25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Adopted texts

Recommendations

Recommendation 340                 Local and regional authorities responding to the economic crisis

Recommendation 341                 Local and regional democracy in Hungary

Recommendation 342                 Local democracy in Ireland

Recommendation 343           Integration through self-employment: promoting migrant entrepreneurship in European municipalities

Recommendation 344                 Election of the members of the Avagani (Assembly of Aldermen) of the City of Yerevan, Armenia (5 May 2013)

Recommendation 345                 Municipal elections in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”
(24 March 2013)

Recommendation 346                 Regions and territories with special status in Europe

                     

Recommendation 347                 Migrants’ access to regional labour markets

Recommendation 348                 Local and regional democracy in Ukraine

Recommendation 349                 Local and regional democracy in Albania

Recommendation 350                 Local and regional democracy in Denmark

Resolutions

Resolution 306 (2010) REV         Observation of local and regional elections – strategy and rules of the Congress

Resolution 307 (2010) REV2       Procedures for monitoring the obligations and commitments entered into by the Council of Europe member states in respect of their ratification of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122)

Resolution 353 (2013) REV         Congress post-monitoring and post-observation of elections: developing political dialogue

Resolution 356                           Verification of new members’ credentials

Resolution 357                           Local and regional authorities responding to the economic crisis

Resolution 358                           Integration through self-employment: promoting migrant entrepreneurship in European municipalities

Resolution 359                           Election of the members of the Avagani (Assembly of Aldermen) of the City of Yerevan, Armenia (5 May 2013)

Resolution 360                           Municipal elections in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”
(24 March 2013)

Resolution 361                       Regions and territories with special status in Europe

Resolution 362                           Migrants’ access to regional labour markets

Resolution 363                  Prospects for effective transfrontier co-operation in Europe


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Local and regional authorities responding to the economic crisis

Recommendation 340 (2013)[1]

1. The financial and economic crisis which hit the world in 2008 has had a particularly severe impact on local and regional authorities as they have had to face at the same time a shrinking revenue base due to the economic downturn, cuts in budgetary transfers from national governments, decreasing local tax authority, mandatory participation in fiscal consolidation programmes and the need to manage debt – excessive sometimes because of so-called “toxic loans” – as well as the obligation to increase social support to citizens, against the background of growing demands for assistance to vulnerable groups affected by the crisis.

2. In 2009-2010, local revenues fell in many countries across Europe, in some by as much as 20%. Regional output also shrank on average by 3.4% in 2008-2009, with such extremes as a 20% fall in Latvia, but saw an upswing in most regions in 2010-2011. A weak economic recovery in 2010, with a 2% GDP growth in the EU, tapered to 1% in 2011 and reversed into 0.1% recession in 2012, with a further 0.4% recession forecast for 2013. Over 2008-2012, local budget investment fell by an average 14%, with as much as 30% in some countries, against the backdrop of an almost 5% decrease in intergovernmental transfers in 2011 alone, which almost completely offset a 5.5% rise in local tax revenues.

3. Local and regional authorities are faced with increasing social costs such as housing and utility allowances, safety net payments to the unemployed and others eligible for minimum income guarantees, and emergency aid to distressed families. In 2012, the number of households where essential household costs (such as rent, mortgage payments and utility charges) exceed 40% of income grew by 13%, pushing local social expenditure on these households up by 16%, against the background of rising unemployment, which exceeded 12% in 2013  in the Eurozone alone, with a high end of 27% in Spain and Greece. Extremely high unemployment, in particular among young people, which reached 62% in Greece and 56% in Spain, is threatening to undermine prospects for long-term sustainable growth.

4. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities is deeply concerned about the impact of the crisis on local communities and regions of Europe, and in particular about the significant social problems caused by the reduction of social welfare programmes in many European countries and lower investment levels in strategic policy areas, such as education, health and social assistance to vulnerable population groups.


5. The Congress is convinced that local and regional authorities are crucial stakeholders and actors in ensuring European economic revival, due to both their economic and social roles. Local and regional authorities represent 65% of all public investment and 30% of public spending (including 60% of all public spending on education and more than 30% on health), and account for some 16% of public debt and almost 13% of public deficits. They hold key responsibilities with regard to social protection of citizens, including housing, health care, education, sickness and disability, care for the elderly, family and children, measures against unemployment and exclusion.

6. The Congress welcomes the fact that the important role of local and regional authorities in economic recovery was recognised by the Ministers of the Council of Europe member States responsible for local and regional government at their Conference in Utrecht (Netherlands) in 2009, and reaffirmed at their Conference in Kyiv (Ukraine) in 2011, with the approval of the “Kyiv Guidelines” and proposals for an Agenda in Common, which identifies as the top priority joint action by national governments and local and regional authorities in responding to the economic crisis.

7. The Congress expresses its concern that the crisis has had an adverse impact on the financial autonomy guaranteed under the European Charter of Local Self-Government (CETS No. 122), in particular its provisions relating to the financial resources and budgetary authority, equalisation, devolution of competences, and consultations with local authorities on matters affecting them and local financing in particular. The Congress stresses that the full implementation of the Charter must be ensured in particular in this time of crisis, when local and regional authorities face greater responsibilities in providing services and assistance to households in need.

8. In this context, the Congress is particularly concerned about the tendencies for recentralisation of local and regional competences, forced municipal amalgamations and regional mergers, imposition of severe austerity measures and fiscal consolidation rules, and slow-down of decentralisation and regionalisation processes as a response to the crisis.

9. The Congress shares the position of the EU Committee of the Regions, expressed in its Opinion of 12 April 2013 on “Devolution in the European Union and the place for local and regional self-government in EU policy making and delivery”, that the economic crisis and austerity measures cannot be used as an excuse to further centralise or devolve powers without providing corresponding financial resources, and that the allocation of powers not linked to corresponding financial resources or to income-raising powers cannot be used as an argument for centralisation.

10. The Congress is convinced that decentralisation is a key to better economic performance and growth and that many local communities and regions in fact did not have enough means and responsibilities to respond adequately to the crisis. The five years of the crisis have shown that, while decentralised economies are no more immune to its impact than the centralised ones, they recover better as they adapt more quickly to changing circumstances and show greater resilience overall. Local and regional authorities know best the needs and circumstances of their communities, and they are in a position to act more effectively and efficiently and to ensure an optimal use of local resources – not least also for reason of better transparency and accountability to citizens.


