the Committee on the election of judges following interviews with candidates for the posts of judges in respect of Denmark and Iceland, subject to ratification by the Assembly through the Progress report (Doc.
15685 Add.
2); o o AS/Bur (2023) CB 01 o Joint Committee (Strasbourg, 26 January 2023): prepared the meeting of the Joint Committee; − Progress report of the Bureau of the Assembly and of the Standing Committee (14 October 2022 to 23 January 2023): approved the Progress report; − Election observation o Montenegro: Presidential election (19 March 2023): subject to receiving an invitation, decided to observe this election and to set up an ad hoc committee composed of 20 members (SOC- 6; EPP/CD-6 ; ALDE-4; EC/DA-3; UEL-1), as well as the two co-rapporteurs of the monitoring committee, and to conduct a pre-electoral mission; References and transmissions to committees: approved the references and transmissions as set out in Appendix 1, subject to ratification by the Assembly through the Progress report; Vice-Presidents of the Assembly for 2023: took note of the list of candidates for Vice-Presidents of the Assembly (appendix 2); Composition of the Monitoring Committee, the Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs and the Committee on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights: on the basis of proposals by the political groups, nominated members of these three committees and decided to submit them to the Assembly for ratification (Commissions (2023) 01 Add.1); o Committee on Rules of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs: on the basis of a proposal by the delegation of Türkiye, appointed Mr Ahmet Yıldız (NR) as a member; Resolution 1376 (2004) relating to Cyprus: took note of the letters from the two Turkish Cypriot political parties informing the President of the Assembly of the names of the "elected representatives of the Turkish Cypriot community" entitled to sit in the Assembly in 2023, namely Mr Armağan Candan and Mr Özdemir Berova, subject to ratification by the Assembly through the Progress report; Resolution 2094 (2016) on the situation in Kosovo* and the role of the Council of Europe: took note of the letter by the President of the Assembly of Kosovo informing the
 President of the Assembly of the names of the members of the delegation of the Assembly of Kosovo for the 2023 ordinary session, and approved the list of the delegation, subject to ratification by the Assembly through the Progress report: − − − − • Members: - Ms Saranda Bogujevci, Self-Determination Movement, Head of Delegation - Mr Arben Gashi, Democratic League of Kosovo - Mr Enis Kervan, Parliamentary Group “Multiethnic” Substitutes: - Ms Ariana Musliu-Shoshi, Democratic Party of Kosovo - Mr Besnik Tahiri, Alliance for the Future of Kosovo - Vacant seat − Date and place of next meeting: decided to hold its meeting as follows: - Friday 27 January 2023, 8.30 am (part-session).
Isild Heurtin * All reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population shall be understood in full compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.
2 AS/Bur (2023) CB 01 Copy to: Secretary General of the Assembly Directors and all staff of the Secretariat of the Assembly Secretaries of National Delegations and of Political Groups of the Assembly Secretaries of observer and partner for democracy delegations Secretary General of the Congress Secretary to the Committee of Ministers Directors General Director of the Private Office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Director of the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights Director of Communication Permanent Representations to the Council of Europe 3 AS/Bur (2023) CB 01 Appendix 1 – References and transmissions to committees A. REFERENCES TO COMMITTEES Doc.
15661, Motion for a resolution, The serious problem of conflicts of interest at the European Court of Human Rights: transmission to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights for information within the framework of the consideration of the admissibility of the petition on the same issue.

B.

MODIFICATION OF A REFERENCE Doc.


15568, Reference 4672 of 10 October 2022, The situation of Ukrainian persons forcefully displaced or transferred to the Russian Federation or Ukrainian territories under the de facto control of the Russian Federation: reference to the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons for report and to the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development for opinion.

C. REPLY AFTER CONSULTATION Doc.


15555, Motion for a resolution, Public regulation of the freedom of expression in digital platforms: reference to the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media for report D. REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS OF REFERENCES Doc.

15274 Reference 4586 of 28 May 2021 – validity: 28 May 2023 Precarious status of cross-border and seasonal workers in Europe (new title: Precarious and irregular work situations of migrants and cross-border workers): extension until 31 December 2023.
Doc.

15130, Reference 4527 of 15 September 2020 – validity: 15 March 2023, Call for an inclusive national political process in Belarus (new title: Call for a national political reform process in Belarus): extension until 15 March 2024.

Doc.

15047, Reference 4499 of 6 March 2020 – validity: 6 March 2023, Relationship between the parliamentary majority and the opposition in a democracy: extension until 6 March 2024.
Bureau decision, Reference 4494 of 31 January 2020 – validity: 31 January 2023, Recent developments in Libya and in the Middle East: what consequences for Europe?

: extension until 31 January 2024.
4 AS/Bur (2023) CB 01 Annexe 2 – Vice-Presidents of the Parliamentary Assembly GROUPS / GROUPES COUNTRY / PAYS CANDIDATURES France Mr Bertrand BOUYX Germany / Allemagne Mr Armin LASCHET GROUP I / GROUPE I Italy / Italie Vacant seat / siège vacant GROUP II / GROUPE II GROUP III / GROUPE III Turkey / Turquie Mr Ahmet YILDIZ United Kingdom / Royaume- Uni Mr John HOWELL Spain / Espagne Mr Antonio GUTIÉRREZ LIMONES Ukraine Ms Olena KHOMENKO Austria / Autriche Mr Reinhold LOPATKA Norway / Norvège Ms Ingjerd SCHOU Portugal Ms Edite ESTRELA Romania / Roumanie Mr Ionuţ-Marian STROE Serbia / Serbie Ms Elvira KOVÁCS Slovak Republic / République slovaque Ms Anna ZÁBORSKÁ Sweden / Suède Mr Markus WIECHEL Switzerland / Suisse Ms Sibel ARSLAN Montenegro / Monténégro Ms Maja VUKIĆEVIĆ GROUP IV / GROUPE IV North Macedonia / Macédoine du Nord Mr Darko KAEVSKI San Marino / Saint-Marin Mr Marco NICOLINI Slovenia / Slovénie Ms Tamara VONTA 5 SECRETARIAT AS/Pol (2023) CB 01 31 January 2023 To the members of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy Synopsis of the meetings held in Strasbourg from 23 to 26 January 2023 The Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy, meeting in Strasbourg from 23 to 26 January 2023, with first Ms Edite Estrela (Portugal, SOC), oldest member present, then Mr Zsolt Németh (Hungary, EC/DA), Chairperson, and then Mr Emanuelis Zingeris (Lithuania, EPP/CD), 2nd Vice-Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: • – – – – • – – – on Monday 23 January 2023 at 2.15 p.m., as regards: Election of the Bureau of the Committee: re-elected, by acclamation: • • • Mr Zsolt Németh (Hungary, EC/DA), Chairperson, Mr Kimmo Kiljunen (Finland, SOC), 1st Vice-Chairperson, Ms María Valentina Martínez Ferro (Spain, EPP/CD), 3rd Vice-Chairperson; and elected, by acclamation, Mr Emanuelis Zingeris (Lithuania, EPP/CD), 2nd Vice-Chairperson; Sub-Committees: reconstituted the Sub-Committee on External Relations, the Sub-Committee on the Middle East and the Arab World, and the Sub-Committee on Democracy; The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges (Rapporteur: Ms Fiona O’Loughlin, Ireland, ALDE): considered a revised addendum to the report and unanimously approved it, including the eight amendments contained therein; Recent developments in Libya and in the Middle East: what consequences for Europe?
heard a statement by Mr Piero Fassino (Italy, SOC) and held an exchange of views; on Tuesday 24 January 2023 at 8.30 a.m., as regards: The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges (Rapporteur: Ms Fiona O’Loughlin, Ireland, ALDE): took position on 35 amendments and one sub-amendment to the draft recommendation; and decided to submit one oral amendment; Assessing the functioning of the partnership for democracy (Rapporteur: Ms Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Netherlands, EPP/CD): considered a draft report and unanimously adopted a draft resolution; Safeguarding peace and stability in the East Mediterranean Sea (Rapporteur: Ms Ria Oomen- Ruijten, Netherlands, EPP/CD): heard a statement by the Rapporteur following her fact-finding visits to Ankara and Athens, considered an introductory memorandum and held an exchange of views; – Sub-Committees: approved the composition of the sub-committees (see Appendix); F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 | Fax: +33 3 88 41 27 33 AS/Pol (2023) CB 01 • – – – • – on Wednesday 25 January 2023 at 2 p.m., as regards: Call for a national political reform process in Belarus (Rapporteur: Mr Kimmo Kiljunen, Finland, SOC): welcomed the Belarussian members of the Contact Group on Belarus; held a hearing with the participation of Mr Bjørn Berge, Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe, and Mr Pavel Sapelka, human rights defender, Viasna Human Rights Centre; taking into account paragraph 18.2. of Resolution 2433 (2022) “Consequences of the Russian Federation's continued aggression against Ukraine: role and response of the Council of Europe”, agreed to invite, at every part-session, up to three representatives of Belarusian democratic political forces to its meetings, on a fair rotational basis to ensure engagement with a broad spectrum of political views; instructed the Rapporteur to identify the relevant political forces to which the invitation should be extended; decided to inform the Bureau,
 hoping that the same representatives would be able to attend meetings of other general committees taking place during the same part-session; The challenge of far-right ideology to democracy and human rights in Europe (Rapporteur: Mr Samad Seyidov, Azerbaijan, EC/DA): considered an outline report and held a hearing with the participation of Dr Cynthia Miller-Idriss, Founding Director, Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab, American University, Professor, School of Public Affairs and School of Education, Washington (USA) (online), and Mr Nicholas Potter, journalist and researcher of the far right, at the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, Berlin; Institutional representation: in the framework of the Assembly’s institutional representation, and taking into account Assembly Resolution 2394 (2021) “Gender representation in the Parliamentary Assembly”, following a call for candidatures, appointed the following members and substitutes, for submission to the Bureau of the Assembly: • Council for Democratic Elections of the Venice Commission (CDE): following a vote, elected: Member: Ms María Valentina Martínez Ferro (Spain, EPP/CD) Substitute: Mr Michael Georg Link (Germany, ALDE); on Thursday 25 January 2023 at 2 p.m., as regards: The situation in Iran: held a hearing (open to public) with the participation of: • • • Mr Javaid Rehman, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran (online) Mr Erwin van Veen, Senior research fellow, head of the Middle East research programme, Clingendael Conflict Research Unit, Netherlands Ms Mina Khani, Political Analyst and Freelance Writer, Berlin; – Work programme: • Appointment of Rapporteurs for report: appointed, by acclamation: Mr Zsolt Németh (Hungary, EC/DA), Rapporteur for “Interconnections between the Council of Europe and the European Political Community” Mr Emanuelis Zingeris (Lithuania, EPP/CD), Rapporteur for “Political consequences of the Russian Federation's aggression
 against Ukraine” Ms María Valentina Martínez Ferro (Spain, EPP/CD), Rapporteur for “Foreign interference: a threat to democratic security in Europe” and heard from them a declaration of absence of conflict of interests; 2 AS/Pol (2023) CB 01 • • Consultation of the Committee on the follow-up to be given to the motion for a resolution “Preventing abuse of the right to veto in the Security Council: a perspective by the member States of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe”: further to the consultation of the Sub-Committee on External Relations, decided to ask the Bureau that this motion be referred to it to be taken into account in the preparation of the report “The need for renewed, effective and inclusive Multilateralism” (Ms Dora Bakoyannis, Greece, EPP/CD), and asked the Chairperson to inform the Bureau accordingly; Replies by the Committee of Ministers: considered the reply of the Committee of Ministers to Recommendation 2226 (2022) “Beyond the Lisbon Treaty: strengthening the strategic partnership between the Council of Europe and the European Union”; Institutional representation: in the framework of the Assembly’s institutional representation, and taking into account Assembly Resolution 2394 (2021) “Gender representation in the Parliamentary Assembly”, following a call for candidatures, appointed, by acclamation, Mr Ahmet Yıldız (Türkiye, NR) as member in the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), for submission to the Bureau of the Assembly; Standing invitations: decided, in accordance with Resolution 1376 (2004) and with the decision of the Bureau of the Assembly of 4 October 2004 approved the same day by the Assembly, and according to Article 48.7 of the Rules of Procedure, to invite the elected representatives of the Turkish Cypriot community to attend its meetings during the Assembly 2023 Ordinary Session; – – – Other business: • • • took note of the procedure and the deadline of 30 April 2023 for the submission of nominations as
 well as the relevant information available on the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize website; authorised Ms Fiona O’Loughin (Ireland, ALDE), former rapporteur for the report “The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe: United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges” to address in the 44th session of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, to be held on 21-23 March 2023 in Strasbourg; authorised Mr Zsolt Németh (Hungary, EC/DA), Chairperson, to represent the Assembly at the Antalya Diplomacy Forum (Türkiye), to be held on 11-13 March 2023; – Meetings in 2023: took note of the meetings in 2023 to be held as follows: - - - - - - - 20 March 2023, Paris April part-session (24-28 April 2023), Strasbourg 11-12 May 2023, Seville (Spain) June part-session (19-23 June 2023), Strasbourg 12-13 September 2023, Paris October part-session (9-13 October 2023), Strasbourg 12 December 2023, Paris * * * * * * 3 AS/Pol (2023) CB 01 The Sub-Committee on External Relations, meeting in Strasbourg on Thursday 26 January 2023 with first Lord Blencathra (United Kingdom, EC/DA), oldest member present, and then Mr Antonio Gutiérrez Limones (Spain, SOC), Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: – – Election of the Bureau: re-elected, by acclamation, Mr Antonio Gutiérrez Limones (Spain, SOC), Chairperson, and Mr Ahmet Yıldız (Türkiye, NR), Vice-Chairperson; Meeting at the United Nations Headquarters, New York (28-30 November 2022): held an exchange of views with the participation of Ambassador Manuel Montobbio, Permanent Representative of Spain to the Council of Europe, Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers’ Rapporteur Group on External Relations (GR-EXT), and Ms Despina Chatzivassiliou-Tsovilis, Secretary General of the Assembly; took note that the Bureau seized the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy with consultation on the follow-up to be given to the motion for a resolution “Preventing abuse of the right to veto in the Security Council: a perspective by the
 member States of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe” and, taking into account the discussions held at the United Nations, agreed that this motion should be dealt with in the framework of the report “The need for renewed, effective and inclusive Multilateralism” (Rapporteur: Ms Dora Bakoyannis, Greece, EPP/CD); – Future work: held an exchange of views on possibilities to establish and/or extend co-operation with non-member States and international organisations; – Date and place of the next meeting: left it to its Chairperson to convene the next meeting.
Sonia Sirtori, Ágnes Kertész, Pavel Chevtchenko, Ayşegül Elveriş, Elia Boggia cc.
Secretary General of the Assembly Directors and all staff of the Secretariat of the Assembly Secretaries of National Delegations and of Political Groups of the Assembly Secretaries of observer and partner for democracy delegations Secretary General of the Congress Secretary to the Committee of Ministers Directors General Director of the Private Office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Director of the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights Director of Communication Permanent Representations to the Council of Europe 4 APPENDIX AS/Pol (2023) CB 01 Sub-Committee on External Relations of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy Sous-commission des relations extérieures de la Commission des questions politiques et de la démocratie 29 seats / 29 sièges LIST OF MEMBERS / LISTE DES MEMBRES Chairperson / Président· Mr Antonio GUTIÉRREZ LIMONES (Spain, SOC) Vice-Chairperson / Vice-président· Mr Ahmet YILDIZ (Türkiye, NR) Full Members / Membres titulaires Alternates / Remplaçant·e·s Mr VARDANYAN Vladimir (EPP/CD) Mr HAJIYEV Sabir (SOC) Ms Van VAERENBERGH Kristien (NR) Ms BONELL Mònica (ALDE) Mr RUBINYAN Ruben (EPP/CD) Mr LOPATKA Reinhold (EPP/CD) Mr SEYIDOV Samad (EC/DA) Mr BOUCHEZ Georges-Louis (ALDE) Mr LOUCAIDES George (UEL) Mr BENEŠÍK Ondřej (EPP/CD) Mr JENSEN Mogen (SOC) Mme KARAMANLI Marietta (SOC) Andorra / Andorre Armenia / Arménie Austria / Autriche Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Belgium / Belgique Cyprus / Chypre Czech Republic / République tchèque Denmark / Danemark France Georgia / Géorgie Germany / Allemagne 1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Mr MIKANADZE Givi (SOC) 11.

Ms FUNKE Fabian (SOC) 12.

Ms BAKOYANNIS Theodora (EPP/CD) Greece / Grèce 13.

Mr TROY Robert (ALDE) Ireland / Irlande 14.

Ms KALNIŅA-LUKAŠEVICA Zanda (EPP/CD)Latvia / Lettonie Lithuania / Lituanie 15.

Mr LYDEKA Arminas (ALDE) Luxembourg 16.

Mr GRAAS Gusty (ALDE) Montenegro / Monténégro 17.

Ms VUKIĆEVIĆ Maja (NR) Netherlands / Pays Bas 18.

Ms OOMEN-RUIJTEN (EPP/CD) Poland / Pologne 19.

Mr BERNACKI Włodzimierz (EC/DA) Portugal 20.


Ms ESTRELA Edite (SOC) Romania / Roumanie 21.

Mr STROE Ionuț-Marian (EPP/CD) 22.

Ms PANTIĆ PILJA Biljana (EPP/CD) Serbia / Serbie 23.

Mr GUTIÉRREZ LIMONES Antonio (SOC) Spain / Espagne Sweden / Suède 24.

Ms ÅBERG Boriana (EPP/CD) Switzerland / Suisse 25.

Ms MARET Marianne (EPP/CD Türkiye 26.

Mr YILDIZ Ahmet (NR) Ukraine 27.

Ms VASYLENKO Lesia (EPP/CD) United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni 28.

Immediate past President of the Assembly / 29.
Mr DAEMS Rik (ALDE) Président de l’Assemblée sortant Lord BLENCATHRA David (EC/DA) M. MARIE Didier (SOC) Mr DAĞDELEN Sevim (UEL) Mr CHATZIVASILEIOU Anastasios (EPP/CD) Ms O'LOUGHLIN Fiona (ALDE)] Mr ZINGERIS Emanuelis (EPP/CD) Mr TRUSKOLASKI Krzysztof (EPP/CD) Mme MEIRELLES Isabel (EPP/CD) Mr COZMANCIUC Corneliu M. (EPP/CD) Ms SIMONOVIĆ BRATIĆ Dunja (SOC) Mr ROBLES Gonzalo (EPP/CD) Ms CAROBBIO GUSCETTI Marina (SOC) Mr ÇEVİKÖZ Ahmet Ünal (SOC) Ms YASKO Yelyzaveta (EPP/CD) Sir LLOYD Tony (SOC) Ex officio: Mr Zsolt Németh Chairperson of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy / Président de la Commission des questions politiques et de la démocratie 5 AS/Pol (2023) CB 01 Sub-Committee on the Middle East and the Arab World of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy Sous-commission sur le Proche-Orient et le monde arabe de la Commission des questions politiques et de la démocratie 29 seats / 29 sièges LIST OF MEMBERS / LISTE DES MEMBRES Chairperson / Président·e … Vice-Chairperson / Vice-président·e … Full Members / Titulaires Alternates / Remplaçant·e·s Armenia / Arménie Austria / Autriche Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Belgium / Belgique Cyprus / Chypre Denmark/Danemark France Germany / Allemagne Greece / Grèce Ireland / Irlande Lithuania / Lituanie Malta / Malte Poland / Pologne Portugal Romania / Roumanie San Marino / Saint-Marin Spain / Espagne Switzerland / Suisse Türkiye Ukraine United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni Ms Van VAERENBERGH Kristien (NR) Mme KARAMANLI Marietta (SOC) Mr ULLRICH Volker (EPP/CD) Mr PAPANDREOU George (SOC) Mr SZEJNA Andrzej (SOC) Mr MANG Ioan (SOC) Mr GUTIÉRREZ LIMONES Antonio (SOC) Mr HEER Alfred (ALDE) Mr YILDIZ Ahmet (NR) Mr SOBOLIEV Serhii (EPP/CD) Mr HOWELL John (EC/DA) Mr VARDANYAN Vladimir (EPP/CD) Mr LOPATKA Reinhold (EPP/CD) Mr MOLLAZADA Asim (EC/DA) Mr MOUTQUIN Simon (SOC) Mr LOUCAIDES George (UEL) Mr JENSEN Mogens (SOC) M. KERN Claude (ALDE) Mr LUCKS Max (SOC) Mr KATROUGALOS George (UEL) 1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Ms O'LOUGHLIN Fiona (ALDE) 11.

