English: 10419 25 January 2005 Parliamentary questions for oral answer Discussion of the communication on the activities of the Committee of Ministers 1. Lord Judd,  To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers,  What specific action the Committee of Ministers is now taking to achieve a solution to the conflict in the Chechen Republic. * * * 2. Mr R. Huseynov, Noting that on 25 January the Parliamentary Assembly discussed the report by Mr David Atkinson devoted to the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in and around the Montainous Karabakh region of Azerbaijan; Further noting that more than a decade after the armed hostilities started, the conflict over the Montainous Karabakh region of Azerbaiijan remains unsolved, considerable parts of its territory are still occupied by the military forces of the Republic of Armenia and hundreds of thousands of Azerbaijani people are still deplaced and live in miserable conditions; Considering that one of its member States, namely Armenia, perseveres to violate blatantly all basic principles of international law and the situation of "no peace, no war" with all its consequences impedes the process of economic, social and democratic developments in Azerbaijan; Taking account of the discussion on the report of Mr Atkinson and the adoption of the relevant Resolution and Recommendation by which the Parliamentary Assembly made a genuine contribution to the solution of this protracted conflict, To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers, Following the adoption of this report, will the Committee of Ministers finally make some efforts to condemn the aggression of Armenia against Azerbaijan and contribute to the earliest resolution of this conflict without hiding behind the fallacious argument that it is the OSCE Minsk Group which is dealing with this issue. * * * 3. Mr Cox,  Noting that there is a new President of Palestine,  To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers,  What discussions he and his colleagues will have with the Prime Minister of Israel in order to ensure that the Prime Minister gives his fullest support to the development of the Middle East Road Map that will genuinely benefit the Palestinian people and their territories. * * * 4. Mr Gross,  To ask the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers,  To what extent has the Polish chairmanship contributed to the visibility of the Council of Europe during the decisive weeks of the orange revolution in Ukraine. * * * 5. Mr Eörsi,  Considering that at their meeting of 15 December 2004, the Ministers’ Deputies had a preliminary discussion on the possibility of extending the term of office of the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights and that the Secretariat was asked to prepare a study of the legal and procedural aspects of extending the term of office of the Commissioner,  To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers  Who asked the Secretariat to prepare a study of the legal method of breaching our own constitution,  What is the position of the Committee of Ministers and what is the position of the Minister himself about extending the term of office of the human rights commissioner,  Does the Committee of Ministers agree the independence of the human rights commissioner highly depends also upon a possibility whether his or her office can be extended,  Can the Minister inform the Assembly which country is at the moment the subject of a report drafted by the current human rights commissioner. * * * 6. Mr Iwiński,  Recalling that at the 7th Ministerial Conference of European Ministers responsible for Migration Affairs (Helsinki, 16-17 September 2002), the need to create a European migrations observatory / agency was supported by the former Chair of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography of the Parliamentary Assembly and by several delegations;  Noting that the European Committee on Migration (CDMG) was entrusted with commissioning a feasibility study on this issue and has now adopted a provisional opinion on this matter;  Noting that the Parliamentary Assembly has also pursued its own reflection on the proposal, resulting in a Report and Recommendation 1655 (2004) on a European migration observatory / agency;  Noting that there is a need for close co-operation with the European Union on this issue;  Noting certain of the needs expressed for a single pan-European Agency, including to improve the quality and sharing of information on migration flows and migration policies and law, to respect the human rights and the dignity of migrants, to co-operate with countries of origin and to provide a regional partner for the United Nations,  To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers,  What plans he has to give impetus to the proposal to establish a European migration observatory/agency at the Third Summit of Heads of State and Government. 