11. The Congress is therefore convinced that any crisis exit strategies must be based on the following principles:

a. recognition of local and regional authorities as key stakeholders in joint action of all tiers of governance to devise common responses and to ensure coherence of response policies and measures as well as solidarity in equitable burden-sharing, through the process of regular consultations and dialogue;

b. further decentralisation of competences in keeping with the principle of subsidiarity, as well as greater budgetary autonomy and tax authority at local and regional levels;

c. reviving investment to stimulate employment, innovation and economic growth;

d. increasing citizen participation in decision making at local and regional levels through elements of direct democracy, in particular through greater use of new information technologies;

e. building partnerships with the private and non-governmental sectors, as well as with other local and regional authorities in the process of voluntary inter-municipal and inter-regional co-operation to benefit from the economies of scale and to facilitate labour mobility, cross-investment and business networking.

12. The Congress notes with deep concern the 2013 findings of the International Labour Organisation, indicating that government austerity policies have been accompanied since 2010 by increasing wage inequalities, in which middle-income groups’ revenues declined while those of top salary earners began to grow again, posing a threat to the social fabric of European societies and increasing the risk of social unrest, which rose within the EU alone from 34% in 2006-2007 to 46% in 2011-2012.

13. In this context, the Congress supports the position of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, expressed in its Resolution 1886 (2012) on the impact of the economic crisis on local and regional authorities in Europe, as well as in its Resolution 1884 (2012) on austerity measures – a danger for democracy and social rights, and welcomes the recent recommendations of the European Commission aimed at shifting the economic policy emphasis from austerity to structural reforms.

14. The Congress also welcomes with caution reform measures entailing decentralisation of competences, being undertaken or planned in a number of member states, while expressing its concern that they are not always accompanied by the decentralisation of resources to finance new competences.

15. In view of the above, and in reference to its Recommendation 328 (2012) on the right of local authorities to be consulted by other levels of government, the Congress asks the Committee of Ministers to invite member States of the Council of Europe to establish mechanisms for regular consultations and dialogue with local and regional authorities on developing anti-crisis policies and measures, in order to ensure coherence of policy responses to the crisis and to take into account their input and innovative ideas aiming in particular to:

a. ensure that local and regional authorities receive greater responsibilities, especially in local and regional economic policy and social protection areas, and in particular in the fields of infrastructure, health care, education and research, social welfare, and recreation and culture, including first and foremost an increase in local and regional tax authority and greater budgetary autonomy, also within internal stability pacts where appropriate;

b. ensure in particular local tax authority over property taxes based on statutory real estate values in countries where this is not yet the case, and reduce the dependence of local budgets on highly volatile tax bases such as corporate profits and property transactions, using as guidance the 2005 Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation REC (2005)1 on the financial resources of local and regional authorities;


c. ensure a steady level of intergovernmental transfers into local and regional budgets, without disproportionate cuts, and a minimum one-year advance notice from national authorities in cases when such transfers are to be reduced;

d. maintain a balanced mix of intergovernmental transfers and local and regional taxes to finance local and regional budgets;

e. reinforce the equalisation and regional solidarity systems among states, and revise national equalisation systems and programmes to improve burden sharing between different tiers of governance and to alleviate better the excessive strain on economically weaker regions and local communities;

f. revise government financing of the local and regional levels to provide a balance between allocations into social support programmes and investments into projects to stimulate innovation and economic growth;

g. revive investment in local and regional infrastructure and generally increase local and regional budget investment as a priority in order to promote local competitiveness, encourage private sector investment and stimulate employment;

h. follow the example of some countries and exclude priority social services such as health, education and social protection for vulnerable groups (families in economic distress, the unemployed, children, young people, people with disabilities, the elderly) from local and regional budget expenditure limits, and exempt them from fiscal consolidation programmes and rules, as well as ensure that vulnerable groups are well protected and that their opportunities in life are not diminished by budgetary measures;

i. remove legal requirements which impose expensive service provision or make sure that, in cases when central authorities do impose uniform standards of service provision at local and regional levels, such as for health care, education and social welfare, the required expenditure is matched by national government financing;

j. design special measures and programmes to alleviate the excessive local and regional debt burden, through a combination of budget deficit limits and ‘debt ceilings’, restrictions on borrowing and on the issue of municipal or regional bonds, creation of special funds for dedicated local government loans, and the introduction of ‘debt brakes’ to ensure that local and regional budgets are financed without structural deficits;

k. make sure that restraints on local and regional government borrowing are based on prudential criteria, which assess capacity for repayment on an objective and non-discretionary basis, and that every tier of governance is responsible for financing its own deficits and debt positions;

l. design special measures to deal with the recovery of local and regional authorities in financial difficulty, including cases of insolvency, using as guidance the 2004 Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation REC (2004)1 on financial and budgetary management at local and regional levels, and including the availability of special financial assistance;  

m. achieve a balanced level of centralisation of competences and put a stop to the trend for recentralisation of competences towards central authorities and for slowing down decentralisation and regionalisation processes;

n. put a stop to forced amalgamations at local and regional levels while encouraging and facilitating voluntary inter-municipal and inter-regional co-operation aimed at sharing administrative resources, service provision and procurement between adjoining authorities;

o. make sure that decisions on territorial reforms, including on the creation of new tiers of governance or abolition of existing ones, are taken only after consultations with the authorities and citizens concerned, and promote a regional governing guideline, allowing regions and local communities in general to directly manage their development policies.


25th Session

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Local and regional democracy in Hungary

Recommendation 341 (2013)[2]

1. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities refers to:

a.Article 2, para. 1b, of Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe relating to the Congress, which provides that one of the aims of the Congress shall be “to submit proposals to the Committee of Ministers in order to promote local and regional democracy”;

b. Article 2, paragraph 3, of Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe relating to the Congress, stipulating that “The Congress shall prepare on a regular basis country-by-country reports on the situation of local and regional democracy in all member states and in states which have applied to join the Council of Europe, and shall ensure, in particular, that the principles of the European Charter on Local Self-Government are implemented”;

c. Resolution 307 (2010) REV on Procedures for monitoring the obligations and commitments entered into by the Council of Europe member states in respect of their ratification of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122);

d. the previous Recommendation 116 (2002) on regional democracy in Hungary and the explanatory memorandum on the situation of local and regional democracy in Hungary.