Mr ZINGERIS Emanuelis (EPP/CD) 12.

Mr SAID Chris (EPP/CD) 13.

Mr MULARCZYK Arkadiusz (EC/DA) 14.

Ms ESTRELA Edite (SOC) 15.

Mr CORLĂŢEAN Titus (SOC) 16.

Mr NICOLINI Marco (UEL) 17.

Mr ROBLES Gonzalo (EPP/CD) 18.

Ms ARSLAN Sibel (SOC) 19.

Mr EKER Mehmet Mehdi (NR) 20.

Ms YASKO Yelyzaveta (EPP/CD) 21.

Mr SHEPPARD Tommy (NR) 22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.
Ex officio: Mr Zsolt Németh Chairperson of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy / Président de la Commission des questions politiques et de la démocratie 6 AS/Pol (2023) CB 01 Sub-Committee on Democracy of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy Sous-commission de la Démocratie de la Commission des questions politiques et de la démocratie 29 seats / 29 sièges LIST OF MEMBERS / LISTE DES MEMBRES Chairperson / Président·e … Vice-Chairperson / Vice-président·e … Full Members / Membres titulaires Alternates / Remplaçant·e·s Mr RUBINYAN Ruben (EPP/CD) 1.
Mr SEYIDOV Samad (EC/DA) 2.

Mr BOUCHEZ Georges-Louis (ALDE) 3.

Mr JENSEN Michael Aastrup (ALDE) 4.

ZZ… 5.

Mr ULLRICH Volker (EPP/CD) 6.

Mr PAPANDREOU George (SOC) 7.

Mr ARATÓ Gergely (SOC) 8.

Mr TROY Robert (ALDE) 9.

10.

Mr DZINTARS Normunds (NR) 11.

Mr LYDEKA Arminas (ALDE) 12.

Mr GRAAS Gusty (ALDE) 13.

Mr MUNCACIU Sorin-Titus (EC/DA) 14.

Ms SUMELZO Susana (SOC) 15.

Ms CAROBBIO GUSCETTI Marina (SOC) Switzerland / Suisse Switzerland / Suisse 16.

Mr HEER Alfred (ALDE) Türkiye 17.


Mr BÜYÜKGÜMÜŞ Ahmet (NR) United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni 18.

Sir LLOYD Tony (SOC) Immediate past President of the Assembly / 19.
Mr DAEMS Rik (ALDE) Président de l’Assemblée sortant Armenia / Arménie Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Belgium / Belgique Denmark / Danemark France Germany / Allemagne Greece / Grèce Hungary / Hongrie Ireland / Irlande Latvia / Lettonie Lithuania / Lituanie Luxembourg Romania / Roumanie Spain / Espagne Mr MOUTQUIN Simon (SOC) M. Alain MILON (EPP/CD) Mr LINK Michael Georg (ALDE) Mr CHATZIVASILEIOU Anastasios (EPP/CD) Ms DMITREA Dumitrina (EC/DA) Ms ARSLAN Sibel (SOC) Ms MARET Marianne (EPP/CD Mr Ahmet Ünal ÇEVİKÖZ (SOC) 20.
21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.
Ex officio: Mr Zsolt Németh Chairperson of the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy / Président de la Commission des questions politiques et de la démocratie 7 SECRETARIAT AS/Ega (2023) CB 01 31 January 2023 To the members of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination Synopsis of the meetings held in Strasbourg on 23-26 January 2023 The Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination, meeting in Strasbourg from 23-26 January 2023, with first Ms Andrea Eder-Gitschthaler (Austria, EPP/CD), oldest member present, then with Ms Mariia Mezentseva (Ukraine, EPP/CD), Chairperson, in the Chair: – Monday 23 January, from 2.15 to 3.15pm, as regards: o Election of the Bureau of the Committee: re-elected by acclamation Ms Béatrice Fresko-Rolfo (Monaco, ALDE), as First Vice-Chairperson; ▪ elected by acclamation Ms Mariia Mezentseva (Ukraine, EPP/CD), as Chairperson; ▪ ▪ elected by acclamation Ms Mai Kivelä (Finland, UEL), as Second Vice-Chairperson; ▪ re-elected by acclamation Mr Fourat Ben Chikha (Belgium, SOC), as Third Vice-Chairperson.
o Sub-Committees: re-constituted its Sub-Committees on Gender Equality; on the Rights of Minorities; and on Disability, Multiple and Intersectional Discrimination; and approved their composition as set out in appendices 1, 2 and 3; o Innovative approaches to sexual and reproductive health and rights (Rapporteur: Ms Petra Stienen, Netherlands, ALDE): approved a draft report and unanimously adopted a draft resolution; – Tuesday, 24 January, from 8.30am to 10am, as regards: o Conflict-related sexual violence (Rapporteur: Ms Petra Bayr, Austria, SOC): took position on 12 amendments and 3 oral sub-amendments to the draft resolution and asked its Chairperson to propose that the amendments unanimously approved be declared as adopted by the Assembly under Rule 34.11 of the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure; o Terms of reference of General Rapporteurs: approved the updated terms of reference of the General Rapporteur on the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people, to be transmitted to the Bureau of the Assembly; o Work programme: took note of the work programme; o Appointment of General Rapporteurs: appointed: ▪ Mr Even Eriksen (Norway, SOC) as General Rapporteur on violence against women; ▪ Ms Petra Bayr (Austria, SOC) as General Rapporteur on combating racism and intolerance; ▪ Mr Christophe Lacroix (Belgium, SOC) as General Rapporteur on the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people; and heard from them their declarations of absence of conflict of interest; This document is available on PACE Apps (restricted area for PACE Members) F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel.
: + 33 3 88 41 20 00 | AS/Ega (2023) CB 01 o Appointment of rapporteurs for report: ▪ following a vote, appointed Ms Margreet de Boer (Netherlands, SOC) as rapporteur for report on The reintegration of persons trapped in prostitution and human trafficking survivors; ▪ appointed by acclamation Ms Petra Bayr (Austria, SOC) as rapporteur for report on Protecting women human rights defenders and people who defend women’s rights in Europe; and heard from them their declarations of absence of conflict of interest; o Declarations of absence of conflict of interest of rapporteurs for report: heard declarations of absence of conflict of interest by: ▪ Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE), rapporteur for report on Institutional racism of law enforcement authorities against Roma and Travellers; ▪ Mr Christophe Lacroix (Belgium, SOC), rapporteur for report on Freedom of expression and assembly of LGBTI people in Europe; o Gender representation in the Parliamentary Assembly: heard a statement by the Chairperson and held an exchange of views on the gender breakdown in Assembly positions in 2022 and on the implementation of PACE Resolution 2394 (2021); o Commission on the Status of Women (CSW 67) (New York, United States, 6 - 17 March 2023): decided to set up an ad hoc Sub-Committee to participate in the 67th session of the CSW, subject to authorisation by the Bureau of the Assembly (at no cost to the Assembly); – Wednesday, 25 January, from 2 to 3pm, as regards: o Women in the economy: employment, entrepreneurship and gender budgeting (Rapporteur: Ms Sena Nur Çelik, Türkiye, NR); postponed the item to a future meeting, in the absence of the rapporteur; o Closing the digital divide: promoting equal access to digital technologies (Rapporteur: Ms Edite Estrela, Portugal, SOC): considered an information memorandum; o Freedom of expression and assembly of LGBTI people in Europe (Rapporteur: Mr Christophe Lacroix, Belgium, SOC): considered an introductory memorandum and authorised the rapporteur to carry out a fact-finding visit
 to Hungary (subject to the availability of funds); o Assembly’s institutional representation: appointed Ms Petra Bayr (Austria, SOC) as representative and Mr Fourat Ben Chikha (Belgium, SOC) as substitute to the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) for 2023; o Commission on the Status of Women (CSW 67) (New York, United States, 6 - 17 March 2023): approved the composition of the ad hoc Sub-Committee to participate in the event as set out in appendix 4; – Thursday, 26 January, from 8.30 to 10am, as regards: o Promoting equal access to justice: held a hearing with the participation of: ▪ Ms Caterina Bolognese, Head of Gender Equality Division, Directorate General of Democracy and Human Dignity (DII), Council of Europe; ▪ Ms Oana Taba, Senior Project Manager, Roma and Travellers Team, Directorate General of Democracy and Human Dignity (DGII), Council of Europe; o Steering Committee on Anti-Discrimination, Diversity and Inclusion (CDADI), Council of Europe: held an exchange of views with Ms Sophie Élizéon, President of the CDADI; o Appointment of representatives: ▪ appointed Mr Christophe Lacroix (Belgium, SOC), General rapporteur on the rights of LGBTI people, to address the conference on Advancing the human rights of intersex people hosted in the framework of Iceland’s Presidency of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and organised by the SOGI Unit in co-operation with the Permanent Representation of Iceland, on 26 January 2023, in Strasbourg (France) (at no cost to the Assembly); ▪ appointed Ms Petra Stienen (Netherlands, ALDE) to participate in the EIGE workshop on the Role of Men, Boys and Masculinities in Gender Equality research and policies on 10 February 2023 in Vilnius, Lithuania (at no cost to the Assembly); invited members interested in participating in the parliamentary seminar Women’s economic empowerment, on 22 February 2023, in Rabat, Morocco, to contact the secretariat (subject to the availability of funds); ▪ 2
 AS/Ega (2023) CB 01 o Activities of the Parliamentary Network Women Free from Violence, the No Hate Parliamentary Alliance and the Parliamentary Platform for the rights of LGBTI people in Europe: heard communications by the General Rapporteurs; o Reporting back: heard a report from Mr Christophe Lacroix (Belgium, SOC), for his participation in the Annual Conference of ILGA Europe, in Sofia on 19-22 October 2022; o Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 2023: call for nominations: took note of the call for nominations and of the deadline of 30 April 2023 for submitting nominations; o Next meetings: at the invitation of the Chairperson of the Moroccan delegation, decided to hold a meeting in 2023 in Marrakech (Morocco) (subject to the authorisation of the Bureau) and confirmed its next meetings as follows: Committee ▪ Paris, 24 March 2023 (Council of Europe Office); ▪ Strasbourg, during the second part-session 2023 of the Assembly (24-28 April); ▪ Paris, 12 May 2023 (Council of Europe Office); ▪ Strasbourg, during the third part-session 2023 of the Assembly (19-23 June); ▪ Marrakech, September 2023 (date tbc); ▪ Strasbourg, during the fourth part-session 2023 of the Assembly (9-13 October); ▪ Paris, 7 December 2023 (Council of Europe Office).
Ad Hoc Sub-Committee to participate in the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW67) ▪ New York, United States, 6 March 2023 Sub-Committee on the Rights of Minorities ▪ Strasbourg, during the second part-session 2023 of the Assembly (24-28 April) Parliamentary Network Women Free from Violence ▪ London, 13 March 2023 No Hate Parliamentary Alliance ▪ Vienna, 8 May 2023 Parliamentary Platform for the rights of LGBTI people in Europe ▪ Brussels, 22 May 2023 ***** The Sub-Committee on Gender Equality, meeting in Strasbourg on 25 January 2023 from 3 to 3.10pm, with Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE), oldest member present, and then Konul Nurullayeva (Azerbaijan, EC/DA), Vice-Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: – – Election of the Bureau of the Sub-Committee: o re-elected by acclamation Ms Maryna Bardina (Ukraine, ALDE) as Chairperson; o elected by acclamation Ms Konul Nurullayeva (Azerbaijan, EC/DA) as Vice-Chairperson; Next meeting: left it to its Chairperson to propose the date and place of the next meeting.
The Sub-Committee on the Rights of Minorities, meeting in Strasbourg on 25 January 2023 from 3.10 to 3.20pm, Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE), oldest member present, and then Ms Elvira Kovács (Serbia, EPP/CD), Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: ***** – – Election of the Bureau of the Sub-Committee: o re-elected by acclamation Ms Elvira Kovács (Serbia, EPP/CD) as Chairperson; o postponed the election of Vice-Chairperson due to a lack of candidates; Next meeting: decided to hold its next meeting during the April part-session.
***** 3 AS/Ega (2023) CB 01 The Sub-Committee on Disability and Multiple and Intersectional Discrimination, meeting in Strasbourg on 25 January 2023 from 3.20 to 3.30pm, with Ms Els van Hoof (Belgium, EPP/CD), oldest member present, in the Chair, as regards: – – Election of the Bureau of the Sub-Committee: o re-elected by acclamation Mr Anastasios Chatzivasileiou (Greece, EPP/CD) as Chairperson; o postponed the election of Vice-Chairperson due to a lack of candidates; Next meeting: left it to its Chairperson to propose the date and place of the next meeting.
Penelope Denu, Sarah Burton, Giorgio Loddo, Élodie Fischer, Solène Falk Copy to: Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly Director and all staff of the Secretariat of the Parliamentary Assembly Secretaries of National Delegations and of Political Groups of the Assembly Secretaries of observer and partner for democracy delegations Secretary General of the Congress Secretary to the Committee of Ministers Directors General Director of the Private Office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Director of the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights Director of Communication Permanent Representations to the Council of Europe 4 AS/Ega (2023) CB 01 Appendix 1 Sub-Committee on Gender Equality Sous-commission sur l’égalité de genre List of members / Liste des membres Chairperson / Président·e BARDINA, Maryna [Ms] Ukraine Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président·e NURULLAYEVA, Konul [Ms] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Full Members / Titulaires LÓPEZ, Pere [M.] BAYR, Petra [Ms] NURULLAYEVA, Konul [Ms] VAN HOOF, Els [Ms] MARIE, Didier [M.] TSILOSANI, Khatia [Ms] ENGELHARDT Heike [Ms] PAPANDREOU, George [Mr] GARVEY, Róisín [Ms] CEPURĪTIS, Edmunds [Mr] FRESKO-ROLFO, Béatrice [Mme] MILEWSKI, Daniel [Mr] ESTRELA, Edite [Mme] DE BOER, Margreet [Ms] GORGHIU, Alina-Ștefania [Ms] KOVÁCS, Elvira [Ms] CASTEL, Laura [Ms] MARRA, Ada [Mme] ÇELİK, Sena Nur [Ms] BARDINA, Maryna [Ms] OSBORNE, Kate [Ms] Ex officio Andorra / Andorre Austria / Autriche Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Belgium / Belgique France Georgia / Géorgie Germany / Allemagne Greece / Grèce Ireland / Irlande Latvia / Lettonie Monaco Poland / Pologne Portugal Netherlands / Pays-Bas Romania / Roumanie Serbia / Serbie Spain / Espagne Switzerland / Suisse Türkiye Ukraine United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni Alternates / Remplaçant·e·s LACROIX, Christophe [M.] SPELLERBERG Merle [Ms] KAIRIDIS, Dimitrios [Mr] O’REILLY, Joseph [Mr] NOWACKA, Barbara [Ms] ȚUȚUIANU, Marius-Horia [Mr] FILIPOVSKI, Dubravka [Ms] PEÑA, Esther [Ms] GRIN, Jean-Pierre [M.] KRAVCHUK, Yevheniia [Ms] Mme Mariia
 MEZENTSEVA, Chairperson of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination / Présidente de la Commission sur l’égalité et la non-discrimination 5 AS/Ega (2023) CB 01 Appendix 2 Sub-Committee on the Rights of Minorities Sous-commission sur les droits des minorités List of members/ Liste des membres Chairperson / Président·e KOVÁCS, Elvira [Ms] Serbia / Serbie Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président·e ZZ… Full Members / Titulaires BAYR, Petra [Ms] MAMIJANYAN, Hayk [Mr] Austria / Autriche Armenia / Arménie Alternates / Remplaçant·e·s NURULLAYEVA, Konul [Ms] Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan HUSEYNOV, Rafael [Mr] SAFAI Daria [Ms] LORER Daniel [Mr] SEPASHVILI, Eka [Ms] Belgium / Belgique LACROIX, Christophe [M.] Bulgaria /Bulgarie Georgia / Géorgie TÜRK-NACHBAUR, Derya [Ms] Germany / Allemagne POLAT, Filiz [Ms] STYLIANIDIS, Evripidis [Mr] Greece / Grèce KAIRIDIS, Dimitrios [Mr] O’REILLY, Joseph [Mr] LYDEKA, Arminas [Mr] LORSCHÉ, Josée [Mme] Ireland / Irlande Lithuania / Lituanie Luxembourg SEKULIĆ, Predrag [Mr] Montenegro / Monténégro NOWACKA, Barbara [Ms] Poland / Pologne ESTRELA, Edite [Ms] Portugal GORGHIU, Alina-Ștefania [Ms] Romania / Roumanie BOTOND,Csoma [Mr] KOVÁCS, Elvira [Ms] PEÑA, Esther [Ms] GRIN, Jean-Pierre [M.] ÇELİK, Sena Nur [Ms] SHARMA, Virendra [Mr] Ex officio Serbia / Serbie Spain / Espagne Switzerland / Suisse GUGGER, Niklaus-Samuel [M.] Türkiye United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni MURRAY, Sheryll [Ms] Mme Mariia MEZENTSEVA, Chairperson of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination / Présidente de la Commission sur l’égalité et la non-discrimination 6 Appendix 3 Sub-Committee on Disability, Multiple and Intersectional Discrimination Sous-commission sur le handicap, la discrimination multiple et intersectionnelle List of members / Liste des membres AS/Ega (2023) CB 01 Chairperson / Président·e CHATZIVASILEIOU, Anastasios [Mr] Greece / Grèce Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président·e ZZ… Full Members / Titulaires BONELL Mònica [Mme] HUSEYNOV, Rafael [Mr] VAN HOOF, Els [Ms] LUCKS,
 Max [Mr] CHATZIVASILEIOU, Anastasios [Mr] GARVEY, Róisín [Ms] FRESKO-ROLFO, Béatrice [Mme] ŚMISZEK, Krzysztof [Mr] CSOMA, Botond [Mr] PEÑA, Esther [Ms] GUGGER, Niklaus-Samuel [M.] YAŞAR, Serap [Mme] BARDINA, Maryna [Ms] Ex officio Andorra / Andorre Alternates / Remplaçant·e·s Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan KARIMZADA, Parvin [Ms] BEN CHIKHA, Fourat [Mr] HEINRICH, Gabriela [Ms] PAPANDREOU, George [Mr] O’REILLY, Joseph [Mr] Belgium / Belgique Germany / Allemagne Greece / Grèce Ireland / Irlande Monaco Poland / Pologne Romania / Roumanie Spain / Espagne Switzerland / Suisse Türkiye Ukraine COZMANCIUC, Corneliu-Mugurel [Mr] BÜCHEL, Roland Rino [Mr] Mme Mariia MEZENTSEVA, Chairperson of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination / Présidente de la Commission sur l’égalité et la non-discrimination 7 AS/Ega (2023) CB 01 Appendix 4 Ad hoc Sub-Committee to participate in the CSW 67 Ad hoc Sous-commission pour participer à la CSW 67 List of members / Liste des membres 1.
2.

