Speech by Mrs Sinikka Hurskainen
Brdo, Slovenia, 10 June 2009
PACE and recent developments in Belarus
First of all, let me thank you for this invitation. I am pleased to be able to share with you the work that the Assembly is carrying out as regards Belarus.
[In case you were not presented: Let me introduce myself: I am the Chair of the sub-committee on Belarus, which is a specialised body of the Political Affairs Committee working on a broad range of issues concerning Belarus. In this capacity, I liaise closely with the Chairs of similar bodies in the European Parliament and the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. The activities of the sub-committee are also closely linked to the work of the Rapporteur on Belarus, Mr Rigoni, which I will describe in my presentation]
Perhaps some of you know that, just a couple of weeks ago, the Political Affairs Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly unanimoulsy adopted a draft resolution which recommends the restoration of Special Guest status for the Belarusian parliament. The Assembly will hold a debate on this draft resolution in June. If it received the support of the Assembly, this proposal would radically change the strategy towards Belarus that the Assembly has followed in the last years, from a strategy of isolation to a strategy of engagement.
[1. PACE-Belarus relations]
Relations between the Assembly and Belarus have been - to say the least -complicated.
Formal dialogue started in the early ‘90s, when the process of democratic transition in Eastern and Central Europe led the countries from the region to look with new interest to the Council of Europe, the oldest democracy and human rights standard-setting organisation on the continent.
It was in this context that, in 1989, PACE introduced ‘Special Guest Status’, as a mechanism to allow involvement in PACE activities of parliamentarians from potential candidate countries, in order to forge closer links with them and contribute to help their countries meet the conditions for membership of the Council of Europe.
Parliamentary delegations with Special Guest Status can participate in the Assembly’s and its committees’ activities, with the right to speak but without the right to vote.
The Belarusian Parliament was granted Special Guest Status in 1992.
However, while in the following years the other countries from Eastern and Central Europe, followed by countries from the Caucasus, were granted membership of the Council of Europe, Belarus was left behind, due to its lack of progress in the Organisation’s core areas: democracy, the rule of law and the protection of human rights.
In fact, structured relations between PACE and Belarus came to a halt: Special Guest Status for the Belarusian parliament was suspended in 1997; the suspension was confirmed in January 2004.
In April 2004, the well-known Pourgourides report on the fate of four political opponents who disappeared in Belarus between 2000-2001 marked a new stage in the deterioration of relations between PACE and Belarus. Pointing at the involvement of a number of high profile officials in the disappearances, the report asked for an independent inquiry to be carried out and announced that, until such an investigation, even the informal presence of Belarusian parliamentarians in PACE activities would be inappropriate. As a matter of fact, between April 2004 and January 2006 there were no contacts at all between PACE and the Belarusian authorities.
This situation started to change in January 2006, when both the then Speaker of the Belarusian parliament and Mr Milinkevich, then single opposition candidate in the presidential election, were invited to address the Assembly in the context of the debate. Later, Mr Rigoni – an Italian member of parliament – was elected as rapporteur on the situation in Belarus. He has always been adamant about his conviction that dialogue was the only way to bring forward democratisation in Belarus and he pursued this conviction by leading a defrosting of de facto relations with the authorities: he conducted two visits to Belarus, one of which with the Chair of the Political Affairs Committee and myself; during his rapporteurship, parliamentarians from Belarus, as well as opposition representatives, were invited on several occasions for exchanges of views on the situation in Belarus, in the context of the Political Affairs Committee or its sub-Committee on Belarus.
|2. Mr Rigoni’s report on the Situation in Belarus]
Mr Rigoni’s report, which was approved by the Political Affairs Committee on 26 May 2009 shows a complex picture where progress and problems coexist, for key areas such as:
- political prisoners;
- freedom of association;
- freedom of the media;
- capital punishment; and
- electoral law and practice.
The report finds that, although Belarus is far from Council of Europe standards in the field of democracy, and the rule of law and human rights, in recent months its authorities have taken important steps in the right direction and that they have shown, as never before, their willingness to engage with European organisations and respond to their demands. The best way to encourage the continuation of this process, and to make changes irreversible and incorporate them in the system, is by engaging in a political dialogue with the authorities, while at the same time continuing to support the strengthening of democratic forces and civil society in the country.
For the Committee, engaging with the Belarusian authorities will enable PACE to:
- come into contact with the Belarusian Establishment, including those political élites who are, or could be, receptive to the Council of Europe message and who, precisely because they are part of the system of power, could have an impact on the situation in the country;
- have easier access to the Belarusian population at large;
- be consistent with its vocation of assisting European states in their efforts to improve their standards in the field of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, through dialogue and the provision of assistance.
The report, therefore, recommends that the Bureau of the Assembly restores Special Guest status for the Belarusian parliament as the best way to re-establish a structured dialogue. However, it warns the Belarusian authorities that the restoration of Special Guest status should be considered as a starting point rather than a point of arrival: it is the beginning of a closer dialogue which can be sustained only through continuous progress and improvement in the field of democracy, the rule of law and human rights.
In fact, the restoration of Special Guest status should be subjected to a special monitoring procedure: in one year’s time at the latest, the Assembly should evaluate whether the Belarusian authorities have undertaken substantive and irreversible progress towards Council of Europe standards, indicating their resolve to embrace its values, and consider further action. In this assessment, special attention should be paid to developments occurring in the following areas:
· political prisoners
· electoral law and practice,
· freedom of association and assembly,
· freedom of the media, and
· capital punishment.
The report also recommends that PACE should not only continue, but also intensify, its contacts with the Belarusian democratic opposition and increase its support to the strengthening of civil society and non-governmental organisations in Belarus. For this reason, it proposes that, in the context of the restoration of Special Guest status and until the opposition is represented in Parliament, a delegation of the Belarusian extraparliamentary opposition should be invited at every Assembly session as well as every time that the issue of Belarus appears on the agenda of the Assembly’s committees. This is a far-fetched and innovative measure, as this delegation would be the only one so closely associated to the work of the Assembly without being composed by parliamentarians.
[ Conclusions]
It would be premature for me to speculate as to whether Mr Rigoni’s position will receive the Assembly’s support. However, I can share my impression that, in recent months, voices calling for the isolation of the Belarusian authorities have become more and more rare in the Assembly, with an increasing number of members prepared to go for dialogue. This is probably the most important result of the discussions that we have had so far in the sub-committee of Belarus and the Political Affairs Committee: a strategy of engagement is the only way forward.
Having said that I cannot hide that different views cohabit in the Assembly on whether this dialogue should be structured, whether it should be conditional, whether it should lead to the restoration of Special Guest status now or after further progress. The June debate, therefore, is going to be decisive to know how the Assembly envisages the future of its relations with Belarus.