2. The Congress recalls that:

a.Hungary became a member of the Council of Europe on 6 November 1990 and ratified the European Charter on Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122, hereafter the Charter) on 21 March 1994, which came into force in respect of Hungary on 1 July 1994. It signed the Additional Protocol to the European Charter on Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (CETS No. 207) on 16 November 2009 and ratified it on 7 June 2010;

b. The Congress Monitoring Committee instructed Mr Artur Torres Pereira and Mr Devrim Çukur to prepare and submit to the Congress a report on local and regional democracy in Hungary; they both visited Hungary from 23 to 25 May 2012.[3]


3. The rapporteurs:

a. thank the Permanent Delegation of Hungary to the Council of Europe and all those whom it met on the visit for their readiness to assist the delegation and for the information they so willingly supplied.  They also thank the Hungarian national delegation to the Congress, the local and regional authority associations and the officials at the Ministry of the Interior who assisted with the organisation and smooth running of the visit;

b.welcome the ratification by Hungary on 7 June 2010 of the Additional Protocol to the European Charter on Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority; and

c. note with satisfaction that local authorities enjoy freedom of association for the purpose of furthering their interests.

4. Nevertheless, the rapporteurs regret the fact that:

a. the principle of local self-government is neither explicitly enshrined in the Cardinal (Implementing) Act on Local Government nor in the Fundamental Law (Constitution);

b. there is a very strong recentralisation of powers, which has led to the considerable reduction of competences previously assigned to local authorities;

c. the principle of the financial autonomy of local authorities is not respected;

d. the principle of local self-government is not complied with due to the pooling at the supra-communal level (district) competences of municipalities of less than 2000 inhabitants, which is implemented through an administrative structure, is composed of civil servants from the State;

e. there is no real consultation in practice, but only a formal one, between the government and local authorities, in particular because of unreasonable deadlines;

f. there is no effective legal remedy which fully guarantees the protection of local self-government, with a genuine and extended right of local authorities to lodge a complaint with the domestic courts in order to secure the free exercise of their powers and respect for such principles of local self-government;

g. the position of the counties is weak in both their institutional framework and as regards their functions.

5. The Congress therefore recommends that the Committee of Ministers invite the Hungarian authorities to:

a. revise the CardinaI Act so that the principle of local self-government is explicitly guaranteed in the legislation and in practice, in accordance with Article 2 of the Charter;

b. revise the legislation concerning local authorities’ mandatory tasks and functions so as to extend the range of powers normally assigned to them on the basis of the principles of decentralisation and subsidiarity;

c. grant local authorities financial autonomy to enable them to exercise their powers properly, in particular by adjusting the level of grants allocated by the central government to local authorities so that their resources remain commensurate with their powers and by limiting central government supervision of the management of local finance so that it is “proportionate” within the meaning of Article 8 of the Charter;

d. ensure that local and regional authorities are equipped with the administrative structures and resources needed for performing their tasks, while at the same time ensuring that elected councils are retained, including in small municipalities;


e. consult local authorities and their national associations and define the consultation partners so that appropriate and effective consultation is arranged, in practice, within reasonable deadlines on all issues of interest to local authorities;

f. revise the legislation in order to provide local authorities with an effective judicial remedy to secure the free exercise of their powers and guarantee the judicial protection of the good implementation of the basic principles of local self-government provided in the Charter ratified by Hungary;

g. strengthen the position of counties, notably in the light of  the Reference Framework for Regional Democracy of the Council of Europe;

h. keep the Congress informed on the follow-up given to this recommendation.

6. The Congress invites the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to take this recommendation into consideration in its monitoring procedure and other activities related to this member State.


25th Session

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Local democracy in Ireland

Recommendation 342 (2013)[4]

1. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe refers to:

a. Article 2, paragraph 1.b. of Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2 of the Committee of Ministers relating to the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, which stipulates that one of the aims of the Congress is “to submit proposals to the Committee of Ministers in order to promote local and regional democracy”;

b. Article 2, paragraph 3, of the above-mentioned Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2, which stipulates that “The Congress shall prepare on a regular basis country-by-country reports on the situation of local and regional democracy in all member states and in states which have applied to join the Council of Europe, and shall ensure, in particular, that the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government are implemented”;

c. Resolution 307 (2010)REV on Procedures for monitoring the obligations and commitments entered into by the Council of Europe member states in respect of their ratification of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No.122);

d. Recommendation 219 (2007) on the status of capital cities, Recommendation 132 (2003) on municipal property in the light of the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government;

e. Resolution 299 (2010) of the Congress on Follow-up by the Congress of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Local and Regional Government (Utrecht, Netherlands, 16‑17 November 2009), which states that the Congress will use the Council of Europe Reference Framework for Regional Democracy in its monitoring activities, as well as the reply made by the Committee of Ministers to the Congress Recommendation 282 (2010) (CM/CONG(2011)Rec282final, encouraging the governments of member states to take account of the above mentioned Reference Framework;

f. the previous Recommendation 97 (2001) on local and regional democracy in Ireland;

g. the explanatory memorandum [CPL(25)5] on the situation of local democracy in Ireland, presented by Mr Andris JAUNSLEINIS, Latvia (L, ILDG)[5] and Mrs Merita JEGENI YILDIZ, Turkey (R, EPP/CCE).


2. The Congress recalls that:

a. Ireland signed the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No.122, hereafter referred to as “the Charter”) on 7 November 1997 and ratified it on 14 May 2002 with a declaration to the effect that Ireland intends to confine the scope of the Charter to the following categories of authorities: county councils, city councils and town councils;

b. Ireland has not signed the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (CETS No. 207).