3.

4.

5.
Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA (Belgium, SOC) Ms Margreet De BOER (Netherlands, SOC) Ms Zita GURMAI (Hungary, SOC) Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA (Ukraine, EPP/CD) Ms Petra STIENEN (Netherlands, ALDE) Secretariat / Secrétariat: Ms Penelope DENU, Head of the Secretariat of the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination / Cheffe du Secrétariat de la Commission sur l’égalité et la non-discrimination 8 SECRETARIAT AS/Cult (2023) CB 01 30 January 2023 To the members of the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media Synopsis of the meeting held in Strasbourg on 23, 24, 25 and 26 January 2023 The Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media, meeting in Strasbourg on Monday 23 January 2023 from 2.15 pm to 3.15 pm, then on Tuesday 24 January, on Wednesday 25 January and on Thursday 26 January 2023 from 2 pm to 3.30 pm, with Lord George Foulkes (United Kingdom, SOC), the oldest member present, then Ms Yevheniia Kravchuk (Ukraine, ALDE) in the chair, Monday, 23 January from 2.15 to 3.15 pm, as regards: - Election of the Bureau of the committee: elected by acclamation: • Ms Yevheniia Kravchuk (Ukraine, ALDE), Chairperson, • Mr Stefan Schennach (Austria, SOC), 1st Vice-Chairperson, • Ms Laura Castel (Spain, UEL), 3rd Vice-Chairperson; - Other business - - thanked the UK Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly, and Lord Alexander Dundee, for the invitation to hold a committee meeting in London, United Kingdom on 1 and 2 June 2023, and agreed to the organisation of this meeting, subject to the authorisation by the Bureau of the Assembly; Designation of General Rapporteurs: designated: • Ms Linda Hofstad Helleland (Norway, EPP/CD) as General Rapporteur on Science and Technology Impact Assessment, subject to her declaration of absence of conflict of interests, • Mr Mogens Jensen (Denmark, SOC) as General Rapporteur on Media Freedom and Safety of Journalists and heard his declaration of absence of conflict of interests; Assembly’s institutional representation: designated, for their appointment by the Bureau of the Assembly, the
 following representatives to the: European Centre for Global Interdependence and Solidarity - North-South Centre: • Ms Marijana Balić (Croatia, EPP/CD) as representative and heard her declaration of absence of conflict of interests, • Ms Maria-Gabriela Horga (Romania, EPP/CD) as substitute, subject to her declaration of absence of conflict of interests; European Commission against Racism and Intolerance – ECRI: • Ms Luz Martinez Seijo (Spain, SOC) as representative and heard her declaration of absence of conflict of interests, • Mr Asim Mollazada (Azerbaijan, EC/DA) as substitute, subject to his declaration of absence of conflict of interests; F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 | Fax: +33 3 88 41 2797 AS/Cult (2023) CB 01 Council of Europe Committee for Works of Art (C-ART): • Mr Constantinos Efstathiou (Cyprus, SOC) as representative and heard his declaration of absence of conflict of interests; Europa Nostra - Pan-European Federation for Heritage: • Ms Foteini Pipili (Greece, EPP/CD) as representative, subject to her declaration of absence of conflict of interests, • Mr Andries Gryffroy (Belgium, NR) as substitute, subject to his declaration of absence of conflict of interests; Committee of the Parties of the Convention on Offences relating to Cultural Property: • Mr Stefan Schennach (Austria, SOC) as representative, subject to his declaration of absence of conflict of interests; Committee representation: designated to the Network of Contact Parliamentarians for a healthy environment: • Ms Inka Hopsu (Finland, SOC) as representative and heard her declaration of absence of conflict of interests; Reconstitution and composition of the sub-committees: reconstituted its three sub-committees and approved their composition1; - - • • • Sub-Committee on Culture, Diversity and Heritage, Sub-Committee on Education, Youth and Sport, Sub-Committee on Media and Information Society; Tuesday 24 January from 2 to 3.30 pm, as regards: - Election
 of the Bureau of the committee: elected by acclamation: • Ms Linda Hofstad Helleland (Norway, EPP/CD), 2nd Vice-Chairperson; - - - - Contact tracing applications: ethical, cultural and educational challenges (Rapporteur: Mr Duncan Baker, United Kingdom, EC/DA): considered ten amendments to the draft resolution, and adopted unanimously and tabled five written sub-amendments, following proposals by the Rapporteur; Youth and the media (Rapporteur: Ms Fiona O’Loughlin, Ireland, ALDE): took note of the explanatory memorandum, then unanimously adopted a draft resolution, thereby approving the report; Assembly’s institutional representation: designated for his appointment by the Bureau of the Assembly to the: Council of Europe Committee for Works of Art (C-ART): • Mr David Morris (United Kingdom, EC/DA) as representative and heard his declaration of absence of conflict of interests; Declarations of absence of conflict of interests: heard the respective declarations of absence of conflict of interests from: • Ms Yevheniia Kravchuk (Ukraine, ALDE), rapporteur on Countering the erasure of cultural identity in war and peace, 1 The composition appears in the appended lists, as approved by the committee on 23 and 26 January 2023, and after the election by each sub-committee of its Bureau.
2 AS/Cult (2023) CB 01 • Mr Stefan Schennach (Austria, SOC), representative to Committee of the Parties of the Convention on Offences relating to Cultural Property; - Communication from the Chairperson of the Committee: took note of the call for nominations for the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 2023; Wednesday 25 January from 2 to 3.30 pm, as regards: - Emerging issues and priorities of the committee for 2023: took note of an information note and held an exchange of views with the participation of Mr Fakhraddin Ismayilov, Ambassador of Azerbaijan, Chairman of the Committee of Ministers' Rapporteur Group on Education, Culture, Sport, Youth and Environment (GR-C); agreed to launch two new reports on “The role of youth for revitalising democracy” and on “Protecting human rights in sport: obligations and shared responsibilities” and asked that the corresponding draft motions be on the agenda of the committee meeting in March; Thursday 26 January from 2 to 3.30 pm, as regards: - - - Building the Open Council of Europe Academic Networks (OCEAN) (Rapporteur: Ms Marta Grande, Italy, NR): took note that no amendments were tabled to the draft resolution and entrusted the Chairperson to present the report on 27 January 2023; Promoting online education and research across national borders (Rapporteur: Lord Alexander Dundee, United Kingdom, EC/DA): took note of the explanatory memorandum, then unanimously adopted a draft resolution and a draft recommendation, thereby approving the report; Committee work programme References to the committee and appointment of rapporteurs: appointed Mr Andi-Lucian Cristea (Romania, SOC) rapporteur on “Risks and opportunities of the Metaverse” and heard his declaration of absence of conflict of interests; Appointment of representatives for forthcoming events: appointed, subject to the availability of funds, Ms Fiona O’Loughlin (Ireland, ALDE), Chairperson of the Sub-committee on Education, Youth and Sport, to participate in “The Global Forum for Inclusion – Partnering for Action”, during the
 Special Olympics World Games Berlin 2023, on 17 and 18 June 2023, in Berlin, Germany; - Composition of the sub-committees: approved the following changes: Sub-committee on Culture, Diversity and Heritage: • Ms Caterina Ferreira Rocha (Portugal, EPP/CD) becomes a full member, • Ms Iryna Konstankevych (Ukraine, EC/DA) becomes a full member, • Mr David Morris (United Kingdom, EC/DA) becomes a full member, • Mr AttilaTilki (Hungary, EC/DA) becomes a full member, • Mr Koloman Brenner (Hungary, NR) becomes the alternate of Mr AttilaTilki; Sub-committee on Education, Youth and Sport: • Ms Harriett Baldwin (United Kingdom, EC/DA) becomes the alternate of Lord George Foulkes; Sub-committee on Media and Information Society: • Ms Ieva Brante (Latvia, NR) and Mr Tomasz Latos (Poland, EC/DA) are no longer members of the sub-committee, • Ms Yuliia Ovchynnykova (Ukraine,ALDE) becomes a full member, • Ms Denitsa Sacheva (Bulgaria, NR) becomes a full member, • Ms Caterina Ferreira Rocha (Portugal, EPP/CD), who was a full member, becomes the alternate of Mr Nuno Carvalho, • Ms Nadejda Iordanova (Bulgaria,NR) becomes the alternate of Ms Denitsa Sacheva; 3 AS/Cult (2023) CB 01 - Next meetings: decided on the forthcoming meetings of the committee as follows: Committee 23 March 2023, Paris 2nd part-session 2023 (24-28 April 2023) 1-2 June 2023, London (subject to the authorisation by the Bureau) 3rd part-session 2023 (19-23 June 2023) 4th part-session 2023 (9-13 October 2023) 4-5 December 2023, Paris Sub-Committee on Culture, Diversity and Heritage 21-22 February 2023, Olympia, Greece confirmed that the next committee meeting will be held on 23 March 2023 in Paris.
*** The Sub-Committee on Culture, Diversity and Heritage (of the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media), meeting in Strasbourg on Monday 23 January 2023 from 2.45 pm to 2.55 pm, with Mr Bernard Fournier (France, EPP/CD), the oldest member present, in the Chair, as regards: - Election of the Bureau of the Sub-Committee: elected by acclamation: • Ms Nina Kasimati (Greece, UEL), Chairperson, • Ms Luz Martinez Seijo (Spain, SOC), Vice-Chairperson; - Next meeting: decided to leave it to the Chairperson to call the next meeting.
*** The Sub-Committee on Education, Youth and Sport (of the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media), meeting in Strasbourg on Monday 23 January 2023 from 2.55 pm to 3.05 pm, with Lord George Foulkes (United Kingdom, SOC), the oldest member present, then Ms Fiona O’Loughlin (Ireland, ALDE) in the Chair, as regards: - Election of the Bureau of the Sub-Committee: elected by acclamation: • Ms Fiona O’Loughlin (Ireland, ALDE), Chairperson, • Ms Nicole Duranton (France, ALDE), Vice-Chairperson; - Next meeting: decided to leave it to the Chairperson to call the next meeting.
*** 4 AS/Cult (2023) CB 01 The Sub-Committee on Media and Information Society (of the Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media), meeting in Strasbourg on Monday 23 January 2023 from 3.05 pm to 3.15 pm, with Lord George Foulkes (United Kingdom SOC), initially as the oldest member present, in the Chair, as regards: - Election of the Bureau of the Sub-Committee: elected by acclamation: Lord George Foulkes (United Kingdom, SOC), Chairperson, • • Ms Karin Brouwers (Belgium, EPP/CD), Vice-Chairperson; - Next meeting: decided to leave it to the Chairperson to call the next meeting.
Roberto Fasino, Dana Karanjac, Silvia Arzilli, Marc Gruber cc: Secretary General of the Assembly Directors and all staff of the Secretariat of the Assembly Secretaries of National Delegations and of Political Groups of the Assembly Secretaries of observer and partner for democracy delegations Secretary General of the Congress Secretary to the Committee of Ministers Directors General Director of the Private Office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Director of the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights Director of Communication Permanent Representations to the Council of Europe 5 AS/Cult (2023) CB 01 Appendix Sub-Committee on Culture, Diversity and Heritage/ Sous-commission de la culture, de la diversité et du patrimoine (25+1) Chairperson / Président.e KASIMATI, Eirini (Nina) [Ms] Greece Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président.e MARTÍNEZ SEIJO, Luz [Ms] Spain Members / Titulaires Alternates / Remplaçant.e.s 1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.
BARTOSEVICIUS, Kristijonas [Mr] CARVALHO Nuno [Mr] CRONIN, Reada [Ms] EFSTATHIOU, Constantinos [Mr] EKER, Mehmet Mehdi [Mr] ERDEM, Arzu [Ms] FOURNIER, Bernard [M.] GAPANY JOHANNA [Ms] GHAZARYAN, Sona [Ms] GRYFFROY, Andries [Mr] HUSEYNOV, Rafael [Mr] JEITLER-CINCELLI, Carmen [Ms] KASIMATI, Eirini (Nina) [Ms] KONSTANKEVYCH Iryna [Ms] LINDBERG, Kristoffer [Mr] MARTÍNEZ SEIJO, Luz [Ms] MORRIS David [Mr] NYKIEL, Mirosława [Ms] PRIOTEASA, Ion [Mr] ROCHA FERREIRA Catarina [Ms] SCHENNACH, Stefan [Mr] TILKI Attila [Mr] Ex-Officio DE BRABANDERE, Bob [Mr] BÜCHEL, Roland Rino [Mr] Lithuania Portugal Ireland Cyprus Türkiye Türkiye France Suisse Armenia Belgium Azerbaijan MOLLAZADA, Asim [Mr] Austria Greece Ukraine Sweden Spain United Kingdom Poland Romania Portugal Austria Hungary LATOS, Tomasz [Mr] BULAI, Iulian [Mr] PIPILI, Foteini [Ms] BRENNER Koloman [Mr] KRAVCHUK Yevheniia [Ms] Ukraine 6 Sub-Committee on Education, Youth and Sport*/ Sous-commission de l’éducation, de la jeunesse et du sport* (25+1) AS/Cult (2023) CB 01 Chairperson / Président.e O’LOUGHLIN, Fiona [Ms] Ireland Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président.e DURANTON, Nicole [Mme] France Members / Titulaires Alternates / Remplaçant.e.s 1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.
GUGGER, Niklaus-Samuel [M.] Lithuania BARTOSEVICIUS Kristijonas [M.] Malta BONETT Chris [Mr] Suisse BÜCHEL, Roland Rino [M.] Czech Republic BŽOCH Jaroslav [Mr] DURANTON, Nicole [Mme] France EDER-GITSCHTHALER, Andrea [Ms] Austria Cyprus EFSTATHIOU, Constantinos [Mr] United Kingdom BALDWIN Harriett [Ms] FOULKES, George [Lord] Belgium GRYFFROY, Andries [Mr] Luxembourg HEMMEN Cécile [Mme] Romania HORGA, Maria Gabriela [Ms] Azerbaijan HUSEYNOV, Rafael [Mr] Serbia JOVANOVIC Stefan [Mr] KONATAR Miloš [Mr] Montenegro LACROIX, Christophe [M.] THELLMANN, Christine [Ms] GADIRLI, Erkin [Mr] LAAN, Jeanet van der [Ms]* HEMMEN Cécile [Mme] MARTÍNEZ SEIJO, Luz [Ms] MATUSZNY, Kazimierz [Mr] NAUDI, Carles [Mr] O’LOUGHLIN, Fiona [Ms] ROUSOPOULOS, Theodoros [Mr] RUSTAMYAN, Armen [Mr] SEPASHVILI Eka [Ms] SIDALI, Zeki Hakan [Mr] VALENTIN, Kim [Mr] Netherlands Luxembourg Spain Poland Andorra Ireland Greece Armenia Georgia Türkiye Denmark FERNÁNDEZ, Maria [Ms] ARENT, Iwona [Ms] CRONIN, Réada [Ms] TRIANTAFYLLIDIS, Alexandros [Mr] JENSEN, Mogens [Mr] Ex-Officio KRAVCHUK Yevheniia [Ms] Ukraine 7 AS/Cult (2023) CB 01 Sub-Committee on Media and Information Society*/ Sous-commission des médias et de la société de l’information* (25+1) Chairperson / Président.e FOULKES, George [Lord] United Kingdom Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président.e BROUWERS, Karin [Ms] Belgium Members / Titulaires 1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.
ARENT, Iwona [Ms] BROUWERS, Karin [Ms] CARVALHO Nuno [Mr] CRISTEA, Andi-Lucian [Mr] EMRE, Yunus [Mr] FERNÁNDEZ, Maria [Ms] FOULKES, George [Lord] GHAZARYAN, Sona [Ms] GUGGER, Niklaus-Samuel [M.] JENSEN, Mogens [Mr] JOVANOVIĆ Stefan [Mr] LACINA Jan [Mr] LORSCHE Josée [Mme] MOLLAZADA, Asim [Mr] NAUDI, Carles [Mr] O’LOUGHLIN, Fiona [Ms] OVCHYNNYKOVA Yuliia [Ms] SACHEVA Denitsa [Ms] SCHENNACH, Stefan [Mr] SEPASHVILI Eka [Ms] ŠLESERS Ričards [Mr] TAMASUNIENE Rita [Ms] TRIANTAFYLLIDIS, Alexandros [Mr] VUCINIC, Maksim [Mr] Poland Belgium Portugal Romania Türkiye Spain United Kingdom Armenia Suisse Denmark Serbia Czech Republic Luxembourg Azerbaijan Andorra Ireland Ukraine Bulgaria Austria Georgia Latvia Lithuania Greece Montenegro Ex-Officio KRAVCHUK Yevheniia [Ms] Ukraine Alternates / Remplaçant.e.s MATUSZNY, Kazimierz [Mr] BRABANDERE, Bob, De [Mr] ROCHA FERREIRA Catarina [Ms] NEAGU Denisa-Elena [Ms] EKER, Mehmet Mehdi [Mr] BARDELL, Hannah [Ms] GERMANN, Hannes [M.] VALENTIN, Kim [Mr] GADIRLI, Erkin [Mr] IORDANOVA Nadejda [Ms] ROUSOPOULOS, Theodoros [Mr] 8 SECRETARIAT AS/Jur (2023) CB 01 31 January 2023 To the members of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights Synopsis of the meeting held in hybrid manner in Strasbourg on 23, 24, 25 and 26 January 2023 The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, meeting in Strasbourg on 23, 24, 25 and 26 January 2023: • – on Monday 23 January 2023 at 2.15pm, with Lord Richard Keen (United Kingdom, EC/DA), oldest member present, in the Chair, as regards: Election of the Bureau of the Committee: elected, by acclamation, Mr Damien Cottier (Switzerland, ALDE) as Chairperson, Mr Davor Ivo Stier (Croatia, EPP/CD) as 1st Vice- Chairperson, Ms Margreet de Boer (Netherlands, SOC) as 2nd Vice-Chairperson and Sir Christopher Chope (United Kingdom, EC/DA) as 3rd Vice-Chairperson; Then with Mr Cottier (Switzerland, ALDE), Chairperson, in the Chair: – Constitution of Sub-Committees: agreed to constitute the Committee’s current three sub- committees for 2023, namely: Sub-Committee on Human Rights i. ii.
Sub-Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights iii Sub-Committee on the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights; − Appointment of representatives of the Committee: agreed to propose to the Bureau that the following members and substitutes be appointed to represent the Committee at meetings of the following bodies in 2023 in the framework of the Assembly’s institutional representation: i. European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) Mr Constantinos Efstathiou (Cyprus, SOC) – titular Mr Serhii Vlasenko (Ukraine, EPP/CD) - substitute ii.
Council for Democratic Elections (of the Venice Commission) Mr. Davor Ivo Stier (Croatia, EPP/CD) - titular Ms Khatia Dekanoidze (Georgia, EPP/CD) - substitute iii.

Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) Mr Titus Corlatean (Romania, SOC) – titular Ms Elena-Simona Spătaru (Romania, ALDE) - substitute F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 | Fax: +33 3 88 41 2702 iv.
Moneyval Ms Maria-Gabriela Horga (Romania, EPP/CD) - titular Ms Klotilda Bushka (Albania, SOC) - substitute v. Committee of Experts on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law (PC-ENV) Ms Sunna Aevarsdottir (Iceland, SOC) – titular Mr Ziya Altunyaldiz (Turkey, NR)- substitute Addressing the issue of Daesh foreign fighters and their families returning from Syria and other countries to the member States of the Council of Europe (Rapporteur: Mr Pieter Omtzigt, the Netherlands, EPP/CD)- took position on 10 amendments to the draft resolution and 3 to the draft recommendation; on Tuesday 24 January 2023 at 8.30am, as regards: Appointment of rapporteurs: − • − - Sanctions of persons on the "Kara-Murza list" (Doc.
15632) appointed Mr Eerik-Niiles Kross, Estonia, ALDE, as Rapporteur and heard from him a statement of no conflict of interest; - General Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders: appointed Ms Thorhildur Sunna Ævarsdóttir for a second year (general rapporteurship now based on the newly revised mandate including protection of whistle-blowers, as agreed in committee on 14 November 2022 and approved by the Bureau on 28 November 2022); − Composition of sub-committees: approved the composition as in the attached appendix.
− • − − − Then with Mr Davor Ivo Stier (Croatia, EPP/CD), 1st Vice-Chairperson in the Chair, as regards: Debate under urgent procedure: “Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine (Rapporteur: Mr Damien Cottier,Switzerland, ALDE), considered a draft report and unanimously adopted a draft resolution; on Wednesday 25 January 2023 at 2pm, as regards: The implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights – 11th report (Rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou, Cyprus, SOC): held an exchange of views regarding the situation pertaining to Hungary with the participation of: Mr Barna Zsigmond, Vice-Chairperson of the Hungarian delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Mr. Dávid Oravecz, Deputy to the Permanent Representative of Hungary to the Council of Europe; The implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights – 11th report (Rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou, Cyprus, SOC): held an exchange of views regarding the situation pertaining to Türkiye with the participation of: Mr Ahmet Yildiz, Chairperson of the Turkish delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Mr Hacı Ali Açıkgül, Head of Department of Human Rights of the Ministry of Justice, Ankara; The implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights – 11th report (Rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou, Cyprus, SOC): held an exchange of views regarding the situation pertaining to Ukraine with the participation of: Ms Mariia Mezentseva, Chairperson of the Ukrainian delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Ms Iryna Mudra, Deputy Minister of Justice, Ukraine Ms Sokorenko, government agent before the European Court of Human Rights; 2 − • − The committee decided to declassify the information notes prepared by the rapporteur on Hungary, Türkiye and Ukraine.
The implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights – 11th report (Rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou, Cyprus, SOC): took note of mission reports by the Rapporteur concerning his recent fact-finding visits to Romania and Azerbaijan, and agreed to declassify them; on Thursday 26 January 2023 at 8.30am, with, first, Mr Davor Ivo Stier (Croatia, EPP/CD), 1st Vice-Chairperson, in the Chair as regards: Debate under urgent procedure: Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine (Rapporteur: Mr Damien Cottier,Switzerland, ALDE): took position on 7 amendments to the draft resolution; Then with Mr Damien Cottier (Switzerland, ALDE), Chairperson, in the Chair as regards: − Other business: • − − − − - Agreed to propose to the Bureau that a second ad hoc sub-committee be established to visit Ukraine in the near future; - Agreed to the proposal of Mr Vladimir Vardanyan (Armenia, EPP/CD) to add a point to the agenda of the meeting on 22 March 2023 concerning the blockade of the Lachin corridor; on Thursday 26 January 2023 at 2pm, with, first, Mr Davor Ivo Stier (Croatia, EPP/CD), 1st Vice- Chairperson, in the Chair as regards: Emergence of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) and their necessary apprehension through European human rights law (Rapporteur: Mr Damien Cotter (Switzerland, ALDE): took position on 5 amendments to the draft resolution; Then with Mr Damien Cottier (Switzerland, ALDE), Chairperson, in the Chair as regards: Participation of members in conferences, meetings, seminars etc: took note of a written report prepared by the committee representative, Mr Givi Mikanadze (Georgia, SOC), regarding the 75th Meeting of the Council of Democratic Elections, Venice,15 December 2022; Václav Havel Human Rights Prize 2023: made a call for nominations, noted the deadline of 30 April 2023 and that details are available on the Václav Havel Human Rights Prize website ; Hearings during the next meeting: agreed to hold the following hearings, during the next
 meeting with invited experts, subject to the availability of funds and that they be open to the public; - UK reform of its human rights legislation: consequences for domestic and European human rights protection: (Rapporteur: Mr Kamal Jafarov, Azerbaijan, EC/DA) - Allegations of systemic torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in places of detention in Council of Europe member States (Rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou, Cyprus, SOC) - Human Rights (Rapporteur: Mr Titus Corlatean, Romania, SOC); Legal aspects of the accession of the European Union to the European Convention on − Other business: - Agreed to the declassification of the introductory memorandum on “UK reform of its human rights legislation: consequences for domestic and European human rights protection: (Rapporteur: Mr Kamal Jafarov, Azerbaijan, EC/DA); - Sub-committees: accepted the application of Ms Nadejda Iordanova (Bulgaria, NR) for membership to the Sub-committee on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights and the Sub- committee on the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights; 3 − - - - - - - - Next meetings: confirmed the external meeting would be held on 22-23 May 2023 in Cyprus1, following the Bureau’s approval on 9 December 2022; 22 March 2023, Paris Office during the Assembly’s 2nd part-session of 2023 (24-28 April 2023) 22-23, May 2023, Larnaca, Cyprus during the Assembly’s 3rd part-session of 2023 (19-23 June 2023 6 September 2023, Paris Office (t.b.c.)
during the Assembly’s 4th part-session of 2023 (9-13 October 2023) 1 December 2023, Paris Office (t.b.c.)
Günter Schirmer, Guillem Cano-Palomares, Agnieszka Szklanna, Eleanor Hourigan cc: Secretary General of the Assembly Directors and all staff of the Secretariat of the Assembly Secretaries of National Delegations and of Political Groups of the Assembly Secretaries of observer and partner for democracy delegations Secretary General of the Congress Secretary to the Committee of Ministers Directors General Director of the Private Office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Director of the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights Director of Communication Permanent Representations to the Council of Europe 1 The meeting place in Cyprus has since been changed from Limassol to Larnaca.
4 Appendix 30 January 2023 Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights Commission des questions juridiques et des droits de l'homme Sub-Committee on Human Rights (29 seats) Sous-commission des Droits de l'Homme (29 sièges) List of members - Liste des members Titular member / Membre titulaire Alternate member/ Membre remplaçant 1.

Mr ALTUNYALDIZ Ziya 2.

Ms BARDELL Hannah 3.

Ms BAYR Petra 4.

Ms BRANT Ieva 5.

Ms CACHIA Naomi 6.

Ms CAROBBIO GUSCETTI Marina 7.

Mr CORLATEAN Titus 8.

Ms DECROIX Eva 9.


Mrs FILIPOVSKI Dubravka 10.

Ms GASIUK-PIHOWICZ Kamila 11.

M. GATTOLIN André 12.

Mr GONCHARENKO Oleksii 13.

Ms HIGGINS Emer 14.

Mr JAFAROV Kamal 15.

Mr KLEINWAECHTER Norbert 16.

Mr LAMUÀ Marc 17.

M. MATHIEU Frédéric 18.

Mr MEREZHKO Oleksandr 19.

Mr MIKANADZE Givi 20.

Ms MODERT Octavie 21.

Ms MUNCH Charlotte 22.

Ms ROCHA FERREIRA, Catarina 23.

Mr SAVICKAS Lukas 24.

Mr SEKULIĆ Predrag 25.

Mr ŚMISZEK Krzysztof 26.

Mr STYLIANIDIS Evripidis 27.


Ms VAN VAERENBERGH Kristien 28.

Mr VARDANYAN Vladimir 29.
Mr ZINGERIS Emanuelis Mr GERMANN Hannes Mr ȚUȚUIANU Marius-Horia Ms PANTIC PILJA Biljana Mr PRINGLE Thomas Mr VALLINI André Mr ÇETİN Cemal Mr SHEPPARD Tommy Turkey/ Turquie United Kingdom/ Royaume-Uni Austria/Autriche Latvia/Lettonie Malta/Malte Switzerland/Suisse Romania/Romanie Czech Repubic/République tchèque Serbia/ Serbie Poland/Pologne France Ukraine Ireland / Irlande Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Mr GADIRLI Erkin Germany/Allemagne Mr ABRAHAM Knut Spain/Espagne Ms SUMELZO Susana France Ukraine Georgia/Géorgie Luxembourg Denmark/Danemark Portugal Lithuania/Lithanie Montenegro/ Montenégro Poland/Pologne Greece/Grèce Belgium/Belgique Armenia/Arménie Lithuania/Lituanie Mr. KALCHENKO Serhii Ms DEKANOIDZE Khatia Mr KATROUGKALOS Georgios Ms WILMES Sophie ex officio: Chairperson of AS/Jur : Mr Damien Cottier (Switzerland, ALDE) 5 Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights Commission des questions juridiques et des droits de l'homme Sub-Committee on the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (29 seats) Sous-commission sur la mise en œuvre des arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (29 sièges) List of members / Liste des members Titular member / Membre titulaire Alternate member / Membre remplaçant BAYR Petra EFSTATHIOU Constantinos GASIUK-PIHOWICZ Kamila ÇELİK Sena Nur (VC/VP in 2022 ) DE BOER Margreet 1.
Ms ALVES MOREIRA, Isabel 2.

Ms ÆVARSDÓTTIR, Thórhildur Sunna 3.

Ms 4.

Ms 5.

Ms 6.

Ms DECROIX Eva Lord KEEN Richard 7.

8.

Mr CORLATEAN Titus 9.

Mr 10.

Ms 11.

Mr GERMANN, Hannes 12.

Mr GUTIÉRREZ PIETRO Sergio 13.

Ms IORDANOVA Nadejda 14.

Mr JAFAROV Kamal 15.

Mr KUHLE Konstantin LLOYD Tony 16.

Mr 17.

Ms. LÓPEZ Eva 18.

Ms 19.

Mr 20.

Mr 21.

Ms 22.

Mr 23.

Mr 24.


Mr LOVOCHKINA Yuliya MATHIEU Frédéric MIKANADZE Givi PANTIC PILJA Biljana PRINGLE Thomas SAID Chris STYLIANIDIS Evripidis Georgios VALLINI André VARDANYAN Vladimir VLASKENKO Serhii 25.

M. 26.

Mr 27.

Mr 28.

Ms WILMES Sophie 29.
Z Mr NAGY Szabolcs Portugal Iceland/Islande Austria/Autriche Turkey/Turquie Netherlands/Pays-bas Czech Repubic/République tchèque United Kingdom/ Royaume-Uni Sir LEIGH Edward Romania / Roumanie Cyprus/Chypre Poland/Pologne Switerland/Suisse Spain/Espagne Bulgaria/Bulgarie Azerbaijan/ Azerbaïdjan Germany/Allemagne United Kingdom/Royaume-Uni Andorra/Andorre Ukraine France Georgie/ Géorgie Serbia/Serbie Ireland/Irlande Malta/Malte Greece/Grèce Mr GADIRLI Erkin Mr MIJATOVIĆ Boris Mr CALVET François Mr KATROUGALOS Mr COTTIER Damien Ms DEKANOIDZE Khatia France Armenia/ Arménie Ukraine Belgium/Belgique Ms JULHAKYAN Arusyak Ms GAHOUCHI Latifa ex officio: Chairperson of AS/Jur : Mr Damien Cottier (Switzerland, ALDE) 6 Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights Commission des questions juridiques et des droits de l'homme Sub-Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights (29 seats) Sous-commission sur l’intelligence artificielle et les droits de l’homme (29 sièges) List of members / Liste des members Alternate member / Membre remplaçant M. KOÇ Haluk Mr GATTOLIN André Ms MARET Marianne Mr NICULESCU ȚÂGÂRLAȘ Cristian Augustin Ms SUMELZO Susana Ms KANELLI Liana Iceland/Islande Turkey/ Turquie France Switzerland/Suisse Cyprus/Chypre Armenia/Arménie Ireland / Irlande Romania/Roumanie Spain/Espagne Bulgaria/Bulgarie Greece/ Grèce Germany/Allemagne Denmark/Danemark Portugal Lithuania/Lituanie Lithuania/Lituanie Titular member / Membre titulaire 1.
Ms ÆVARSDÓTTIR Thórhildur Sunna 2.

Mr ALTUNYALDIZ Ziya 3.

Mr CALVET François 4.

Mr COTTIER Damien 5.

Mr EFSTATHIOU Constantinos 6.

Ms JULHAKYAN Arusyak 7.

Ms HIGGINS Emer 8.

Ms HORGA Maria Gabriela 9.

Ms HOYO Belén 10.

Ms IORDANOVA Nadejda 11.

Mr KAIRIDIS Dimitrios 12.

Mr PETRY Christian 13.

Mr REISSMANN Mette 14.

Ms ROCHA FERREIRA Catarina 15.

Mr SAVICKAS Lukas 16.

Mr ZINGERIS Emanuelis 17.