7. Mr Pourgourides,  Speaking with the backing of his colleagues in the Committee for Legal Affairs and Human Rights,  To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers,  Why the Committee of Ministers, in its reply to Recommendation 1657 (2004) on missing persons in Belarus, has not followed the example of the European Union, which has subjected the high-ranking officials named in the Assembly’s report to a visa ban,  Why the Committee of Ministers has not even put into question the participation of official Belarusian representatives in such sensitive inter-governmental committees as the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH),  And, finally, whether it is appropriate that a Belarusian diplomatic representative still disposes of an office on the premises of the Council of Europe. * * * 8. Mr Marty,  Noting that there are rumours that the Committee of Ministers’ Deputies are currently discussing a possible extension of the term of office of the current Commissioner for Human Rights, notwithstanding Resolution (99) 50 which, by clearly stating that the Commissioner’s terms of office shall be six years and non-renewable, rightly attaches overriding importance to the independence of the institution,  To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers, If he agrees that the Council of Europe should not only insist that the rule of law be upheld in all member states but also do so itself in its own practice, If he agrees that the mere fact of contemplating a possible deviation from the text of Resolution (99) 50 would in itself risk damaging the institutional independence, credibility and authority of the Commissioner and the Council of Europe as an organisation, If he will guarantee that the prerogatives of the Parliamentary Assembly as the organ electing the Commissioner will be fully preserved, If he will assure the Assembly that the text of Resolution (99) 50 will therefore be applied to the letter and the election procedure for the new Commissioner be launched without delay. * * * 9. M. Wielowieyski,  To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers,  What the attitude is of the Polish Presidency to the idea of organizing a summit of all European and Euro-Atlantic organisations. * * * 10. Mr Toshev,  Noting that the Council of Europe has declared the year 2005 as European Year of Democratic Citizenship based on Education,  To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers,  What is the content of the Programme of the Council of Europe in this respect. * * * 11. Mr Jurgens, Referring to his previous question concerning the case of Hakkar v. France, to which the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers replied on 22 June 2004; Recalling that in his reply, the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers said he was confident that the appeal hearing would clearly establish Mr Hakkar’s situation under criminal law and that the Committee of Ministers had a duty to follow this case, To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers, Whether he has taken note of the judgment given on 14 January 2005 by the Assize Court of Appeal of Yvelines whereby this court took the exceptional decision to reduce the unconditional period accompanying the life sentence, from 18 to 16 years, and whether he can tell the Assembly what practical implications this decision will have for Mr Hakkar, and in particular when can he be released, once the judgment of 14 January 2005 has become final. * * * 12. Mr McNamara, Recalling the judgment of the UK House of Lords Judicial Committee in the case of A & others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, which ruled that indefinite detention of foreign nationals under UK anti-terror legislation contravened the European Convention on Human Rights; Aware that this legislation responded to the prohibition under international law on the removal of persons to countries where they run a risk of torture or of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, but that in order to allow continuing detention of such persons, the UK authorities had considered it necessary to derogate from Article 5 ECHR; Noting that Home Secretary Charles Clarke has recently stated that the UK authorities are now proposing to "prosecute much more energetically [their] ability to deport the individuals concerned to the countries from which they come," on the basis of improved "memoranda of understanding" with the governments concerned, intended to obtain assurances that such deportations do not result in torture or other ill-treatment; Aware that recent experience of such "diplomatic assurances" calls into question their adequacy as a mechanism for preventing ill-treatment, as shown in the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights’ report on his visit to Sweden, and noting also the concern expressed by