3. The Congress delegation carried out two official visits to Ireland from 3 to 5 October 2012 and on 3 May 2013.[6]

4. The delegation would like to thank the Permanent Representation of Ireland to the Council of Europe and the Irish authorities at central, regional and local levels, the associations of local and regional authorities, experts and other interlocutors for their valuable co–operation at different stages of the monitoring procedure and for the information conveyed to the delegation.

5. The Congress:

a. notes with satisfaction that important changes have been accomplished since the last recommendation and that the basic legal framework is now established for local and partly also for regional authorities;

b. takes note that the local authorities in Ireland, in spite of various structural and financial issues, have a strong connection to their citizens and deliver services adequately;

c. acknowledges the commitment of the Irish authorities to move from a very centralised system to a certain level of decentralisation;

d. welcomes the Action Programme adopted in October 2012 by the Irish Government, which provides a clear commitment on the part of the Government to expand the local government’s responsibilities.

6. The Congress expresses its concern that:

a.the constitutional protection of local self-government is rather weak and that the principle of subsidiarity is not properly reflected and guaranteed in the legislation;

b.local governments do not manage a substantial share of public affairs: local authorities are still waiting for a strong decentralisation effort and the delegation of relevant competences and financial independence to the local and regional level;

c. consultations with local authorities and their associations are neither systematic nor sufficiently regulated to allow the latter to be involved in the decision-making process on matters which concern them and, in the present context, to make an input into the proposed reform;

d. the administrative supervision of local authorities’ activities by the central level remains disproportionate and, under this system, the powers given to local authorities are not full and exclusive;

e. the equalisation mechanism is not transparent and, although local governments have the formal freedom to adopt budgets, such freedom is severely limited in practice;

f. the scale of local taxes and the power of local authorities to determine the rates are very limited;


g. conditions of office of local elected representatives are insufficiently regulated by general legislation (Labour Code).

7. In the light of the above, the Congress requests that the Committee of Ministers invite Irish authorities to take account of the following recommendations:

a. to revise their legislation in order to ensure that the subsidiarity principle is better enshrined and protected in the law and to promote this basic principle in practice in the Irish public administration system;

b. to implement the Action Programme rapidly in order to devolve more powers and responsibilities to local and regional authorities and delegate relevant competences and financial resources to the local and regional levels;

c. to develop the procedures and mechanisms of consultation with local and regional authorities on matters concerning them directly both in legislation and in practice, taking into account the criteria provided by Article 4 para.6 of the Charter, namely, “in due time” and “in an appropriate way”;

d. take the necessary measures to amend existing legislation which allows the central government to intervene in local decision making and ensure that the Action Programme does not increase the level of supervision even more through the establishment of a new additional National Oversight Office to monitor the efficiency of local authorities including, inter alia, their compliance with national objectives and policies;

e. to review the equalisation mechanism in order to render it transparent and ensure that the rules pertaining thereto are established in consultation with the local authorities;

f. to ensure that, in practice, local governments have the power to levy taxes and determine effectively the rates within the limits of the law;

g. to consider establishing a clear and specific legislative basis regarding the conditions of office of local elected representatives, particularly as related to rules for private employers to provide “free time” to elected officials for participation in local matters;

h. to encourage the Irish Government to consider opening the debate on further developing the regional tier of government, with the possibility of putting in place a system of direct election of representatives and real responsibilities in the delivery of “regional” public services;

i. to invite the Irish Government to sign the Additional Protocol to the European Outline Convention on Trans-frontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities (ETS No. 159) and the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (CETS No. 207).


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Integration through self-employment:

promoting migrant entrepreneurship in European municipalities

Recommendation 343 (2013)[7]

1. The immigrant population in Europe is growing and rapidly becoming more diverse in terms of ethnic or national origin, as well as in terms of length of stay, educational achievement, and socio-economic position. Increasing migration to Europe raises the questions of both integration of migrants into the host community and their meaningful contribution to the local economy and economic development, which is especially important in the current situation of economic crisis.

2. An increasing number of migrants are becoming entrepreneurial, with a greater number of migrants interested in setting up their own businesses than among the native population. The ongoing rise in migrant entrepreneurship is expected to contribute significantly to the integration of immigrants at local level, to the economic development of their city of residence, and to the creation of new businesses in Europe in general, which has been identified as a crucial issue in the EU proposal for the programme for business competitiveness and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs),[8] in the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy.

3. Micro-businesses and SMEs represent 99% of all enterprises in the EU,[9] employ 67% of the workforce in the private sector, account for 58% of the total turnover[10] and create 4 million new jobs every year.[11] It is the entrepreneurs behind these businesses who are the backbone for building stability and success for European economic recovery and development. However, Europe lags behind other world regions in the creation of new businesses, with only 37% of Europeans interested in starting a business – down from 45% three years ago – compared to 51% in the USA and 56% in China.[12] Improving the possibilities and conditions for starting and operating businesses in Europe as well as for supporting and protecting entrepreneurs is therefore crucial for European economic development.

4. Migrant entrepreneurs can be important for various reasons: they create their own jobs; create jobs for others; develop different social networks than immigrant workers and shape their own destinies rather than waiting for cues from the host society’s institutions. As entrepreneurs, they may provide a different range of goods and services; they can enhance the vitality of particular streets or neighbourhoods in cities or of specific economic sectors and most of all, they play their part in the ‘natural’ process of succession and renewal of the total corpus of entrepreneurs.


5. However, migrants face significant obstacles when starting business careers, which are specific to their situation and include, among others, difficulties in contacting the authorities, receiving funding or accessing local social networks. The typical barriers they encounter are related to the availability of information about entrepreneurial opportunities and the relevant rules and regulations; to the availability of business locations; to the availability of financial capital; to having access to a pool of customers; to their embeddedness in local, national and transnational networks; to staff management; and to the availability of skills and competencies.

6. At the same time, many national authorities today consider that migrant entrepreneurship is first and foremost a question of entrepreneurship, that efforts toward entrepreneurs are also beneficial for migrants, and that no specific measures are therefore needed to promote migrant entrepreneurship.