ZZ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.
29. ex officio: Chairperson of AS/Jur : Mr Damien Cottier (Switzerland, ALDE) 7 AS/Soc (2023) CB01 27 January 2023 To the members of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Synopsis of the meetings held in Strasbourg on 24-26 January 2023 The Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development, meeting in Strasbourg on Tuesday, 24 January 2023, at 8.30 am, with first Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE), oldest member present, and then Ms Selin Sayek Böke (Türkiye, SOC), re-elected Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: − Election of the Bureau of the Committee: re-elected by acclamation: − − − − Ms Selin Sayek Böke (Türkiye, SOC), Chairperson Mr Alain Milon (France, EPP/CD), first Vice-Chairperson Ms Olena Khomenko (Ukraine, EC/DA), second Vice-Chairperson Ms Sibel Arslan (Switzerland, SOC), third Vice-Chairperson − Standing invitation: decided, in accordance with Resolution 1376 (2004) and the decision of the Bureau of the Assembly of 4 October 2004 approved the same day by the Assembly, and according to Article 48.7 of the Rules of Procedure, to invite the elected representatives of the Turkish Cypriot community to attend its meetings during the Assembly’s 2023 Ordinary Session; − Constitution of Sub-Committees: decided to reconstitute the following Sub-Committees as indicated in the appendix: − − − − Sub-Committee on Public Health and Sustainable Development Sub-Committee on the European Social Charter Sub-Committee on the Europe Prize Sub-Committee on Children − Public health emergency: the need for a holistic approach to multilateralism and health care (Rapporteur: Ms Selin Sayek Böke, Türkiye, SOC): heard the Rapporteur’s report back on her fact-finding visit to the World Trade Organization in Geneva on 29-30 September 2022 and her participation in the World Health Summit on 16-18 October 2022 in Berlin; − Safeguarding democracy, rights and the environment in international trade (Rapporteur: Mr Geraint Davies, United Kingdom, SOC): considered a preliminary draft
 report; − Institutional representation of PACE in 2023: nominated the following Committee representatives: − for the Committee of Experts on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law (PC-ENV) ✓ Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE) as representative ✓ Ms Yuliia Ovchynnykova (Ukraine, ALDE) as alternate − for the European Centre for Global Interdependence and Solidarity – Council of Europe North-South Centre ✓ Mr Stefan Schennach (Austria, SOC) as representative ✓ Ms Carmen Leyte (Spain, EPP/CD) as alternate for appointment by the Bureau of the Assembly; F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | assembly@coe.int | Tel: +33 3 88 41 2000 AS/Soc (2023) CB01 − Committee’s work programme and priorities: − appointed Committee representatives to external events as follows (subject to the availability of funds): ✓ European Committee on Democracy and Governance (CDDG) – Working Group on Governance (GT-G), 2-3 February 2023, Strasbourg – Mr Armen Gevorgyan (Armenia, EC/DA) (at no cost to the Assembly) ✓ 6th meeting of the Drafting Group on Human Rights and Environment (CDDH-ENV), 8-10 February 2023, Strasbourg/KUDO – Mr Simon Moutquin (Belgium, SOC) and (at no cost to the Assembly, on KUDO) Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE) ✓ 44th session of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, 21-23 March 2023, Strasbourg – Mr Armen Gevorgyan (Armenia, EC/DA) ✓ 7th plenary meeting of the Steering Committee for the Rights of the Child (CDENF), followed by an international Conference on integrated Child protection systems organised by the Icelandic Presidency of the Committee of Ministers, 28-30 March 2023, Reykjavík – Ms Sevinj Fataliyeva (Azerbaijan, EC/DA); − heard back from the Committee representatives to external events as follows: ✓ UNITE – Global Parliamentarians Network to end infectious diseases, 5-7 December, Lisbon – Ms Carmen Leyte (Spain, EPP/CD) and Ms Nigar Arpadarai (Azerbaijan, EC/DA) ✓ Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) Workshop “Implementing human
 rights and environmental due diligence”, 6 December, online – Mr Geraint Davies (United Kingdom, SOC); − took note of the Committee of Ministers’ reply to the Assembly’s Recommendation 2239 (2022) “The future of work is here: revisiting labour rights”; − issued a call for a rapporteur for opinion (to be appointed at a subsequent meeting): ✓ The situation of Ukrainian persons forcefully displaced or transferred to the Russian Federation or Ukrainian territories under the de facto control of the Russian Federation; − instructed the Chairperson to send a letter to the PACE Bureau asking for the prolongation of references for reports on “Deliberate germline editing in human beings”, “Taking into consideration the impact of the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic on the mental health of minors and young adults” and “Preventing addictive behaviours in children”; • Tuesday, 24 January 2023, at 2 pm, with Ms Selin Sayek Böke (Türkiye, SOC), Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: − Environmental impact of armed conflicts (Rapporteur: Mr John Howell, United Kingdom, EC/DA): took position on the 3 amendments tabled to the draft resolution and on the 3 amendments tabled to the draft recommendation; − Health and social protection of undocumented workers (Rapporteur: Ms Ada Marra, Switzerland, SOC): considered a preliminary draft report and agreed to modify the title of the report to “Health and social protection of undocumented workers or those in an irregular situation”; − Taking into consideration the impact of the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic on the mental health of minors and young adults (Rapporteur: Mr Simon Moutquin, Belgium, SOC): considered and agreed to declassify a preliminary draft report, and held a public hearing with the participation of Mx Anna Knobbout, member of the Advisory Council on Youth (CCJ) of the Council of Europe; • Thursday, 26 January 2023, at 2 pm, with Ms Selin Sayek Böke (Türkiye, SOC), Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: − Committee’s
 work programme and priorities: - appointed Mr Armen Gevorgyan (Armenia, EC/DA), General Rapporteur on Local and Regional Authorities, to participate in the meeting of the CDDG Working Group on green public administration, 2-3 March 2023, Strasbourg; - took note of the Committee of Ministers’ reply to the Assembly’s Recommendation 2173 (2020) “Combating trafficking in human tissues and cells”, and decided to invite the responsible Director- General to one of the Committee meetings during the April part-session; 2 AS/Soc (2023) CB01 − Combating the commodification of and trafficking in tissues of human origin: unanimously adopted a Committee declaration; − Right of the child to protection while using the internet (Rapporteur: Mr Joseph O’Reilly, Ireland, EPP/CD): held a public hearing with the participation of Mr Uri Sadeh, Co-ordinator – Crimes against Children Unit, INTERPOL, and Ms Ana Balcells Cartagena, Legal and Policy Officer, DG CNECT.F.2 – Digital Services (Programme Office and Societal aspects), European Commission; − Network of Contact Parliamentarians for a healthy environment: heard a report from Mr Rik Daems (Belgium, ALDE), Network Chairperson, on the meetings held on 2 December 2022 in Paris and on 25 January 2023 in Strasbourg; − Sub-Committee on the Europe Prize: heard a report from Ms Carmen Leyte (Spain, EPP/CD), Chairperson of the Sub-Committee, on the meeting held on 26 January 2023; − Sub-Committee on the European Social Charter: heard a report from Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE), Chairperson of the Sub-Committee, on the meeting held on 26 January 2023; − Sub-Committee on Public Health and Sustainable Development: heard a report from Ms Nigar Arpadarai (Azerbaijan, EC/DA), Chairperson of the Sub-Committee, on the meeting held on 26 January 2023; − Other business: took note of the call for nominations for the 2023 Václav Havel Prize and of the deadline of 30 April 2023 for the submission of nominations; − Date and place of next meetings:
 Plenary committee - Thursday and Friday (morning), 16-17 March 2023, Morocco - Second part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 24-28 April 2023, Strasbourg - Monday, 22 May 2023, Paris (Council of Europe Office) - Third part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 19-23 June 2023, Strasbourg - Tuesday, 19 September 2023, Paris (Council of Europe Office) - Fourth part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 9-13 October 2023, Strasbourg - Wednesday, 6 December 2023, Paris (Council of Europe Office) **** The Network of Contact Parliamentarians for a healthy environment, meeting in Strasbourg on Wednesday, 25 January 2023, with first Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE), oldest member present, and then Mr Rik Daems (Belgium, ALDE), re-elected Network Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: • • re-elected by acclamation Mr Rik Daems (Belgium, ALDE) Chairperson re-elected by acclamation Ms Edite Estrela (Portugal, SOC) Vice-Chairperson − The right to a healthy environment and local democracy: held an exchange of views with: ✓ Ms Maren Lambrecht, Secretary of the Current Affairs Committee, Council of Europe Congress of Local and Regional Authorities ✓ Ms Alina Tatarenko, Head of Division, Democratic Governance, DGII: Directorate General of Democracy and Human Dignity, Council of Europe − held an exchange of views on the plans for a meeting in Morocco on 17-18 March 2023 and the contribution of members to the preparation of the 4th Summit of the Council of Europe; − Date and place of the next meeting: Friday (afternoon) and Saturday, 17-18 March 2023, Marrakech and Ben Guerir, Morocco.
**** The Sub-Committee on the Europe Prize, meeting in Strasbourg on Thursday, 26 January 2023, with Ms Carmen Leyte (Spain, EPP/CD), oldest member present, then re-elected Sub-Committee Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: • • re-elected by acclamation Ms Carmen Leyte (Spain, EPP/CD) Chairperson re-elected by acclamation Mr Christian Petry (Germany, SOC) Vice-Chairperson 3 AS/Soc (2023) CB01 – was informed by the Chairperson on the applications for the 2023 Europe Prize, Plaque of Honour, Flag of Honour and European Diploma; – Date and place of the next meetings: - Second part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 24-28 April 2023, Strasbourg (date to be confirmed; to be held in camera) - Third part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 19-23 June 2023, Strasbourg (date to be confirmed) **** The Sub-Committee on the European Social Charter, meeting in Strasbourg on Thursday, 26 January 2023, with Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE), first as oldest member present, then as re-elected Sub- Committee Chairperson, in the Chair: re-elected by acclamation Mr Jean-Pierre Grin (Switzerland, ALDE) Chairperson • • elected by acclamation Ms Susana Sumelzo (Spain, SOC) Vice-Chairperson − The work of the Committee of Ministers’ ad hoc Working Party on Improving the European Social Charter System (GT-CHARTE): heard a statement by the Chairperson; – Date and place of the next meeting: Second part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 24-28 April 2023, Strasbourg (date to be confirmed).
**** The Sub-Committee on Public Health and Sustainable Development, meeting in Strasbourg on Thursday, 26 January 2023, with first Ms Carmen Leyte (Spain, EPP/CD), oldest member present, and then Ms Nigar Arpadarai (Azerbaijan, EC/DA), re-elected Sub-Committee Chairperson, in the Chair: re-elected by acclamation Ms Nigar Arpadarai (Azerbaijan, EC/DA) Chairperson • • postponed the election of the Vice-Chairperson to a future meeting - Tissues of human origin: held an exchange of views on the position statement of the European Committee on Organ Transplantation of the Council of Europe (CD-P-TO) on “Risk of commodification of substances of human origin”, with Ms Beatriz Domínguez-Gil, the National Transplant Organisation of Spain (Organización Nacional de Trasplantes – ONT), and approved a draft declaration on “Combating commodification of and trafficking in tissues of human origin” for transmission to the plenary Committee for adoption; – Date and place of the next meeting: Second part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 24-28 April 2023, Strasbourg (date to be confirmed).
**** The Sub-Committee on Children, meeting in Strasbourg on Thursday, 26 January 2023, with Ms Selin Sayek Böke (Türkiye, SOC), Committee Chairperson, in the Chair: • elected by acclamation Ms Sevinj Fataliyeva (Azerbaijan, EC/DA) Chairperson • postponed the election of the Vice-Chairperson to a future meeting − Date and place of the next meeting: Second part of the 2023 session of the Assembly, 24-28 April 2023, Strasbourg (date to be confirmed).
Tanja Kleinsorge, Aiste Ramanauskaite, Jannick Devaux, Anita Gholami, Guillaume Parent, Prisca Barthel _____________ cc: Secretary General of the Assembly Directors and all staff of the Secretariat of the Assembly Secretaries of National Delegations and of Political Groups of the Assembly Secretaries of observer and partner for democracy delegations Secretary General of the Congress Secretary to the Committee of Ministers Directors General Director of the Private Office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Director of the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights Director of Communication Permanent Representations to the Council of Europe 4 AS/Soc (2023) CB01 Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Commission des questions sociales, de la santé et du développement durable Sub-Committee on the Europe Prize Sous-commission du Prix de l’Europe List of members / Liste des membres (27 seats / 27 sièges) (26 January 2023) Chairperson / Président/e : Ms Carmen Leyte Spain / Espagne Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président(e) : Mr Christian Petry Germany / Allemagne Members / Membres Alternates / Remplaçant(e)s 1.
Mr 2.

Ms 3.

Ms Stefan Schennach Austria / Autriche Nigar Arpadarai Minna Reijonen Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Finland / Finlande 4.

Mme Mireille Clapot France 5.


Ms Eka Sepashvili Georgia / Géorgie Zz… Zz… Zz… Zz… Zz… Christian Petry Germany / Allemagne Ms Catarina dos Santos-Wintz Kyriakos Velopoulos Greece / Grèce Mr Theodora Tzakri Joseph O’Reilly Kęstutis Masiulis Ireland / Irlande Lithuania/ Lituanie Danuta Jazłowiecka Poland / Pologne Pedro Cegonho Portugal Zz… Zz… Zz… Zz… Cristian-Augustin Niculescu-Țâgârlaș Zz... 12.
Ms Diana Stoica Romania/Roumanie Mr Carmen Leyte Spain / Espagne Susana Sumelzo Spain / Espagne Zz... Pierre-Alain Fridez Switzerland / Suisse Ms Sibel Arslan 6.

Mr 7.

Mr 8.

Mr 9.

Mr 10 Ms 11.

Ms 13.

Ms 14.

Ms 15.

M. 16.

Mr 17.

Ms Türkiye Ukraine United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni Zz… Zz… Ms Ruth Jones Hişyar Özsoy Yuliia Ovchynnykova 18.

Mr David Morris 19.

Baroness Doreen Massey 20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.
Ex officio: Ms Selin Sayek Böke, Chairperson/Présidente, Türkiye 5 AS/Soc (2023) CB01 Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Commission des questions sociales, de la santé et du développement durable Sub-Committee on the European Social Charter Sous-commission sur la Charte sociale européenne List of members / Liste des membres (27 seats / 27 sièges) 24.01.2023 Chairperson / Président/e : M. Jean-Pierre Grin Switzerland / Suisse Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président(e) : Ms Susana Sumelzo Spain / Espagne Members / Membres Alternates / Remplaçant(e)s Mr Zz… Zz… Bob De Brabandere Zz… Zz… Mr Harald Weyel Ms Foteini Pipili Zz… Zz… Zz… Zz… Jamila Madeira Ms Ms Daniela Oteșanu Ms Belén Hoyo M. Pierre-Alain Fridez Zz… Zz… Pere López Sevinj Fataliyeva M. Ms Mme Latifa Gahouchi M. Mr Ms Ms Ms Ms M. Mr Mr Ms Ms M. Alain Milon Levan Ioseliani Catarina dos Santos-Wintz Nina Kasimati Réada Cronin Rasa Budbergytė Paul Galles Andrzej Szejna Nuno Carvalho Diana Stoica Susana Sumelzo Jean-Pierre Grin Mr Richard Bacon Ms Ruth Jones Andorra / Andorre Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Belgium / Belgique France Georgia / Géorgie Germany / Allemagne Greece / Grèce Ireland / Irlande Lithuania / Lituanie Luxembourg Poland / Pologne Portugal Romania / Roumanie Spain / Espagne Switzerland / Suisse United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni 1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.
27. ex officio: Ms Selin Sayek Böke (Chairperson / Présidente, Türkiye) 6 AS/Soc (2023) CB01 Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Commission des questions sociales, de la santé et du développement durable Sub-Committee on Public Health and Sustainable Development Sous-commission de la santé publique et du développement durable List of members / Liste des membres (27 seats / 27 sièges) 24.01.2023 Chairperson / Président/e : Ms Nigar Arpadarai Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président(e) : Zz… Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Members / Membres 1.
2.

Mr Ms Armen Gevorgyan Nigar Arpadarai M. Simon Moutquin 3.

Ms Minna Reijonen 4.

M. 5.

Mr 6.

Mr 7.

Ms 8.

9.

Mr 10.

Mr 11.

M. Alain Milon Levan Ioseliani Andrej Hunko Theodora Tzakri Joseph O’Reilly Edmunds Cepurītis Max Hengel 12.

Mr Miloš Konatar 13.

Mr 14.

Mr 15.

Mr 16.

Mr 17.

Ms 18.

Ms 19.

Ms 20.

Mr 21.

Ms Andrzej Szejna Bolesław Piecha Nuno Carvalho Andi-Lucian Cristea Carmen Leyte Susana Sumelzo Sibel Arslan Halil Özşavli Larysa Bilozir 22.

Mr Geraint Davies 23.

24.

25.

26.


27.
Alternates / Remplaçant(e)s Zz… Ms Konul Nurullayeva Ms Els Van Hoof Zz… Mme Nathalie Serre Zz… Martina Stamm-Fibich Foteini Pipili Zz… Zz… Zz… Germany / Allemagne Ms Ms Armenia / Arménie Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Belgium / Belgique Finland/ Finlande France Georgia / Géorgie Greece / Grèce Ireland /Irlande Latvia / Lettonie Luxembourg Montenegro / Monténégro Poland / Pologne Poland / Pologne Portugal Zz… Zz… Tomasz Latos Jamila Madeira Ion Prioteasa Belén Hoyo Zz… Mr Ms Romania / Roumanie M. Ms Spain / Espagne Spain / Espagne Switzerland / Suisse Mme Ada Marra Türkiye Ukraine United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni Zz… Zz… Zz… ex officio: Ms Selin Sayek Böke (Chairperson / Présidente, Türkiye) 7 AS/Soc (2023) CB01 Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Commission des questions sociales, de la santé et du développement durable Sub-Committee on Children Sous-commission sur les enfants List of members / Liste des membres (27 seats / 27 sièges) 24.01.2023 Chairperson / Président/e : Ms Sevinj Fataliyeva Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président(e) : Zz… Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Members / Membres Alternates / Remplaçant(e)s Armenia / Arménie Austria / Autriche Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Ms Zz… Zz… Parvin Karimzada Mme Latifa Gahouchi Zz… Mme Nathalie Serre Katrin Staffler Ms Kyriakos Velopoulos Mr Réada Cronin Ms Zz… Zz… Zz… Tomasz Latos Zz… Cristian-Augustin Niculescu-Țâgârlaș Zz… Mme Ada Marra Zz… Mr Mr Mr David Morris Mr 1.
Mr 2.

Ms 3.

Ms 4.

Ms 5.

Mme 6.

Ms 7.

Ms 8.

9.

Mr 10.

Mr 11.

Mr 12.

M. 13.

Ms 14.

Mr Armen Gevorgyan Stefan Schennach Sevinj Fataliyeva Els Van Hoof Tarja Filatov Isabelle Santiago Martina Stamm-Fibich Nina Kasimati Joseph O’Reilly Andris Bērziņš Kęstutis Masiulis Max Hengel Marta Kubiak Pedro Cegonho Belgium / Belgique Finland / Finlande France Germany / Allemagne Greece / Grèce Ireland / Irlande Latvia / Lettonie Lithuania / Lituanie Luxembourg Poland / Pologne Portugal 15.
Ms Alina-Ștefania Gorghiu Romania / Roumanie 16.

Ms 17.

M. 18.

Ms Carmen Leyte Jean-Pierre Grin Emine Nur Günay 19.

Baroness Doreen E. Massey Spain / Espagne Switzerland / Suisse Türkiye United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni 20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.
27. ex officio: Ms Selin Sayek Böke (Chairperson / Présidente, Türkiye) 8 Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Commission des questions sociales, de la santé et du développement durable Network of Contact Parliamentarians for a healthy environment / Réseau de Parlementaires de référence pour un environnement sain AS/Soc (2023) CB01 List of members / Liste des membres 55 membres / members 32 Parlements / Parliaments 27.01.2023 MEMBER STATES / ÉTATS MEMBRES Albania / Albanie Andorra / Andorre Armenia / Arménie Austria / Autriche Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan Belgium / Belgique Bosnia and Herzegovina / Bosnie-Herzégovine Bulgaria / Bulgarie Croatia / Croatie Cyprus / Chypre Czech Republic / République tchèque Denmark / Danemark Estonia / Estonie Finland / Finlande France Georgia / Géorgie Germany / Allemagne Greece / Grèce Hungary / Hongrie Iceland / Islande Ireland / Irlande Italy / Italie Latvia / Lettonie Liechtenstein Lithuania / Lituanie Luxembourg Malta / Malte Republic of Moldova / République de Moldova Monaco Montenegro / Monténégro Netherlands / Pays-Bas North Macedonia / Macédoine du Nord Norway / Norvège Armen Gevorgyan Stefan Schennach Michel Reimon Sevinj Fataliyeva Rik Daems Mr/M.
Mr/M.

Mr/M.

Ms/Mme Mr/M.

Ms/Mme Marina Pendeš Mr/M.

Saša Magazinović Ms/Mme Zdravka Bušić Urmas Reitelmann Mr/M.

Ms/Mme Minna Reijonen Ms/Mme Liliana Tanguy Ms/Mme Mr/M.

Franziska Kersten George Papandreou Mr/M.

Bjarni Jónsson Mr/M.

Thomas Pringle Ms/Mme Róisín Garvey Ms/Mme Maria Rizzotti Mr/M.

Mr/M.

Mr/M.

Peter Frick Arminas Lydeka Paul Galles José Badia Miloš Konatar Mr/M.

Mr/M.
Mr/M.

Ms/Mme Margreet De Boer Ms/Mme Agnes Mulder Ms/Mme Linda Hofstad Helleland 9 EC/DA SOC SOC EC/DA ALDE EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD EC/DA EC/DA ALDE SOC SOC UEL UEL SOC EPP/CD ALDE ALDE EPP/CD EPP/CD SOC SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD AS/Soc (2023) CB01 Poland / Pologne Portugal Romania / Roumanie San Marino / Saint-Marin Serbia / Serbie Slovak Republic / République slovaque Slovenia / Slovénie Spain / Espagne Sweden / Suède Switzerland / Suisse Ms/Mme Marta Kubiak Ms/Mme Mr/M.
Ms/Mme Maria Gabriela Horga Ms/Mme Alina Stefania Gorghiu Danuta Jazłowiecka Pedro Cegonho Mr/M.

Dean Premik Türkiye Ukraine United Kingdom / Royaume-Uni Baroness Doreen E. Massey Mr/M.

Mr/M.

Ms/Mme Ms/Mme Jean-Pierre Grin Olivier Français Emine Nur Günay Yuliia Ovchynnykova Canada Israel / Israël Mexico / Mexique OBSERVERS / OBSERVATEURS Mr/M.

Yorai Lahav Hertzanu PARTNERS FOR DEMOCRACY / PARTENAIRES POUR LA DÉMOCRATIE Jordan / Jordanie Kyrgyzstan / Kirghizstan Morocco / Maroc Palestine Mr/M.
Allal Amraoui PRESIDENT OF THE ASSEMBLY / PRÉSIDENT·E DE L’ASSEMBLÉE EX-OFFICIO MEMBER / MEMBRE D’OFFICE Mr/M.

Tiny Kox PRESIDENTS OF POLITICAL GROUPS / PRÉSIDENT(E)S DES GROUPES POLITIQUES EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS / MEMBRES D’OFFICE Mr/M.

Mr/M.

Mr/M.

Mr/M.

Mr/M.


Frank Schwabe Aleksander Pociej Ian Liddell-Grainger Iulian Bulai George Katrougalos PACE COMMITTEES CONCERNED / COMMISSIONS DE L’APCE CONCERNÉES Political Affairs / Questions politiques Legal Affairs / Questions juridiques Migration / Migrations Equality / Égalité Culture Mr/M.

Simon Moutquin Mr/M.