the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture that such diplomatic assurances risk undermining the principle of non-refoulement, To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers, Whether he is also concerned at the increased recourse by governments, in the current context of their efforts to combat terrorism, to the practice of diplomatic assurances in order to remove individuals from their territory and whether he agrees that: i. such assurances do not absolve member States from their obligations under international human rights law, in particular Articles 2, 3 and 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Protocols Nos. 6 and 13 to that Convention, not to expose individuals to a risk of treatment or punishment contrary to the rights contained in these provisions, whether in the form of death sentences, executions or other violations of the right to life, torture or other ill-treatment, or a flagrant denial of justice; ii. on account of these obligations, member States therefore have a duty to ascertain, prior to removing an individual from their territory and in each individual case on the basis of all available evidence (including objective evidence as to the reliability of the assurance), that that person does not run such risks upon removal, and to refrain from removal unless the absence of any such risk is firmly established; iii. reflection should be initiated by the Council of Europe about the problems resulting from the practice of diplomatic assurances and on a possible Council of Europe mechanism for independent risk assessment prior to removals and monitoring of the situation of returned persons. * * * 13. Mr Kosachev, To ask the Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers, How does he assess the progress of the preparatory work on the substantive content of the final documents of the 3rd Summit of the Council of Europe, the decisions of which are to determine in many respects the future of Europe. * * * 14. Mrs Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, Noting that in its Recommendation 1679 (2004), the Assembly recommended that the Committee of Ministers ensure that the human rights situation in Chechnya remains a regular item on the agenda of the Ministers’ Deputies and that such discussions be based on the Secretary General’s regular reports; Recalling that in 2003 it officially seized the Committee of Ministers by virtue of para.
French:  * * * 2. M. R. Huseynov, Notant que, le 25 janvier, l’Assemblée parlementaire a examiné le rapport de M. David Atkinson consacré au conflit entre l’Arménie et l’Azerbaïdjan dans la région azerbaïdjanaise du Haut-Karabakh et aux alentours; Notant aussi que, plus de dix ans après le début des hostilités armées, le conflit au sujet de la région azerbaïdjanaise du Haut-Karabakh reste non résolu, que des parties considérables du territoire de l’Azerbaïdjan restent occupées par les forces militaires de la république d’Arménie, et que des centaines de milliers d’Azerbaïdjanais sont toujours déplacés et vivent dans des conditions déplorables; Considérant que l’un des Etats membres du Conseil de l'Europe, l’Arménie, s’obstine à violer de manière flagrante tous les principes fondamentaux du droit international, et que la situation de «ni paix ni guerre», par ses multiples conséquences, entrave l’évolution économique, sociale et démocratique de l’Azerbaïdjan; Tenant compte du débat sur le rapport de M. Atkinson et de l’adoption de la résolution et de la recommandation correspondantes, par lesquelles l’Assemblée apporte une contribution réelle au règlement de ce très long conflit, Demande au Président du Comité des Ministres,  Si, à la suite de l’adoption de ce rapport, le Comité des Ministres va finalement prendre des mesures pour condamner l’agression de l’Azerbaïdjan par l’Arménie et favoriser le règlement de ce conflit dans les meilleurs délais, et s’il va donc renoncer à invoquer l’argument fallacieux selon lequel c’est le Groupe de Minsk de l’OSCE qui s’occupe de cette question. * * * 3. M. Cox, Notant que la Palestine s’est dotée d’un nouveau Président, Demande au Président du Comité des Ministres, De quelle manière lui-même et ses collègues comptent discuter avec le Premier ministre israélien afin d’obtenir que ce dernier apporte son plein appui à la mise en œuvre de la feuille de route pour la paix au Moyen-Orient dans un sens qui soit véritablement favorable au peuple palestinien et à ses territoires. * * * 4. M. Gross,  Demande au Président du Comité des Ministres,  Dans quelle mesure la présidence polonaise a-t-elle contribué à la visibilité du Conseil de l'Europe durant les semaines décisives de la révolution orange en Ukraine. * * * 5. M. Eörsi, Considérant qu’à leur réunion du 15 décembre 2004 les Délégués des Ministres ont procédé à un échange de vues préliminaire sur la possibilité de prolonger le mandat du Commissaire aux droits de l’homme du Conseil de l’Europe et prié le Secrétariat d’étudier les aspects juridiques et procéduraux d’une telle prolongation, Demande au Président du Comité des Ministres, Qui a demandé au Secrétariat de faire une étude sur les moyens légaux de violer les propres règles statutaires du Conseil de l’Europe, Quelle est la position du Comité des Ministres et du ministre lui-même sur la prolongation du mandat du Commissaire aux droits de l’homme, Si le Comité des Ministres convient que l’indépendance du Commissaire aux droits de l’homme est fonction, dans une large mesure, de la possibilité de prolonger ou non son mandat, Si le ministre peut indiquer à l’Assemblée sur quel pays l’actuel Commissaire aux droits de l’homme est en train d’élaborer un rapport.  * * * 6. M. Iwiński, Rappelant qu’à la 7e Conférence des ministres européens responsables des migrations (Helsinki, 16-17 septembre 2002), l’idée de créer un observatoire/une agence européen(ne) des migrations avait recueilli le soutien de l’ancien Président de la commission des migrations, des réfugiés et de la démographie de l’Assemblée parlementaire ainsi que de plusieurs délégations; Notant que le Comité européen sur les migrations (CDMG), chargé de faire réaliser une étude de faisabilité sur cette question, a maintenant adopté un avis provisoire; Notant que l’Assemblée parlementaire a également poursuivi sa réflexion sur la proposition, réflexion qui a abouti à l’adoption d’un rapport et d’une recommandation (Recommandation 1655 (2004) relative à un observatoire/une agence européen(ne) des migrations); Notant que, dans ce domaine, une étroite collaboration avec l’Union européenne est indispensable; Notant que le besoin se fait sentir d’un organe paneuropéen unique, afin notamment d’améliorer la qualité et la circulation des informations sur les flux migratoires et sur les politiques et législations en matière de migrations, de faire en sorte que les droits de l’homme et la dignité des migrants soient respectés, de coopérer avec les pays d’origine et de procurer à l’Organisation des Nations Unies un partenaire régional, Demande au Président du Comité des Ministres, Ce qu’il compte faire pour donner une impulsion à la proposition de création d’un observatoire/d’une agence européen(ne) des migrations lors du 3e Sommet des chefs d’Etat et de gouvernement. * * * 7. M. Pourgourides, S’exprimant avec le soutien de ses collègues de la commission des questions juridiques et des droits de l’homme, Demande au Président du Comité des Ministres, Pourquoi le Comité des Ministres, dans sa réponse à la Recommandation 1657 (2004) sur les personnes disparues au Bélarus, n’a pas suivi l’exemple de l’Union européenne qui a instauré une interdiction de visa à l’égard des hauts responsables cités dans le rapport de l’Assemblée, Pourquoi le Comité des Ministres n’a même pas remis en cause la participation de représentants officiels du Bélarus aux travaux de comités intergouvernementaux aussi sensibles que le Comité directeur pour les droits de l’homme (CDDH), Enfin, s’il est opportun qu’un diplomate représentant le Bélarus dispose encore d’un bureau dans les locaux du Conseil de l’Europe. * * * 8. M. Marty, Notant que, selon certaines rumeurs, les Délégués des Ministres seraient en train de réfléchir à une éventuelle prolongation du mandat de l’actuel Commissaire aux droits de l’homme, et ce malgré la Résolution (99) 50 qui, en disposant expressément que le Commissaire est élu pour un mandat de six ans non renouvelable, souligne à juste titre que l’indépendance de cette institution revêt une importance primordiale,  Demande au Président du Comité des Ministres, S’il reconnaît que le Conseil de l’Europe devrait veiller à ce que la primauté du droit prévale non seulement dans tous ses Etats membres, mais aussi dans ses propres pratiques, S’il admet que le simple fait d’envisager une dérogation aux dispositions de la Résolution (99) 50 risque de porter atteinte à l’indépendance institutionnelle, à la crédibilité et à l’autorité du Commissaire et du Conseil de l’Europe en tant qu’organisation,  S’il peut garantir que les prérogatives de l’Assemblée parlementaire concernant l’élection du Commissaire seront pleinement préservées, S’il peut donner à l’Assemblée l’assurance que la Résolution (99) 50 sera en conséquence appliquée à la lettre et que la procédure d’élection du nouveau Commissaire sera lancée sans délai. * * * 9. M. Wielowieyski,  Demande au Président du Comité des Ministres,  Ce que pense la Présidence polonaise de l’idée d’organiser un sommet de toutes les organisations européennes et euro-atlantiques. * * * 10. M. Toshev, Notant que le Conseil de l’Europe a proclamé l’année 2005 «Année européenne de la citoyenneté par l’éducation», Demande au Président du Comité des Ministres, Quelle est la teneur du programme du Conseil de l’Europe en la matière. * * * 11. M. Jurgens, Se référant à sa question précédente concernant l'affaire Hakkar c.