7. Over the past years, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities has addressed to the Committee of Ministers a number of recommendations on various aspects of integration of migrants at local level, in particular Recommendation 115 (2002) on “The participation of foreign residents in local public life: consultative bodies”; Recommendation 153 (2004) on “A pact for the integration and participation of people of immigrant origin in Europe’s towns, cities and regions”; Recommendation 252 (2008) on “Improving the integration of migrants through local housing policies”; Recommendation 261 (2009) on “Intercultural cities”; Recommendation 262 (2009) on “Equality and diversity in local authority employment and service provision”; and Recommendation 304 (2011) on “Meeting the challenge of inter-faith and intercultural tensions at local level”. The integration of migrants through local entrepreneurship and self-employment is another aspect that deserves full attention.

8. The challenge of integrating migrants in local communities as a major factor for better social cohesion and intercultural harmony, and the crucial role of local authorities in this process, were also highlighted in the report on “Living together: Combining diversity and freedom in 21st century Europe”, commissioned by the Council of Europe and prepared by its Group of Eminent Persons in 2011.[13]

9. The European Commission, in its January 2013 communication “Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan: Reigniting the entrepreneurial spirit in Europe”, committed itself to proposing “policy initiatives to attract migrant entrepreneurs and to facilitate entrepreneurship among migrants already present in the EU or arriving for reasons other than setting up business, building on the best practices developed in the member states, including by local authorities.”[14] The Commission also invited EU member states to remove legal obstacles to the establishment of businesses by legal migrant entrepreneurs and to facilitate access to information and networking for migrant entrepreneurs and prospective migrant entrepreneurs.[15]

10. Maintaining and improving social cohesion through better integration and inclusion of migrants and other minority groups has become a major challenge for all Council of Europe member states, in particular in this time of economic crisis. The implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy in EU countries should provide impetus and positive examples to trigger similar policies and action in non-EU member states as well.  


11. In the light of the above, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities asks the Committee of Ministers to invite member states of the Council of Europe to:

a. recognise the importance of migrant entrepreneurship for integration and economic development, and promote migrant entrepreneurship as part of wider integration policies and economic growth;

b. review the regulatory and structural frameworks for setting up and operating small and medium-sized businesses, which frequently present barriers to migrant business creation, bearing in mind the Think Small First principle and aim to:

i.        make national laws more business-friendly for SMEs;

ii.       simplify procedures and reduce administrative burdens;

iii.      improve the information flow between business and the administration;

iv.      provide access to finance and support access to markets;

v.       evaluate the impact of policy measures on migrant business operations;

vi.      set up mechanisms for consultations with entrepreneurs and their associations to ensure their feedback on the way policy measures are implemented and their effectiveness.

c. advocate and develop in particular methods to facilitate access to venture capital through micro-financing for migrant entrepreneurs and other specific groups;

d. raise the awareness of intermediary organisations such as training centres, consultancies and business associations concerning the situation and conditions of migrant entrepreneurs and strengthen these organisations’ capacities;

e. recognise the importance of the local level in promoting migrant entrepreneurship, and support local policies and measures to facilitate the start-up and operation of migrant businesses;

f. improve the framework for increasing the participation of migrants, including migrant entrepreneurs, in decision making at local level, and in particular grant the right to vote at local level to non-EU foreign residents, following the example of more than 20 European countries which have done so, as well as sign and ratify the Council of Europe Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level;[16]

g. stimulate network building between different actors and co-operation between different levels of governance to raise awareness and increase the knowledge of migrant entrepreneurship;

h. promote entrepreneurship and business creation in general and recognise in particular the importance of SMEs in meeting the challenges brought about by the ageing of the European population.

12. The Congress further reaffirms the continued relevance of its proposals for the integration of migrants contained in its recommendations referred to in paragraph 7 above, and asks the Committee of Ministers to invite member states of the Council of Europe to ensure their full implementation.


13. The Congress also recommends that the European Union and its structures:

a. recognise migrant entrepreneurship as an important aspect of integration and use its potential to contribute to job creation and inclusive economic growth in Europe;

b. take advantage of the possibilities at European level to support local and national governments in their efforts to promote migrant entrepreneurship and increase migrant entrepreneurs’ access to venture capital;

c. recognise and promote entrepreneurship in general as a prerequisite for Europe in dealing with future challenges;

d. make the best use of the existing knowledge of European countries, regions and cities to promote experience sharing and dissemination of best practices.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Election of the members of the Avagani (Assembly of Aldermen) of the City of Yerevan, Armenia

(5 May 2013)

Recommendation 344 (2013)[17]

1. Following an invitation by the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia, the Congress decided to observe the elections of members of Avagani (Assembly) of the City of Yerevan held on 5 May 2013. Stewart DICKSON (United Kingdom, L, ILDG) was appointed Head of Delegation and Rapporteur.

2. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe refers to:

a. the Statutory Resolution relating to the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe (CM/Res(2011)2)[18] adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 19 January 2011 and, in particular, its Article 2 paragraph 4 on the Congress’ role in the observation of local and regional elections;

b. the principles laid down in the European Charter of Local Self-Government (CETS No. 122) which was ratified by Armenia on 25 January 2002, and entered into force on 1 May 2002.

3. The Congress points to the importance of genuinely democratic elections and to its specific mandate and role in the observation of local and regional elections in Council of Europe member states.

4. It stresses that the Congress observes elections only upon invitation by the countries themselves. Similar to the monitoring process of the European Charter of Local Self-Government, election observation missions are conceived as activities carried out in dialogue with the respective authorities.

5. In conformity with its Resolution 306 (2010)[19] on rules for observing local and regional elections, the Congress underlines the importance of this statutory activity and its complementarity to the political monitoring of the situation of local and regional democracy in Council of Europe member states.


6. The Congress notes with satisfaction that:

a. the elections of members of Avagani (Assembly) of the City of Yerevan held on 5 May 2013 were, in general, technically well-prepared, conducted in an orderly manner and organised in accordance with the standards for democratic elections developed by the Council of Europe and other international institutions;

b. following the recommendations made by the Congress in 2009 (Recommendation 277 (2009)[20]), progress was made, in particular with regard to a shift from a partisan to a non-partisan model at the level of the Central Election Commission and the Constituency Electoral Commissions, ensured by the new Electoral Code; also the composition of Precinct Election Commissions ensured better opportunities for the contesters to scrutinise each other;

c. further to Congress Recommendation 338 (2012) which suggested limiting the number of people present in polling stations, there was more control in polling stations thanks to the provision that only 15 voters were allowed to enter at the same time and the clarification on providing assistance to voters in polling stations proved to be positive on Election Day;

d. on the whole, there was some progress concerning the strengthening of the system of checks and balances and with regard to media freedom and anti-corruption measures.