Ziya Altunyaldiz Mr/M.
Ms/Mme Ms/Mme Pierre-Alain Fridez Edite Estrela Inka Hopsu 10 EC/DA EPP/CD SOC EPP/CD EPP/CD ALDE ALDE ALDE NR ALDE SOC UEL SOC EPP/CD EC/DA ALDE UEL SOC NR SOC SOC SOC AS/Soc (2023) CB01 SOC EPP/CD EC/DA SOC BUREAU OF THE COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AFFAIRS / BUREAU DE LA COMMISSION DES QUESTIONS SOCIALES EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS / MEMBRES D’OFFICE Chairperson / présidente First Vice-Chairperson / premier vice-président Second Vice-Chairperson / deuxième vice-présidente Third Vice-Chairperson / troisième vice-présidente Ms/Mme Selin Sayek Böke Mr/M.
Alain Milon Ms/Mme Olena Khomenko Ms/Mme Sibel Arslan CONGRESS OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL AUTHORITIES / CONGRES DES POUVOIRS LOCAUX ET REGIONAUX Thematic Spokesperson on Environment and Climate Change/ Porte-Parole thematique sur l'environnement et le changement climatique Mr/M.
Cemal Bas PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF THE FRANCOPHONIE / ASSEMBLÉE PARLEMENTAIRE DE LA FRANCOPHONIE INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION / UNION INTERPARLEMENTAIRE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT / PARLEMENT EUROPEEN Ms/Mme Marie-Pierre Vedrenne (France, Renew Europe) 11 SECRETARIAT AS/Mig (2023) CB 01 30 January 2023 To the members of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons Synopsis of the meetings held in Strasbourg on 24 and 26 January 2023 The Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons, meeting in Strasbourg, on 24 and 26 January 2023: • on Tuesday 24 January 2023, from 2.00 to 3.30 pm, with first Lord Leslie Griffiths (United Kingdom, SOC), oldest member present, and then Mr Theodoros Rousopoulos (Greece, EPP/CD), Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: – Election of the Bureau of the Committee: re-elected by acclamation: • Mr Theodoros Rousopoulos (Greece, EPP/CD), Chairperson, • Mr Paul Gavan (Ireland, UEL), 1st Vice-Chairperson, • Mr Oleksii Goncharenko (Ukraine, EC/DA), 2nd Vice-Chairperson, • Mr Domagoj Hajduković (Croatia, SOC), 3rd Vice-Chairperson; – Reconstitution and composition of the Sub-Committees: reconstituted its three sub-committees and approved their composition (see Appendix): • Sub-Committee on Diasporas and Integration, • Sub-Committee on Refugee and Migrant Children and Young People, • Sub-Committee on Migrant Smuggling and Trafficking in Human Beings; – – – Integration of migrants and refugees: benefits for all parties involved (Rapporteur: Mr Domagoj Hajduković, Croatia, SOC): heard a statement by the rapporteur on his fact-finding visit to Norway on 10 and 11 November 2022; considered a preliminary draft report; Addressing the specific challenges faced by the Belarusians in exile (Rapporteur: Mr Paul Galles, Luxembourg, EPP/CD): considered a draft outline; held an exchange of views with the participation of Ms Kristina Rikhter, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya's Advisor on legal affairs and Mr Vałdzis Fuhaš, from the human rights organization "Human Constanta"; authorised the rapporteur
 to carry out a fact-finding visit to Poland and Lithuania, in the framework of the preparation of his report (subject to the availability of funds); Request to be seized for opinion: decided to ask the Bureau of the Assembly to refer to it for opinion the report on “Health and social protection of undocumented workers” (Rapporteur for report of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development: Ms Ada Marra, Switzerland, SOC); • on Thursday 26 January 2023, from 8.30 to 10 am, with Mr Theodoros Rousopoulos (Greece, EPP/CD), Chairperson, in the Chair, as regards: F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | asmig@coe.int | Tel: +33 3 88 41 2000 AS/Mig (2023) CB 01 – – – The situation of Ukrainian persons forcefully displaced or transferred to the Russian Federation or Ukrainian territories under the de facto control of the Russian Federation (Rapporteur: Mr Paulo Pisco, Portugal, SOC): held an exchange of views with the participation of Ms Oleksandra Matviichuk, Director, Centre for Civil Liberties, Ukraine / Nobel Peace Prize 2022; European solidarity in the context of asylum and international protection (Rapporteur: Lord Alexander Dundee, United Kingdom, EC/DA): considered a revised draft report and adopted unanimously a draft resolution and a draft recommendation; The theme of migration and asylum in the election campaign and the consequences on the welcoming and rights of migrants (Rapporteur: Mr Pierre-Alain Fridez, Switzerland, SOC): held an exchange of views with the participation of Mr Mats Lindberg, Directorate General of Democracy and Human Dignity, European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI); took note of the Charter of European political parties for a non-racist and inclusive society [AS/Ega/Inf (2022) 28]; – Work programme: • Call for candidates: called for candidates for reports on: - - Immigration, one of the answers to Europe's demographic aging [Doc.
15629]: took note of the candidature of Mr Pierre-Alain Fridez (Switzerland, SOC); Ensuring human rights compliant asylum procedures [Doc.15601]: took note of the candidatures of Mr Fourat Ben Chikha (Belgium, SOC) and Mr Jeremy Corbyn (United Kingdom, SOC); • References for consultation: - Transfer and resettlement of asylum seekers [Doc.
15571]: agreed that this motion for a resolution be taken into account in the preparation of the report on “Ensuring human rights compliant asylum procedures”; • References to be taken into account in the preparation of other reports: - Protecting human rights and saving lives in the North Sea and the English Channel [Doc.
15630] : agreed that the above reference be taken into account in the preparation of the report on “Missing migrants, refugees and asylum seekers – a call to clarify their fate” (Rapporteur: Mr Julian Pahlke, Germany, SOC) and in the follow-up to Resolution 2462 (2022) on “Pushbacks on land and sea: illegal measures of migration management”, as proposed by the Bureau; • References for information: - The right to movement: addressing the challenges faced by Turkish citizens and other non-EU citizens in visa applications to Schengen Area States [Doc.
15560]: took note of the reference sent to the committee for information by the Bureau; - Legal aspects of preventing the use of explosive weapons in populated areas and explosive contamination [Doc.
15583]: took note of the reference sent to the committee for information by the Bureau; – Other business: • Call for nominations for the 2022 Václav Havel Human Rights Prize: took note of the call for nominations; • Mr Jeremy Corbyn (United Kingdom, SOC) reported on a recent visit in Calais in his capacity as a British member of Parliament and expressed deep concerns at the human rights situation of migrants and refugees in Calais and across the Channel in United Kingdom; – Next meetings: took note of its next meetings as follows: • Paris, 15 March 2023 (Council of Europe Office); 2 AS/Mig (2023) CB 01 • Strasbourg, during the second part-session 2023 of the Assembly (24-28 April); • Paris, 11 May 2023 (Council of Europe Office); • Strasbourg, during the third part-session 2023 of the Assembly (19-23 June); • 21 September 2023 (place tbc); • Strasbourg, during the fourth part-session 2023 of the Assembly (9-13 October); • Paris, 8 December 2023 (Council of Europe Office).
*** The Sub-Committee on Diasporas and Integration, meeting in Strasbourg on 26 January 2023, from 2.00 to 2.20 pm, with Mr Theodoros Rousopoulos (Greece, EPP/CD), Committee Chairperson, exceptionally in the Chair, as regards: - Election of the Sub-Committee's bureau: re-elected by acclamation Mr Paulo Pisco (Portugal, SOC) as Chairperson; postponed the election of the Vice-Chairperson to the next meeting, in the absence of candidates; - Next meeting: left it to its Chairperson to convoke its next meeting.
*** The Sub-Committee on Refugee and Migrant Children and Young People, meeting in Strasbourg on 26 January 2023, from 2.20 to 2.40 pm, with Mr Theodoros Rousopoulos (Greece, EPP/CD), Committee Chairperson, exceptionally in the Chair, as regards: - Election of the Sub-Committee's bureau: re-elected by acclamation Mr Ionuț-Marian Stroe (Romania, EPP/CD) as Chairperson; postponed the election of the Vice-Chairperson to the next meeting in the absence of candidates; - Next meeting: left it to its Chairperson to convoke its next meeting.
*** The Sub-Committee on Migrant Smuggling and Trafficking in Human Beings, meeting in Strasbourg on 26 January 2023, from 2.40 to 3.00 pm, with Mr Theodoros Rousopoulos (Greece, EPP/CD), Committee Chairperson, exceptionally in the Chair, as regards: - Election of the Sub-Committee's bureau: re-elected by acclamation Ms Diana Stoica (Romania, ALDE) as Chairperson and Lord Simon Russell (United Kingdom, EC/DA) as Vice-Chairperson; - Next meeting: left it to its Chairperson to convoke its next meeting.
Tatiana Termacic, Angela Garabagiu, Marie Martin _____________ cc: Secretary General of the Assembly Directors and all staff of the Secretariat of the Assembly Secretaries of National Delegations and of Political Groups of the Assembly Secretaries of observer and partner for democracy delegations Secretary General of the Congress Secretary to the Committee of Ministers Directors General Director of the Private Office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Director of the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights Director of Communication Permanent Representations to the Council of Europe 3 AS/Mig (2023) CB 01 APPENDIX / ANNEXE Composition of the Sub-Committees / Composition des sous-commissions1 Sub-Committee on Refugee and Migrant Children and Young People / Sous-commission sur les enfants et les jeunes réfugiés et migrants 27 seats / sièges Chairperson / Président: Mr Ionuț-Marian STROE (Romania, EPP/CD) Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président.e : … COUNTRY / PAYS MEMBER / MEMBRE ALTERNATE / REMPLAÇANT.E 1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.


ARMENIA / ARMÉNIE Ms Arusyak JULHAKYAN (EPP/CD) AZERBAIJAN / AZERBAÏDJAN Mr Tural GANJALIYEV (EC/DA) BELGIUM / BELGIQUE Mr Tom Van GRIEKEN (EC/DA) Ms Sophie WILMES (ALDE) DENMARK / DANEMARK Ms Sascha FAXE (SOC) FRANCE Mr Jacques LE NAY (ALDE) Ms Sylvie GOY-CHAVENT (EPP/CD) GEORGIA / GÉORGIE Ms Khatia TSILOSANI (SOC) GERMANY / ALLEMAGNE Ms Catarina dos SANTOS-WINTZ (EPP/CD) Ms Katja LEIKERT (EPP/CD) GREECE / GRÈCE Ms Garyfallia (Liana) KANELLI (UEL) Mr Kriton-Ilias ARSENIS (UEL) 9.
IRELAND / IRLANDE Mr Paul GAVAN (UEL) Mr Thomas PRINGLE (UEL) 10.

LUXEMBOURG Mr Paul GALLES (EPP/CD) 11.

POLAND / POLOGNE Mr Krzysztof TRUSKOLASKI (EPP/CD) Ms Marta KUBIAK (EC/DA) 12.

PORTUGAL Mr Paulo PISCO (SOC) 13.

ROMANIA / ROUMANIE Mr Ionuț-Marian STROE (EPP/CD) Ms Denisa-Elena NEAGU (ALDE) 14.

SPAIN / ESPAGNE 15.

SPAIN / ESPAGNE Mr Gonzalo ROBLES (EPP/CD) Ms Nerea AHEDO (ALDE) 16.

SWITZERLAND / SUISSE Mr Damien COTTIER (ALDE) Ms Ada MARRA (SOC) 17.

TÜRKIYE 18.

TÜRKIYE 19.

UKRAINE 20.


UNITED KINGDOM / ROYAUME-UNI Ms Serap YAŞAR (NR) Mr Yıldırım Tuğrul TÜRKEŞ (NR) Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO (EC/DA) Baroness Doreen E. MASSEY (SOC) Lord Leslie GRIFFITHS (SOC) 21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

Ex-officio: Mr Theodoros ROUSOPOULOS, Greece, EPP/CD, Chairperson of the Committee / Président de la commission 1 Further to the election by each sub-committee of its Bureau.
4 AS/Mig (2023) CB 01 Sub-Committee on Diasporas and Integration / Sous-commission sur les diasporas et l’intégration 27 seats / sièges Chairperson / Président: Mr Paulo PISCO (Portugal, SOC) Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président.e: … COUNTRY / PAYS MEMBER / MEMBRE ALTERNATE/ REMPLAÇANT.E 1.

ARMENIA/ARMÉNIE Mr Hayk MAMIJANYAN (EPP/CD) 2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.


AUSTRIA / AUTRICHE Mr Eduard KÖCK (EPP/CD) AZERBAIJAN / AZERBAÏDJAN Ms Nigar ARPADARAI (EC/DA) Mr Kamal JAFAROV (EC/DA) BELGIUM / BELGIQUE Ms Darya SAFAI (NR) Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA (SOC) CROATIA / CROATIE Mr Domagoj HAJDUKOVIĆ (SOC) DENMARK / DANEMARK Mr Alexander RYLE (ALDE) GEORGIA / GÉORGIE Mr Akaki MINASHVILI (EPP/CD) GERMANY / ALLEMAGNE Mr Konstantin KUHLE (ALDE) Mr Fabian FUNKE (SOC) GREECE / GRÈCE Ms Theodora TZAKRI (UEL) Mr Kriton-Ilias ARSENIS (UEL) 10.
IRELAND / IRLANDE Mr Thomas PRINGLE (UEL) 11.

LITHUANIA / LITUANIE Mr Lukas SAVICKAS (SOC) 12.

LITHUANIA / LITUANIE Ms Rita TAMAŠUNIENĖ (EC/DA) 13.

LUXEMBOURG Mr Paul GALLES (EPP/CD) 14.

NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS Ms Margreet DE BOER (SOC) 15.

NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS Mr Ruben BREKELMANS (ALDE) 16.

POLAND / POLOGNE Mr Jacek PROTASIEWICZ (EPP/CD) 17.

PORTUGAL Mr Paulo PISCO (SOC) 18.

ROMANIA / ROUMANIE Ms Daniela OTEȘANU (SOC) Ms Diana STOICA (ALDE) 19.
SPAIN / ESPAGNE Mr Antonio GUTIÉRREZ LIMONES (SOC) 20.

SWITZERLAND / SUISSE Mr Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ (SOC) Mr Damien COTTIER (ALDE) 21.

SWITZERLAND / SUISSE 22.

TÜRKIYE Mr Alfred HEER (ALDE) Mr Yıldırım Tuğrul TÜRKEŞ (NR) 23.

TÜRKIYE 24.

UKRAINE 25.

UKRAINE 26.

UNITED KINGDOM / ROYAUME-UNI 27.
Ms Arzu ERDEM (NR) Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO (EC/DA) Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA (EPP/CD) Lord Leslie GRIFFITHS (SOC) Ms Kate OSAMOR (SOC) Ex-officio: Mr Theodoros ROUSOPOULOS, Greece, EPP/CD, Chairperson of the Committee / Président de la commission 5 AS/Mig (2023) CB 01 Sub-Committee on Migrant Smuggling and Trafficking in Human Beings / Sous-commission sur le trafic de migrants et la traite des êtres humains 27 seats / sièges Chairperson / Présidente : Ms Diana STOICA (Romania, ALDE) Vice-Chairperson / Vice-Président : Lord Simon RUSSELL (United Kingdom, EC/DA) COUNTRY / PAYS MEMBER / MEMBRE ALTERNATE / REMPLAÇANT.E 1.
ANDORRA / ANDORRE Ms Mònica BONELL (ALDE) 2.

ARMENIA / ARMÉNIE Mr Hayk MAMIJANYAN (EPP/CD) 3.

AUSTRIA / AUTRICHE Mr Eduard KÖCK (EPP/CD) 4.

AUSTRIA / AUTRICHE Ms Stephanie KRISPER (ALDE) 5.

AZERBAIJAN / AZERBAÏDJAN Mr Kamal JAFAROV (EC/DA) 6.

BELGIUM / BELGIQUE Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA (SOC) Ms Sophie WILMES (ALDE) 7.

CROATIA / CROATIE Mr Domagoj HAJDUKOVIĆ (SOC) 8.

CYPRUS / CHYPRE Ms Christiana EROTOKRITOU (SOC) 9.

DENMARK / DANEMARK Ms Sascha FAXE (SOC) 10.

FRANCE 11.
FRANCE 11.

FRANCE Ms Nicole DURANTON (ALDE) Mr Jacques LE NAY (ALDE) Mr Thibaut FRANÇOIS (EC/DA) 12.

GERMANY / ALLEMAGNE Mr Julian PAHLKE (SOC) Mr Christoph HOFFMANN (ALDE) 13.

GREECE / GRÈCE Ms Theodora TZAKRI (UEL) Ms Garyfallia (Liana) KANELLI (UEL) 14.

IRELAND / IRLANDE Mr Paul GAVAN (UEL) 15.

NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS Ms Margreet DE BOER (SOC) 16.

NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS Mr Ruben BREKELMANS (ALDE) 17.

POLAND / POLOGNE Mr Krzysztof TRUSKOLASKI (EPP/CD) 18.
ROMANIA / ROUMANIE Ms Diana STOICA (ALDE) Mr Ioan MANG (SOC) 19.

SPAIN / ESPAGNE Ms Nerea AHEDO (ALDE) 20.

SPAIN / ESPAGNE Mr Gonzalo ROBLES (EPP/CD) 21.

SWITZERLAND / SUISSE Ms Ada MARRA (SOC) Mr Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ (SOC) 22.

TÜRKIYE Mr Ahmet BÜYÜKGÜMÜŞ (NR) 23.

UNITED KINGDOM / ROYAUME-UNI Mr Jeremy CORBYN (SOC) Ms Kate OSAMOR (SOC) 24.

UNITED KINGDOM / ROYAUME-UNI Lord Simon RUSSELL (EC/DA) 25.

26.

27.
Ex-officio: Mr Theodoros ROUSOPOULOS, Greece, EPP/CD, Chairperson of the Committee / Président de la commission 6 First part-session of the Assembly 2023 – public meetings and side events, Monday to Thursday, 1 to 2 p.m Première partie de session de l’Assemblée 2023 – réunions et événements publics organisés du lundi au jeudi, de 13 h à 14 h 19/01/2023 09:49 Unofficial events sponsored by Assembly members / Evénements non officiels parrainés par des membres de l’Assemblée1 Date Room Salle Title/ Titre Member responsible for the event – organiser Membre responsable de l’événement – organisateur(trice) Monday 23 January Lundi 23 janvier NEW 1.15 pm to 2.15 pm Political rights in full democracies: the Catalan case 2 Les droits politiques dans de véritables démocraties : le cas catalan Ms Laura Castel (Spain, UEL) (Espagne, GUE) Monday 23 January Lundi 23 janvier 3 The follow-up to the issue of political prisoners in Azerbaijan: 10 years after the rejection of Strässer’s report NEW 1.15 pm to 2.15 pm Le suivi de la question des prisonniers politiques en Azerbaïdjan 10 ans après le rejet du rapport Strässer Tuesday 24 January Mardi 24 janvier 3 National Security Journalists, Whistleblowers and Human Rights Defenders: Political persecution of those who advocate for transparency?
Journalistes de la sécurité nationale, lanceurs d'alerte et défenseurs des droits de l'homme : Persécution politique de ceux qui prônent la transparence ?
Mr Franck Schwabe (Germany, SOC) (Allemagne, SOC) Chairperson of SOC Group Président du Groupe SOC Mr Pieter Omtzigt (Netherlands, EPP/CD) (Pays-Bas, PPE/DC) Friedrich-Ebert Foundation Fondation Friedrich-Ebert Mr Andrej Hunko (Germany, UEL) (Allemagne, GUE) Jus Cogens – Law Firm / Cabinet juridique 1 These meetings are not organised by the Parliamentary Assembly or its bodies.
They remain under the full responsibility of the PACE members sponsoring the meeting / Ces réunions ne sont pas organisées par l’Assemblée parlementaire ni par ses entités.