7. At the same time, the Congress has identified issues to be addressed which include:

a. the question of voter registration - concerning those citizens who no longer live in Yerevan but have stayed on the State Population Register and thus on the voters’ lists - and possible misuse of voting rights in this respect;

b. the cameras present in each polling station and the practice of extensive filming by different stakeholders as well as the extensive number of domestic observers present in polling stations;

c. the use of mobile phones in polling stations, in particular during the vote count;

d. the reports received by the delegation about pressure exerted on public service employees to vote in a certain way and to persuade other voters, as well as the recurring issue of vote-buying.

8. Taking into account the previous comments, the Congress invites the authorities of Armenia to take the necessary steps:

a. to make the Electoral Code more specific as to the habitual or main place of permanent residence, in order that residence – in addition to registration – be a condition for voting rights at local level, since local issues should be decided by the electorate actually living in a specific community;

b. to change the provision in the Electoral Code concerning the rights of domestic observers, proxies and media representatives with regard to photographing and videotaping in polling stations, in order to discontinue extensive filming on Election Day which could create mistrust among voters about overly-controlled electoral processes;

c. to introduce a provision to limit the use of mobile phones in polling stations, in particular during the vote count in order to avoid practices obstructing electoral processes.

9. In accordance with international standards for free and fair elections which engage states to take action to combat any kind of electoral fraud,[21] the Congress urges the Armenian authorities to implement the applicable provisions enshrined in the Criminal Code, in particular with regard to financial incentives and the exertion of voting rights.

10. In line with the Venice Commission’s Opinion,[22] the Congress is convinced that although the Electoral Code of Armenia has the potential to ensure the conduct of democratic elections, legislation alone cannot ensure this. It therefore invites the authorities of the Republic of Armenia to fully and properly implement the provisions of the Electoral Code and other laws referring to electoral matters.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Municipal elections in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (24 March 2013)

Recommendation 345 (2013)[23]

1. Following the invitation of the government of “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” to observe local elections on 24 March 2013, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe refers to:

a. the Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2 relating to the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 19 January 2011, and, in particular, its Article 2 paragraph 4 on the Congress’ role in the observation of local and regional elections;

b. the principles laid down in the European Charter of Local Self-Government ETS No.122 (“the Charter”) which was ratified by “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” on 6 June 1997.

2. The Congress points to the importance of genuinely democratic elections and to its specific mandate and role in the observation of local and regional elections in Council of Europe member states.

3. It stresses that the Congress’ election observation missions are carried out only upon invitation by the countries concerned. Similar to the monitoring process of the Charter, election observation missions are conceived in the spirit of co-operation activities.

4. The Congress notes with satisfaction that:

a. the municipal elections of 24 March 2013 were conducted in an overall calm and peaceful manner; election administration was carried out efficiently and  the vote was preceded by an active and highly competitive campaign. The second round of elections held on 7 April 2013 in about 40 municipalities was not observed by the Congress but assessed by a reduced OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission (EOM) which visited a number of polling stations around the country;[24]

b. the legal framework was considered to be comprehensive and amendments to the Electoral Code - which were adopted in addition to amendments made in November 2012 - enjoyed cross-party consensus (though it has to be mentioned that amending the legal framework less than one year before an election is inconsistent with the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters);

c. the voters’ lists were revised and updated and in order to increase voters’ confidence in electoral processes, some 119,000 citizens were removed from the lists as they did not possess a biometric identification card or passport;

d. in municipalities where at least 20% of the citizens speak an official language other than Macedonian, the ballot papers were consistently available in that language;

e. the criteria for gender representation were respected in election administration bodies and, in line with legal requirements, one in each consecutive three places on candidate lists was reserved for the less represented gender.

5. The Congress is also pleased that – further to the European Union-brokered agreement between the ruling Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation – Democratic Party for Macedonian National Unity (VMRO-DPMNE) and the opposition Social Democratic Union of Macedonia (SDSM) – the boycott of Parliament and the municipal elections ended on 1 March 2013 and the vote took place with the participation of the opposition. It recognises the will of the stakeholders to overcome the political crisis in view of the country’s overall goal to achieve EU membership, which has been a strategic priority of all the country’s governments since independence.

6. The Congress expresses concern that:

a. as a consequence of the present global economic crisis, some 25 municipalities in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” reported – prior to Election Day - problems in organising the municipal elections due to the lack of financial resources[25];

b. despite a free and competitive campaign, there was a blurring of state and party activities which did not always provide a level playing field for the contestants;

c. related to the coverage of the campaign by public and private broadcasters, there was bias displayed in favour of the governing coalition.

7. Taking into account the previous comments, the Congress invites the authorities of “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” to make the necessary provisions:

a. to address the gaps still existing in the Electoral Code, including provisions on campaign finance, candidate registration and complaints and appeals;

b. for the further improvement of the accuracy of voters’ lists and providing personalised information for voters indicating the address of their polling station;

c. for the training of the electoral staff in order to pay systematic attention to the secrecy of the vote and to actively address cases of family or group voting;

d. for improving the counting procedures including provisions allowing members of the Electoral Boards to clearly distinguish between valid and invalid ballots and for the re-count of the ballots at polling stations;

e. to ensure a pluralistic media landscape and appropriate working conditions for journalists.

8. Furthermore, the Congress encourages the authorities of “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” to further advance local self-government reforms and decentralisation, with regard to Recommendation 329 (2012).

9. Generally speaking, there is need for the further strengthening of the multi-ethnic society in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, in order to consolidate the state and avoid that inter-ethnic relations are compromised by political party and power interests.


25th SESSION

29-31 October 2013

Regions and territories with special status in Europe

Recommendation 346 (2013)[26]

The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe,

1. Recognising:

a. that Europe’s unique character and strength lies in its diversity;

b. the huge progress the continent has made in developing a large variety of constitutional and political systems to accommodate this diversity;

c. that Europe has a pioneering role in the field of multi-level governance, in developing, articulating and defining the working methods and complex inter-relationships of democratic governance at several different levels (local, intermediate, regional, national and supra-national).

2. Convinced that:

a. much of the future of the European space, its future peaceful and prosperous development will depend on making greater progress in conflict prevention and resolution, which will require the political will to pursue peaceful political dialogue and to move forward on identifying and negotiating legal and constitutional solutions, to develop satisfactory models of decentralised democratic governance for regions with specific issues and identities;

b. the regional level of self-government remains an under-exploited structure for the political and economic development of European states and for responding to the legitimate democratic demands of their citizens;

c. special regional autonomy status can be an effective counterbalance to secessionist tendencies.

3. Recognising that the special status enjoyed by regions of some European states has brought stability and prosperity to those regions.

4. Bearing in mind:

a. the 2002 Helsinki Declaration on Regional Self-Government;

b. the 2009 Council of Europe Reference Framework for Regional Democracy.

5. Welcoming the resolve of the Committee of Ministers to seek peaceful political solutions to European conflicts.

6. Therefore asks the Committee of Ministers to:

a. invite member states to make greater use of the special status model, as a realistic option for a negotiated solution to regional territorial issues, including frozen conflicts;

b. involve the Congress, the Parliamentary Assembly and the Venice Commission in this work;

c. examine how special regional status can contribute to addressing the territorial issues faced by countries with which it is cooperating in the framework of the Council of Europe’s policy towards  neighbouring regions;

d. include, in the context of its political dialogue with the Congress, a transversal examination of the conditions for successful regional autonomy.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Migrants’ access to regional labour markets

Recommendation 347 (2013)[27]

1. The rapidly growing cultural diversity of European societies has brought to the forefront the questions of both integration of migrants into the host community and their participation in the economic development, in particular at regional and local levels. The migrant population in Europe is becoming more diverse not only in terms of ethnic or national origin, but also of length of stay, educational achievement, and socio-economic position, meaning that migrants today have better opportunities for making a meaningful contribution to the regional and local economy, which is especially important in the current economic crisis.

2. In 2011, 33.3 million foreigners were living in the European Union alone (6.6% of the total population). The majority (20.5 million) were third-country nationals (4.4% of the total population). About 80% of third-country nationals in the EU are of working age (15–64 years) and constitute a significant pool of the labour force. In the period prior to the economic crisis, from 2000 to 2007, third-country nationals contributed to a quarter of the overall rise in employment.[28] Yet this migrant human capital remains widely underused, to a large extent due to the lack of recognition of foreign qualifications, complexity of procedures for obtaining work authorisation as well as a range of discriminatory practices. During the economic crisis, the employment situation of migrant workers has deteriorated more rapidly than that of natives.

3. Migrants’ access to the labour market or to creating their own businesses is of utmost importance for successful integration processes because gainful activities – as employee on the labour market or as entrepreneur – constitute a central dimension of both the structural and social integration of migrants. Many opportunities for their participation in society and economic processes become available through employment or self-employment, influencing their social status as individuals. Successful integration through employment contributes to better social cohesion at the local and regional levels and renders a wide range of benefits for the communities and regional population, including by reducing costs associated with social assistance and conflict resolution.


4. Thus, employment and self-employment have been widely recognised as a crucial step in the process of migrants’ integration: they are an integral part of building intercultural relations and improving social cohesion of regional and local communities. Although the regulatory framework for integration is set mostly at the national or European level, regional and local authorities have considerable leeway in implementing related regulations and in moderating their impact and outcome at the grassroots level. Since integration always takes place in a concrete local context, they share the responsibility for the inclusion of migrants in regional and local economic processes,[29] and play a crucial role in creating specific conditions of access to regional and local labour markets or to entrepreneurial activity. This has also been emphasised in the European Agenda for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals.[30]

5. The challenge of integrating migrants in regional and local communities as a major factor for better social cohesion and intercultural harmony, and the crucial role of regional and local authorities in this process, were also highlighted in the report on “Living together: Combining diversity and freedom in 21st century Europe”, commissioned by the Council of Europe and prepared by its Group of Eminent Persons in 2011.

6. Over the past years, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities has addressed to the Committee of Ministers a number of recommendations on various aspects of the integration of migrants at local level, in particular Recommendation 115 (2002) on “the participation of foreign residents in local public life: consultative bodies”; Recommendation 153 (2004) on “A pact for the integration and participation of people of immigrant origin in Europe’s towns, cities and regions”; Recommendation 252 (2008) on “Improving the integration of migrants through local housing policies”; Recommendation 261 (2009) on “Intercultural cities”; Recommendation 262 (2009) on “Equality and diversity in local authority employment and service provision”; Recommendation 304 (2011) on “Meeting the challenge of inter-faith and intercultural tensions at local level”; and Recommendation 347 (2013) on “Integration through self-employment: promoting migrant entrepreneurship in European municipalities”. Improving migrants’ access to regional labour markets is another aspect crucial for migrant integration at the grassroots.

7. Regional policy can directly influence the conditions of migrants’ employment, even if it has to operate in a framework of national and federal state regulations and legislations. In many countries, regional authorities have significant competences in regulating employment and access to labour markets in terms of evaluation of skills and qualifications, issuance of work permits, and provision of proper education and training, as well as of financial assistance, among others. Yet, in many regions, even highly skilled migrant workers are unable to work and integrate professionally, which is often due to the complexity of procedures and discriminatory attitudes and prejudice towards hiring migrants.


8. The Congress is convinced that promoting migrants’ access to regional labour markets and business activities requires a broad range of policies and measures, which must be part of the general economic development and social policy, and which must be guided by the principles of equality, non-discrimination and respect for human rights. Such policies must be based on an integrated approach encompassing most aspects of traditional integration policy, improvement of intercultural relations and diversity management. The challenge of supporting the integration of migrants into increasingly diverse societies calls indeed for innovative measures in all relevant institutions of the host society, and the regional level offers unique opportunities for a bottom-up development of such innovation.