Elles restent sous l’entière responsabilité des membres de l’APCE qui les parrainent.
Date Room Salle Title/ Titre Member responsible for the event – organiser Membre responsable de l’événement – organisateur(trice) Tuesday 24 January Mardi 24 janvier 5 The special tribunal on the crime of aggression of Russia as a component of the peace formula in Ukraine: the role of the Council of Europe Ms Mariia Mezentseva (Ukraine, EPP/CD – PPE/DC) Le tribunal spécial pour le crime d'agression de la Russie en tant qu'élément de la formule de paix en Ukraine : le rôle du Conseil de l'Europe Ms Olena Khomenko (Ukraine, EC/DA – CE/AD) MsLesia Zaburanna (Ukraine, ALDE – ADLE) NGO “Tribunal” / ONG “Tribunal” Wednesday 25 January Mercredi 25 janvier 3 Resilience to Disinformation: Lublin Triangle perspective Résilience face à la désinformation : perspectives du Triangle de Lublin Mr Emanuelis Zingeris (Lithuania, EPP/CD) (Lettonie, PPE/DC) Chairperson of the Lithuanian delegation Président de la délégation de la Lettonie Thursday 26 January Jeudi 26 janvier 3 Misuse of the Anti-Money Laundering Measures (AML) and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) regulations as a tool of transnational repression Abus des mesures de lutte contre le blanchiment d’argent et le financement du terrorisme en tant qu’outil de répression transnationale Mr Constantinos Efstathiou (Cyprus, SOC) (Chypre, SOC) Open Dialogue Foundation Fondation Open Dialogue Date Room Salle Title/ Titre Member responsible for the event – organiser Membre responsable de l’événement – organisateur(trice) Thursday 26 January Jeudi 26 janvier 5 Humanitarian Demining : paving the way towards peace and sustainable development Mr Samad Seyidov (Azerbaijan, EC/DA) (Azerbaïdjan, CE/AD) Déminage humanitaire – ouvrir la voie à la paix et au développement durable Speakers / Intervenants : 1) Mr Samad Seyidov Chairperson of the parliamentary delegation of Azerbaijan / Président de la délégation parlementaire d’Azerbaïdjan 2) Mr Samir Poladov – Deputy Chairman of the Board, Mine Action Agency of the Republic of Azerbaijan / Vice-Président du Conseil d’administration de l’Agence de lutte anti-mines de la République d’Azerbaïdjan 3) Mr Sultan Hajiyev – Deputy Head of the Secretariat of the Coordination Center for Reconstruction and Rehabilitation of the Republic of Azerbaijan / Chef adjoint du Secrétariat du Centre de coordination pour la reconstruction et la réhabilitation of the Chairperson delegation of Azerbaijan Président de la délégation parlementaire d’Azerbaïdjan parliamentary Doc.
15687 23 January 2023 Examination of credentials of representatives and substitutes Report on credentials In accordance with Rule 6, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Rules of Procedure, the President of the 1.

Assembly has received the credentials of representatives and substitutes for the 2023 Ordinary Session of the Assembly, which have been transmitted in due form by the competent authorities of member States.
The Assembly is called upon to express its decision on the validation of the credentials of the 2. representatives and substitutes whose names are given in this report.

Five seats of representative and five seats of substitute remain vacant for Bosnia and Herzegovina 3.

(until the credentials are transmitted following the parliamentary elections of 2 October 2022).

4.

5.

One seat of representative and one seat of substitute remain vacant for Cyprus.
One seat of representative and three seats of substitute remain vacant for the Slovak Republic.

In the case of reasoned objection or contestation, the contested credentials shall be referred without 6. debate to the appropriate committee which shall report back to the Assembly, in accordance with Rules 7 and 8 of the Rules of Procedure.
Members Albania Representatives Mr Lulzim BASHA (Democratic Party) Ms Klotilda BUSHKA (Socialist Party) Ms Etilda GJONAJ (Socialist Party) Ms Blerina GJYLAMETI (Socialist Party) Substitutes Ms Aurora MARA (Socialist Party) Mr Eduard SHALSI (Socialist Party) Ms Jorida TABAKU (Democratic Party) Mr Ferdinand XHAFERI (Democratic Party) Andorra Representatives Mme Mònica BONELL (Groupe Démocrate) M. Pere LÓPEZ (Groupe Social Démocrate) https://pace.coe.int https://pace.coe.int Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Substitutes Ms Eva LÓPEZ (Groupe Indépendant) Mr Carles NAUDI (Groupe Ciutadans Compromesos) Armenia Representatives Mr Armen GEVORGYAN (Armenia) Ms Arusyak JULHAKYAN (Civil Contract) Mr Ruben RUBINYAN (Civil Contract) Mr Vladimir VARDANYAN (Civil Contract) Substitutes Ms Sona GHAZARYAN (Civil Contract) Ms Hripsime GRIGORYAN (Civil Contract) Mr Hayk MAMIJANYAN (With Honor) M. Armen RUSTAMYAN (Armenia) Austria Representatives Ms Doris BURES (SPÖ) Mr Franz Leonhard ESSL (ÖVP) Mr Martin GRAF (FPÖ) Ms Carmen JEITLER-CINCELLI (ÖVP) Mr Reinhold LOPATKA (ÖVP) Mr Michel REIMON (GRÜNE) Substitutes Ms Petra BAYR (SPÖ) Ms Andrea EDER-GITSCHTHALER (ÖVP) Mr Axel KASSEGGER (FPÖ) Mr Eduard KÖCK (ÖVP) Ms Stephanie KRISPER (NEOS) Mr Stefan SCHENNACH (SPÖ) Azerbaijan Representatives Ms Nigar ARPADARAI (Independent) M. Sabir HAJIYEV (Civil Unity Party) Mr Rafael HUSEYNOV (Civil Solidarity Party) Mr Kamal JAFAROV (New Azerbaijan Party) Ms Konul NURULLAYEVA (Independent) Mr Samad SEYIDOV (New Azerbaijan Party) Substitutes Ms Sevinj FATALIYEVA (New Azerbaijan Party) Mr Erkin GADIRLI (REAL Party) Mr Tural GANJALIYEV (Independent) Ms Parvin KARIMZADA (New Azerbaijan Party) Mr Asim MOLLAZADA (Azerbaijan Democratic Reforms Party) M. Fazil MUSTAFA (Great Creation Party) 2 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Belgium Representatives Mr Bob De BRABANDERE (Vlaams Belang) Ms Karin BROUWERS (CD&V) Mr Tom van GRIEKEN (Vlaams Belang) Mr Andries GRYFFROY (N-VA) M. Christophe LACROIX (PS) Ms Darya SAFAI (N-VA) Mme Sophie WILMES (MR) Substitutes Mr Fourat BEN CHIKHA (Ecolo-Groen) M. Georges-Louis BOUCHEZ (MR) Mr Rik DAEMS (Open VLD) Mme Latifa GAHOUCHI (PS) Ms Els van HOOF (CD&V) M. Simon MOUTQUIN (Ecolo-Groen) Ms Kristien Van VAERENBERGH (N-VA) Bosnia and Herzegovina Representatives ZZ... ZZ... ZZ... ZZ... ZZ...
Substitutes ZZ... ZZ... ZZ... ZZ... ZZ... Bulgaria Representatives Mr Gueorg GUEORGUIEV (GERB-UDF) Mr Hamid HAMID (Movement for Rights and Freedoms) Ms Nadejda IORDANOVA (Democratic Bulgaria – Union) Mr Ivan IVANOV (BSP for Bulgaria) Mr Daniel LORER (We Continue the Change) Ms Denitsa SACHEVA (GERB-UDF) Substitutes Mr Stanislav ANASTASSOV (Movement for Rights and Freedoms) Mr Kostadin ANGELOV (GERB-UDF) Mr Ilian IONTCHEV (BSP for Bulgaria) Ms Iskra MIHAYLOVA (Revival) Ms Liliya NEDEVA (Bulgarian Rise) Mr Vasil PANDOV (We Continue the Change) 3 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Croatia Representatives Ms Marijana BALIĆ (Croatian Democratic Union) Ms Zdravka BUŠIĆ (Croatian Democratic Union) Ms Sabina GLASOVAC (Social Democratic Party) Mr Domagoj HAJDUKOVIĆ (Independent) Mr Davor Ivo STIER (Croatian Democratic Union) Substitutes Mr Stephen Nikola BARTULICA (Homeland Movement) Mr Mato FRANKOVIĆ (Croatian Democratic Union) Ms Ivana KEKIN (New Left) Ms Marijana PETIR (Independent) Mr Nino RASPUDIĆ (Bridge of the Independent Lists) Cyprus Representatives Ms Christiana EROTOKRITOU (DIKO – Democratic Party) Mr George LOUCAIDES (AKEL – Left-New Forces) ZZ...
Substitutes Mr Constantinos EFSTATHIOU (EDEK – Movement of Social Democrats) Mr Nicos TORNARITIS (DISY – Democratic Rally Party) ZZ... Czech Republic Representatives Mr Ondřej BENEŠIK (Christian and Democratic Union – Czechoslovak People's Party) Mr Jaroslav BŽOCH (ANO 2011) Ms Eva DECROIX (Civic Democratic Party) Ms Klára DOSTÁLOVÁ (ANO 2011) Mr Jan LACINA (Mayors and Independents) Ms Miroslava NĚMCOVÁ (Civic Democratic Party) Mr David SMOLJAK (Mayors and Independents) Substitutes Mr Aleš JUCHELKA (ANO 2011) Mr Ondřej KOLÁŘ (TOP09) Ms Michaela ŠEBELOVÁ (Mayors and Independents) Ms Jitka SEITLOVÁ (Christian and Democratic Union – Czechoslovak People's Party) Mr Ondřej ŠIMETKA (Civic Democratic Party) Mr Pavel STANĚK (Civic Democratic Party) Mr Jiří STRÝČEK (ANO 2011) Denmark Representatives Ms Camilla FABRICIUS (Social Democratic Party) Ms Sascha FAXE (The Alternative) Mr Michael Aastrup JENSEN (The Liberal Party) 4 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Mr Mogens JENSEN (Social Democratic Party) Mr Alexander RYLE (Liberal Alliance) Substitutes Ms Karin LILTORP (The Moderates) Ms Charlotte MUNCH (The Denmark Democrats) Ms Mette REISSMANN (Social Democratic Party) Mr Søren SØNDERGAARD (Red-Green Alliance) Mr Kim VALENTIN (The Liberal Party) Estonia Representatives Ms Maria JUFEREVA-SKURATOVSKI (Estonian Centre Party) Mr Eerik-Niiles KROSS (Estonian Reform Party) Mr Indrek SAAR (Social Democratic Party) Substitutes Mr Heiki HEPNER (Isamaa Party) Mr Urmas REITELMANN (Conservative People's Party of Estonia) Ms Vilja TOOMAST (Estonian Reform Party) Finland Representatives Ms Tarja FILATOV (Social Democrats) Ms Hilkka KEMPPI (Centre Party) Mr Kimmo KILJUNEN (Social Democrats) Ms Minna REIJONEN (The Finns Party) Ms Anne-Mari VIROLAINEN (National Coalition Party) Substitutes Ms Inka HOPSU (The Greens) Mr Mikko KINNUNEN (Centre Party) Ms Mai KIVELÄ (Left Alliance) Mr Mika NIIKKO (The Finns Party) Ms Elina VALTONEN (National Coalition Party) France Representatives M. Bertrand BOUYX (Renaissance) M. François CALVET (Les Républicains) Mme Marie-Christine DALLOZ (Les Républicains) Mme Nicole DURANTON (Rassemblement des démocrates progressistes et indépendants) M. Bernard FOURNIER (Les Républicains) M. Thibaut FRANÇOIS (Rassemblement national) M. Joël GIRAUD (Renaissance) Mme Marietta KARAMANLI (Socialistes et apparentés) M. Claude KERN (Union centriste) Mme Stéphanie KOCHERT (Horizons et apparentés) Mme Hélène LAPORTE (Rassemblement National) M. Frédéric MATHIEU (La France insoumise) M. Alain MILON (Les Républicains) Mme Anne STAMBACH-TERRENOIR (La France Insoumise) 5 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials M. Bruno STUDER (Renaissance) Mme Liliana TANGUY (Renaissance) M. André VALLINI (Socialistes et Républicains) M. Philippe VIGIER (Démocrate (MoDem et Indépendants)) Substitutes Mme Sabrina AGRESTI-ROUBACHE (Renaissance) Mme Nadine BELLUROT (Les Républicains) M. Roger CHUDEAU (Rassemblement National) Mme Mireille CLAPOT (Renaissance) M. Emmanuel FERNANDES (La France Insoumise) M. André GATTOLIN (Rassemblement des démocrates progressistes et indépendants) Mme Sylvie GOY-CHAVENT (Les Républicains) M. Alexis IZARD (Renaissance) M. Laurent JACOBELLI (Rassemblement National) M. Christian KLINGER (Les Républicains) Mme Brigitte KLINKERT (Renaissance) M. Jacques LE NAY (Union centriste) M. Antoine LÉAUMENT (La France Insoumise) M. Didier MARIE (Socialistes et Républicains) Mme Maud PETIT (Démocrate (MoDem et Indépendants)) Mme Isabelle SANTIAGO (Socialistes et apparentés) Mme Nathalie SERRE (Les Républicains) M. Frédéric VALLETOUX (Horizons et apparentés) Georgia Representatives Mr Irakli CHIKOVANI (Georgian Dream) Ms Khatia DEKANOIDZE (United National Movement – Unified Opposition "Unity Makes Strength") Mr Levan IOSELIANI (Citizens) Mr Irakli KOBAKHIDZE (Georgian Dream) Ms Eka SEPASHVILI () Substitutes Mr Fridon INJIA (European Socialists) Mr Givi MIKANADZE (Georgian Dream) Mr Akaki MINASHVILI (United National Movement – Unified Opposition "Unity Makes Strength") Mr Archil TALAKVADZE (Georgian Dream) Ms Khatia TSILOSANI (Georgian Dream) Germany Representatives Mr Knut ABRAHAM (CDU/CSU) Ms Heike ENGELHARDT (SPD) Mr Michael HENNRICH (CDU/CSU) Ms Nicole HÖCHST (AfD) Mr Andrej HUNKO (DIE LINKE.)
Ms Gyde JENSEN (FDP) Mr Norbert KLEINWÄCHTER (AfD) Mr Armin LASCHET (CDU/CSU) Mr Michael Georg LINK (FDP) Mr Max LUCKS (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) Mr Julian PAHLKE (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) Mr Christian PETRY (SPD) Ms Filiz POLAT (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) 6 Doc.

15687 Report on credentials Ms Catarina dos SANTOS-WINTZ (CDU/CSU) Mr Axel SCHÄFER (SPD) Mr Frank SCHWABE (SPD) Ms Derya TÜRK-NACHBAUR (SPD) Mr Volker ULLRICH (CDU/CSU) Substitutes Mr Petr BYSTRON (AfD) Ms Sevim DAĞDELEN (DIE LINKE.)
Mr Fabian FUNKE (SPD) Mr Jürgen HARDT (CDU/CSU) Ms Gabriela HEINRICH (SPD) Mr Christoph HOFFMANN (FDP) Mr Josip JURATOVIC (SPD) Ms Franziska KERSTEN (SPD) Ms Julia KLÖCKNER (CDU/CSU) Mr Konstantin KUHLE (FDP) Ms Katja LEIKERT (CDU/CSU) Mr Boris MIJATOVIC (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) Ms Tabea RÖSSNER (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) Ms Merle SPELLERBERG (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN) Ms Katrin STAFFLER (CDU/CSU) Ms Martina STAMM-FIBICH (SPD) Mr Johann David WADEPHUL (CDU/CSU) Mr Harald WEYEL (AfD) Greece Representatives Ms Theodora BAKOYANNIS (N.D.) Ms Nina KASIMATI (SY.RIZ.A.)
Mr George KATROUGALOS (SY.RIZ.A) Mr George PAPANDREOU (Movement for Change) Ms Foteini PIPILI (N.D.) Mr Theodoros ROUSOPOULOS (N.D.) Mr Evripidis STYLIANIDIS (N.D.) Substitutes Mr Kriton-Ilias ARSENIS (MeRA25) Mr Anastasios CHATZIVASILEIOU (N.D.) Mr Dimitrios KAIRIDIS (N.D.) Ms Liana KANELLI (Greek Communist Party) Mr Alexandros TRIANTAFYLLIDIS (SY.RIZ.A.)

Ms Theodora TZAKRI (SY.RIZ.A.)


Mr Kyriakos VELOPOULOS (Elliniki Lisi) Hungary Representatives Mr Gergely ARATÓ (DK Democratic Coalition) Ms Mónika BARTOS (Fidesz Hungarian Civic Union) Mme Katalin CSÖBÖR (Fidesz Hungarian Civic Union) Ms Hajnalka JUHÁSZ (KDNP Christian Democratic People's Party) Mr Lőrinc NACSA (KDNP Christian Democratic People’s Party) Mr Zsolt NÉMETH (Fidesz Hungarian Civic Union) Mr László TOROCZKAI (Mi Hazánk – Our Homeland) 7 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Substitutes Mr Zoltán BÓNA (Fidesz Hungarian Civic Union) Mr Koloman BRENNER (Jobbik Movement for a better Hungary) Mr Norbert ERDŐS (Fidesz Hungarian Civic Union) Ms Zita GURMAI (MSZP Hungarian Socialist Party) Ms Boglárka ILLÉS (Fidesz Hungarian Civic Union) Mr Attila TILKI (Fidesz Hungarian Civic Union) Mr Barna Pál ZSIGMOND (Fidesz Hungarian Civic Union) Iceland Representatives Ms Thórhildur Sunna ÆVARSDÓTTIR (Pirate Party) Mr Bjarni JÓNSSON (Left-Green Movement) Mr Birgir THÓRARINSSON (Independence Party) Substitutes Ms Berglind Ósk GUÐMUNDSDÓTTIR (Independence Party) Mr Björn Leví GUNNARSSON (Pirate Party) Ms Jódís SKÚLADÓTTIR (Left-Green Movement) Ireland Representatives Mr Paul GAVAN (Sinn Féin) Ms Fiona O'LOUGHLIN (Fianna Fáil) Mr Joseph O'REILLY (Fine Gael) Mr Robert TROY (Fianna Fáil) Substitutes Ms Reada CRONIN (Sinn Féin) Ms Róisín GARVEY (Green Party) Ms Emer HIGGINS (Fine Gael) Mr Thomas PRINGLE (Dáil Independent Group) Italy Representatives Mr Alfredo ANTONIOZZI (FdI) Ms Deborah BERGAMINI (FI-PPE) Mr Simone BILLI (LSP) Ms Elena BONETTI (Azione-Italia Viva) Mr Mario Alejandro BORGHESE (Cd'I-NM (UDC-CI-NcI-IaC)-MAIE) Mr Dimitri COIN (LSP) Mr Giuseppe De CRISTOFARO (Misto-AVS) Mr Marco DREOSTO (LSP-PSd'Az) Ms Elisabetta GARDINI (FdI) Mr Ettore Antonio LICHERI (M5S) Mr Arnaldo LOMUTI (M5S) Mr Stefano MAULLU (FdI) Mr Andrea ORLANDO (PD-IDP) Ms Licia RONZULLI (FI-BP-PPE) Mr Marco SCURRIA (FdI) Ms Domenica SPINELLI (FdI) Mr Francesco VERDUCCI (PD-IDP) 8 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Ms Sandra ZAMPA (PD-IDP) Substitutes Ms Susanna Lina Giulia CAMUSSO (PD-IDP) Ms Maria Cristina CARETTA (FdI) Mr Andrea CRISANTI (PD-IDP) M. Piero FASSINO (PD-IDP) Ms Aurora FLORIDIA (Misto-AVS) Mr Alessandro GIGLIO VIGNA (LSP) Ms Valentina GRIPPO (Azione-Italia Viva) Ms Alessandra MAIORINO (M5S) Ms Lucrezia MANTOVANI (FdI) Ms Ester MIELI (FdI) Ms Emma PAVANELLI (M5S) Ms Giovanna PETRENGA (Cd'I-NM (UDC-CI-NcI-IaC)-MAIE) Mr Fabio PIETRELLA (FdI) Mme Daisy PIROVANO (LSP-PSd'Az) Mr Graziano PIZZIMENTI (LSP) Mme Catia POLIDORI (FI-PPE) Mr Roberto ROSSO (FI-BP-PPE) Mr Francesco ZAFFINI (FdI) Latvia Representatives Ms Ieva BRANTE (The United List – Latvian Green Party, Latvian Regional Alliance, Liepaja Party) Mr Normunds DZINTARS (National Alliance "All For Latvia!
"–"For Fatherland and Freedom/LNNK") Ms Zanda KALNIŅA-LUKAŠEVICA (New Unity) Substitutes M. Andris BĒRZINŠ (Union of Green and Farmers) Mr Edmunds CEPURĪTIS (Progressives) Mr Ričards ŠLESERS (Latvia First) Liechtenstein Representatives Mr Peter FRICK (Patriotic Union) Ms Franziska HOOP (Progressive Citizens' Party) Substitutes Mr Hubert BÜCHEL (Patriotic Union) Mr Thomas HASLER (Progressive Citizens' Party) Lithuania Representatives Mr Arminas LYDEKA (Liberals movement) Ms Aušrinė NORKIENĖ (Lithuanian Farmers and Greens Union) Mr Lukas SAVICKAS (Democrats For Lithuania) Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS (Homeland Union – Lithuanian Christian Democrats) Substitutes Mr Kristijonas BARTOŠEVIČIUS (Homeland Union – Lithuanian Christian Democrat) 9 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Ms Rasa BUDBERGYTĖ (Lithuanian Social Democratic Party) Mr Kęstutis MASIULIS (Homeland Union – Lithuanian Christian Democrats) Ms Rita TAMAŠUNIENĖ (Lithuanian Regions) Luxembourg Representatives M. Gusty GRAAS (Parti démocratique) Mme Josée LORSCHÉ (Les Verts – déi gréng) Mme Octavie MODERT (Parti chrétien social) Substitutes M. Paul GALLES (Parti chrétien social) Mme Cécile HEMMEN (Parti socialiste) M. Max HENGEL (Parti chrétien social) Malta Representatives Mr Chris BONETT (Labour Party) Ms Naomi CACHIA (Labour Party) Mr Joseph Beppe FENECH ADAMI (Nationalist Party) Substitutes Ms Romilda BALDACCHINO ZARB (Labour Party) Ms Cressida GALEA (Labour Party) Mr Chris SAID (Nationalist Party) Republic of Moldova Representatives Mr Vlad BATRÎNCEA (Bloc of Communists and Socialists (BECS)) Ms Natalia DAVIDOVICI (Action and Solidarity Party (PAS)) Mr Ion GROZA (Action and Solidarity Party (PAS)) Mr Mihail POPSOI (Action and Solidarity Party (PAS)) Ms Adela RĂILEANU (Bloc of Communists and Socialists (BECS)) Substitutes Ms Reghina ĂPOSTOLOVA (ŞOR Party) Mr Adrian BĂLUȚEL (Action and Solidarity Party (PAS)) Ms Doina GHERMAN (Action and Solidarity Party (PAS)) Mr Oleg REIDMAN (Bloc of Communists and Socialists (BECS)) Ms Olesea STAMATE (Action and Solidarity Party (PAS)) Monaco Representatives M. José BADIA (Primo!
Priorité Monaco) Mme Béatrice FRESKO-ROLFO (Horizon Monaco) Substitutes Mme Brigitte BOCCONE-PAGES (Primo!

Priorité Monaco) M. Daniel BOERI (Non-inscrits Monégasques) 10 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Montenegro Representatives Mr Dragan KRAPOVIĆ (Democratic Montenegro) Mr Predrag SEKULIĆ (Democratic Party of Socialists) Ms Maja VUKIĆEVIĆ (Democratic People's Party) Substitutes Mr Miloš KONATAR (Civic Movement United Reform Action) Ms Kenana STRUJIĆ-HARBIĆ (Bosniak Party) Mr Maksim VUČINIĆ (Labour Party) Netherlands Representatives Ms Margreet De BOER (GreenLeft) Mr Tiny KOX (Socialist Party (SP)) Ms Jeanet van der LAAN (Democrats 66 (D66)) Ms Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN (Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA)) Ms Petra STIENEN (Democrats 66 (D66)) Mr Jeroen Van WIJNGAARDEN (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD)) Mr Geert WILDERS (Party for Freedom) Substitutes Mr Caspar Van den BERG (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD)) Mr Ruben BREKELMANS (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD)) Ms Reina de BRUIJN-WEZEMAN (People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD)) Ms Agnes MULDER (Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA)) Mr Pieter OMTZIGT (Omtzigt) Mr Bob van PAREREN (JA21) Ms Kati PIRI (Labour Party) North Macedonia Representatives Ms Arta BILALLI ZENDELI (Democratic Union for Integration) Mr Darko KAEVSKI (Social Democratic Union of Macedonia) Mr Aleksandar NIKOLOSKI (VMRO – Democratic Party for Macedonian National Unity) Substitutes Mr Vlado MISAJLOVSKI (VMRO – Democratic Party for Macedonian National Unity) Ms Fanica NIKOLOSKA (Social Democratic Union of Macedonia) Ms Artina QAZIMI (Alliance of Albanians) Norway Representatives Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN (Labour Party) Mr Even ERIKSEN (Labour Party) Ms Lisa Marie Ness KLUNGLAND (Centre Party) Ms Ingjerd SCHOU (Conservative Party) Mr Morten WOLD (Progress Party) 11 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Substitutes Ms Linda Hofstad HELLELAND (Conservative Party) Mr Geir Inge LIEN (Centre Party) Ms Lise SELNES (Labour Party) Ms Ingvild Wetrhus THORSVIK (Liberal Party) Mr Andreas Sjalg UNNELAND (Socialist Left Party) Poland Representatives Ms Iwona ARENT (Law and Justice (PiS)) Mr Włodzimierz BERNACKI (Law and Justice (PiS)) Ms Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA (Civic Coalition (KO)) Mr Tomasz LATOS (Law and Justice (PiS)) Mr Daniel MILEWSKI (Law and Justice (PiS)) Mr Arkadiusz MULARCZYK (Law and Justice (PiS)) Mr Sławomir NITRAS (Civic Coalition (KO)) Ms Mirosława NYKIEL (Civic Coalition (KO)) M. Aleksander POCIEJ (Civic Coalition (KO)) Mr Jacek PROTASIEWICZ (Polish Coalition) Mr Krzysztof ŚMISZEK (The Left) Ms Katarzyna SÓJKA (Law and Justice (PiS)) Substitutes Mr Marek BOROWSKI (Civic Coalition (KO)) Ms Kamila GASIUK-PIHOWICZ (Civic Coalition (KO)) Mr Marcin GWÓŹDŹ (Law and Justice (PiS)) Mr Bogdan KLICH (Civic Coalition (KO)) Ms Maria KOC (Law and Justice (PiS)) Ms Marta KUBIAK (Law and Justice (PiS)) Mr Kazimierz MATUSZNY (Law and Justice (PiS)) Ms Barbara NOWACKA (Civic Coalition (KO)) Mr Jacek OSUCH (Law and Justice (PiS)) Mr Bolesław PIECHA (Law and Justice (PiS)) Mr Andrzej SZEJNA (The Left) Mr Krzysztof TRUSKOLASKI (Civic Coalition (KO)) Portugal Representatives Ms Isabel ALVES MOREIRA (PS) Mr Nuno CARVALHO (PSD) Mr Pedro CEGONHO (PS) Mme Edite ESTRELA (PS) Mme Isabel MEIRELLES (PSD) M. Paulo PISCO (PS) Ms Catarina ROCHA FERREIRA (PSD) Substitutes Mr Eurico BRILHANTE DIAS (PS) Ms Mara LAGRIMINHA (PS) Ms Jamila MADEIRA (PS) Mr Jorge Gabriel MARTINS (PS) Mr Paulo MONIZ (PSD) Ms Mónica QUINTELA (PSD) Ms Paula REIS (PS) 12 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Romania Representatives Mr Iulian BULAI (Save Romania Union) Mr Titus CORLĂŢEAN (Social Democratic Party) Mr Andi-Lucian CRISTEA (Social Democratic Party) Mr Botond CSOMA (Democratic Alliance of Hungarians in Romania) Ms Alina-Ștefania GORGHIU (National Liberal Party) Ms Maria-Gabriela HORGA (National Liberal Party) Mr Sorin-Titus MUNCACIU (The Alliance for the Unity of Romanians) Ms Daniela OTEŞANU (Social Democratic Party) Ms Diana STOICA (Save Romania Union) Mr Ionuț-Marian STROE (National Liberal Party) Substitutes Mr Corneliu-Mugurel COZMANCIUC (National Liberal Party) Mr Ioan MANG (Social Democratic Party) Ms Dumitrina MITREA (The Alliance for the Unity of Romanians) Mr Szabolcs NAGY (Democratic Alliance of Hungarians in Romania) Ms Denisa Elena NEAGU (Save Romania Union) Mr Cristian-Augustin NICULESCU-ȚÂGÂRLAȘ (National Liberal Party) M. Ion PRIOTEASA (Social Democratic Party) Ms Elena-Simona SPĂTARU (Save Romania Union) Ms Christine THELLMANN (National Liberal Party) Mr Marius-Horia ȚUȚUIANU (Social Democratic Party) San Marino Representatives Ms Marica MONTEMAGGI (Libera) Mr Marco NICOLINI (Movimento Civico R.E.T.E.)
Substitutes Mr Gerardo GIOVAGNOLI (Noi per la Repubblica) Ms Mariella MULARONI (PDCS) Serbia Representatives Ms Dubravka FILIPOVSKI ("Aleksandar Vucic – Together We Can Do Everything") Mr Stefan JOVANOVIĆ (People’s Party) Ms Elvira KOVÁCS (Alliance of Vojvodina Hungarians) Mr Vojislav MIHAILOVIĆ (HOPE – NEW DSS – POKS) Ms Biljana PANTIĆ PILJA ("Aleksandar Vucic – Together We Can Do Everything") Ms Tatjana PAŠIĆ (UNITED – SSP, PSG, PREOKRET, SLOGA) Ms Dunja SIMONOVIĆ BRATIĆ ("Ivica Dacic – Socialist Party of Serbia") Substitutes Mr Aleksandar MARKOVIĆ ("Aleksandar Vucic – Together We Can Do Everything") Mr Uglješa MARKOVIĆ (Ivica Dacic – Socialist Party of Serbia) Mr Goran MILIĆ ("Aleksandar Vucic – Together We Can Do Everything") Ms Jelena MILOŠEVIĆ (UNITED – SSP, PSG, PREOKRET, SLOGA) Ms Slavica RADOVANOVIĆ (People’s Party) Mr Dejan ŠULKIĆ (HOPE – NEW DSS – POKS) Ms Jelena ŽARIĆ KOVAČEVIĆ ("Aleksandar Vucic – Together We Can Do Everything") 13 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Slovak Republic Representatives Mr Martin BELUSKÝ (LS Naše Slovensko) Ms Jarmila HALGAŠOVÁ (SaS) Mr Juraj ŠELIGA (ZA LUDÍ) Mme Anna ZÁBORSKÁ (OLANO) ZZ...
Substitutes Ms Anna ANDREJUVOVÁ (OLANO) Mr Eduard KOČIŠ (Non-affiliated) ZZ... ZZ... ZZ... Slovenia Representatives Ms Iva DIMIC (New Slovenia – Christian democrats) Ms Tatjana GREIF (The Left) Ms Tamara VONTA (Svoboda) Substitutes Ms Meira HOT (Social Democrats) Mr Anže LOGAR (Slovenian Democratic Party) Mr Dean PREMIK (Svoboda) Spain Representatives Ms Nerea AHEDO (PNV) Ms Laura CASTEL (ERC) Ms María FERNÁNDEZ (PSOE) Mr Antón GÓMEZ-REINO (Unidas Podemos) Mr Antonio GUTIÉRREZ LIMONES (PSOE) Mr Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO (PSOE) Mr Pablo HISPÁN (Partido Popular) Ms María Valentina MARTÍNEZ FERRO (Partido Popular) Ms Luz MARTINEZ SEIJO (PSOE) Mr Gonzalo ROBLES (Partido Popular) Mr José María SÁNCHEZ GARCÍA (VOX) Ms Susana SUMELZO (PSOE) Substitutes Mr Omar ANGUITA (PSOE) Mr Fabián CHINEA CORREA (Agrupación Socialista Gomera) Ms Sara GIMÉNEZ (Ciudadanos) Ms Belén HOYO (Partido Popular) Mr Marc LAMUÀ (PSOE) Mr José LATORRE (PSOE) Ms Carmen LEYTE (Partido Popular) Mr Javier MAROTO (Partido Popular) Mr Manuel MIRANDA (PSOE) Ms Esther PEÑA (PSOE) 14 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Ms Margarita PROHENS (Partido Popular) Mr Salvador VIDAL (PSOE) Sweden Representatives Ms Boriana ÅBERG (Moderate Party) Mr Alexander CHRISTIANSSON (Sweden Democrats) Mr Mattias JONSSON (Social Democratic Party) Ms Azadeh ROJHAN GUSTAFSSON (Social Democratic Party) Ms Annika STRANDHÄLL (Social Democratic Party) Mr Markus WIECHEL (Sweden Democrats) Substitutes Ms Yasmine BLADELIUS (Social Democratic Party) Mr Adnan DIBRANI (Social Democratic Party) Mr Gustaf GÖTHBERG (Moderate Party) Mr Kristoffer LINDBERG (Social Democratic Party) Ms Jessica STEGRUD (Sweden Democrats) Ms Beatrice TIMGREN (Sweden Democrats) Switzerland Representatives Ms Sibel ARSLAN (Grüne) M. Damien COTTIER (Les Libéraux-Radicaux) Mr Hannes GERMANN (Union démocratique du centre) Mr Alfred HEER (Union démocratique du centre) Mme Marianne MARET (Le Centre) Mme Ada MARRA (Partis socialiste suisse) Substitutes Mr Roland Rino BÜCHEL (Union démocratique du centre) Mme Marina CAROBBIO GUSCETTI (Parti socialiste suisse) M. Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ (Parti socialiste suisse) Mme Johanna GAPANY (Les Libéraux-Radicaux) M. Jean-Pierre GRIN (Union démocratique du centre) Mr Niklaus-Samuel GUGGER (Parti évangélique suisse) Türkiye Representatives Mr Ziya ALTUNYALDIZ (AK Party) Mr Ahmet BÜYÜKGÜMÜŞ (AK Party) Ms Sena Nur ÇELİK (AK Party) Mr Cemal ÇETİN (MHP) Mr Ahmet Ünal ÇEVİKÖZ (CHP) Mr Mehmet Mehdi EKER (AK Party) Mr Yunus EMRE (CHP) Ms Arzu ERDEM (MHP) Ms Emine Nur GÜNAY (AK Party) M. Haluk KOÇ (CHP) Mr Halil ÖZŞAVLI (AK Party) Mr Hişyar ÖZSOY (HDP) Ms Selin SAYEK BÖKE (CHP) Mr Zeki Hakan SIDALI (IYI Party) 15 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials Mr Yıldırım Tuğrul TÜRKEŞ (AK Party) Ms Feleknas UCA (HDP) Mme Serap YAŞAR (AK Party) Mr Ahmet YILDIZ (AK Party) Substitutes Ms Arzu AYDIN (AK Party) Mr Kamil AYDIN (MHP) Mr Cengiz AYDOĞDU (AK Party) Mr Osman Aşkın BAK (AK Party) Ms Aysu BANKOĞLU (CHP) Mr Utku ÇAKIRÖZER (CHP) Ms Pero DÜNDAR (HDP) Ms Müşerref Pervin Tuba DURGUT (AK Party) Mr Mehmet Kasım GÜLPINAR (AK Party) Ms Canan KALSIN (AK Party) Mr Akif Çağatay KILIÇ (AK Party) Ms Nilgün ÖK (AK Party) Mr Hüseyin ÖRS (IYI Party) Mr İsmail ÖZDEMIR (MHP) Ms Sibel ÖZDEMIR (CHP) Ms Jale Nur SÜLLÜ (CHP) Mr Tayip TEMEL (HDP) Ms Zeynep YILDIZ (AK Party) Ukraine Representatives Ms Maryna BARDINA (Servant of the People) Mr Taras BATENKO (For the Future) Ms Larysa BILOZIR (Trust) Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO (European Solidarity) Mr Serhii KALCHENKO (Servant of the People) Ms Yevheniia KRAVCHUK (Servant of the People) Mr Oleksandr MEREZHKO (Servant of the People) Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA (Servant of the People) Ms Yuliia OVCHYNNYKOVA (Servant of the People) Mr Serhii SOBOLIEV (Batkivshchyna All-Ukrainian Union) Ms Lesia VASYLENKO (Holos) Ms Lesia ZABURANNA (Servant of the People) Substitutes Mr Pavlo BAKUNETS (Trust) Mr Artem DUBNOV (Servant of the People) Mr Yuriy KAMELCHUK (Servant of the People) Ms Olena KHOMENKO (Servant of the People) Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVICH (For the Future) Mr Andrii LOPUSHANSKYI (European Solidarity) Ms Olena MOSHENETS (Servant of the People) Mr Dmytro NATALUKHA (Servant of the People) Mr Pavlo SUSHKO (Servant of the People) Ms Oleksandra USTINOVA (Holos) Mr Sergiy VLASENKO (Batkivshchyna All-Ukrainian Union) Ms Yelyzaveta YASKO (Servant of the People) 16 Doc.
15687 Report on credentials United Kingdom Representatives Ms Tonia ANTONIAZZI (Labour) Mr Richard BACON (Conservative) Mr Duncan BAKER (Conservative) Ms Hannah BARDELL (Scottish National) Lord Alexander DUNDEE (Conservative) Lord George FOULKES (Labour) Ms Jo GIDEON (Conservative) Ms Sally-Ann HART (Conservative) Mr John HOWELL (Conservative) Ms Ruth JONES (Labour) Lord Richard KEEN (Conservative) Mr Ian LIDDELL-GRAINGER (Conservative) Sir Tony LLOYD (Labour) Baroness Doreen E. MASSEY (Labour) Mr David MORRIS (Conservative) Ms Jill MORTIMER (Conservative) Mr Ian PAISLEY (Democratic Unionist) Mr Virendra SHARMA (Labour) Substitutes Lord Andrew ADONIS (Labour) Ms Nickie AIKEN (Conservative) Ms Harriett BALDWIN (Conservative) Lord David BLENCATHRA (Conservative) Sir Christopher CHOPE (Conservative) Ms Theo CLARKE (Conservative) Mr Jeremy CORBYN (Independent) Mr Geraint DAVIES (Labour) Lord Leslie GRIFFITHS (Labour) Ms Pauline LATHAM (Conservative) Sir Edward LEIGH (Conservative) Ms Sheryll MURRAY (Conservative) Ms Kate OSAMOR (Labour) Ms Kate OSBORNE (Labour) Lord Simon RUSSELL (Crossbench) Mr Tommy SHEPPARD (Scottish National) Ms Jane STEVENSON (Conservative) Lord James WHARTON (Conservative) 17