9. In the light of the above, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities asks the Committee of Ministers to invite member States of the Council of Europe to review national regulatory frameworks for the employment of migrants with a view to improving and facilitating their access to labour markets, as well as to promote and support regional action and measures aimed at facilitating migrants’ access to employment, and in particular to:

a. encourage regional authorities to mainstream migrant employment policies and strategies into regional economic development plans;

b. adopt and enforce non-discrimination legislative measures with regard to employment;

c. consider lifting or shortening the duration of work restrictions for certain categories of migrants (such as refugees and asylum seekers);

d. review, where applicable, procedures for the evaluation of skills and qualifications, in particular for medium-and high-skilled migrants, in order to facilitate their obtaining of work authorisation without undue delay;

e. review and facilitate, where applicable, general procedures for obtaining work authorisation by migrants;

f. review and facilitate employment procedures in order to reduce bureaucratic hurdles and to remove excessive requirements for certain categories of jobs, in particular language requirements where applicable;

g. support the development of regional intercultural policies aimed at fostering dialogue and interaction between migrants and the host community, in order to change the prejudiced attitudes of the local population (in particular employers) towards hiring migrants;

h. support training for regional staff to improve their intercultural competences and promote respect for diversity and non-discriminatory attitudes and practices;

i. support the development of intra and inter-regional co-operation aimed at facilitating labour mobility, which would be beneficial also to the migrant population;

j. promote migrant entrepreneurship as a measure to increase job creation and expand regional labour markets, which would be beneficial also to migrant employment;

k. improve education opportunities for migrants and their access to educational institutions, including by providing financial assistance as necessary.

10. The Congress further reaffirms the continued relevance of its proposals for the integration of migrants contained in its recommendations referred to in paragraph 6 above, and asks the Committee of Ministers to invite member States of the Council of Europe to ensure their full implementation.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Local and regional democracy in Ukraine

Recommendation 348 (2013)[31]

1. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe refers to:

a. Article 2, paragraph 1.b. of Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2 of the Committee of Ministers relating to the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, which stipulates that one of the aims of the Congress is “to submit proposals to the Committee of Ministers in order to promote local and regional democracy”;

b. Article 2, paragraph 3, of the above-mentioned Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2, which stipulates that “The Congress shall prepare on a regular basis country-by-country reports on the situation of local and regional democracy in all member states and in states which have applied to join the Council of Europe, and shall ensure, in particular, that the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government are implemented”;

c. Resolution 307 (2010) (revised) on Procedures for monitoring the obligations and commitments entered into by the Council of Europe member states in respect of their ratification of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No.122);

d. Recommendation 219 (2007) on the status of capital cities, Recommendation 132 (2003) on municipal property in the light of the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government;

e. Resolution 299 (2010) of the Congress on Follow-up by the Congress of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Local and Regional Government (Utrecht, Netherlands, 16‑17 November 2009), which states that the Congress will use the Council of Europe Reference Framework for Regional Democracy in its monitoring activities, as well as the reply made by the Committee of Ministers to Congress Recommendation 282 (2010) [CM/Cong(2011)Rec282final], encouraging the governments of member states to take account of the above mentioned Reference Framework in their policies and reforms;

f. the previous Recommendation 102 (2001) on local and regional democracy in Ukraine;

g. the explanatory memorandum [CG(25)8PROV] on the situation of local and regional democracy in Ukraine, presented by Mr Marc Cools (Belgium, L, ILDG) and Mr Pascal Mangin (France, R, EPP/ECC).

2. The Congress delegation carried out two official visits to Ukraine from 20 to 23 May 2012 and from 22 to 23 April 2013. [32]

3. The delegation would like to thank the Permanent Representation of Ukraine to the Council of Europe and the Ukrainian authorities at all levels of government, the associations of local and regional authorities, experts and all the persons with whom discussions took place, for their interest in the Congress’s work and their co-operation at different stages of the monitoring procedure and the information conveyed to the delegation.

4. The Congress notes that:

a.Ukraine signed the European Charter of Local Self-Government (STE No. 122, hereafter “the Charter”) on 6 November 1996 and ratified it, all provisions included on 11 September 1997, with entry into force on 1 January 1998;

b. Ukraine signed the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (STCE No. 207) on 20 October 2011 but has not yet ratified it.

 

5. The Congress welcomes:

a.  the initiatives taken by the government in view of a substantial territorial reform and the fact that local authorities have been represented in this process by their associations through the consultation mechanism as well as the adoption of the “Strategy for Regional Development until 2015” by the government ;

b. the adoption of the “Law on Associations of Local Authorities” of 16 April 2009 which defines the legal basis for the organisation and activities of local government associations and their voluntary union as well as their interaction with central and local authorities;

c.the joint action of the national Ukrainian associations within their “Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Ukraine”;

d. the declarations made by the President of Ukraine on 28 March and 6 June 2013, in which he states that local government reform is one of the most urgent reforms that the country should  carry out ;

e. the creation of co-ordination and consultation instruments such as the "Constitutional Assembly", which brings together representatives of political parties and civil society to develop proposals for the changes to the made to the Constitution of Ukraine, and the "Council of Regions" which aims to improve relations between the state governments and local authorities;

f. the work of the Constitutional Assembly on the "Amending Motion on Chapter XI - Local Autonomy – of the Constitution of Ukraine" presented to the Assembly at its meeting of  21 June 2013;

g. the ratification by Ukraine of Protocol No. 3 to the European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities concerning Euroregional Co-operation Groupings.


6. The Congress regrets however:

a.the legislation that limits the local authorities’ ability to take decisions and manage their own affairs to “matters of local importance” and the fact that local authorities cannot fully exercise their competences on all matters that concern them, which poses a problem with regard to Articles 3 and 4  of the Charter;

b. that several towns and cities, including the capital, have remained without an elected mayor for long periods owing to a gap in the electoral law, which undermines the exercise of local self-government in these towns and cities, in particular in the light of Article 7 para. 1 of the Charter;

c. the limits put on local governments’ financial autonomy by the restrictions on the system of inter-budgetary relations, as well as the insufficient concomitant financing of delegated competences, that transparency is not always guaranteed, notably in the distribution of subsidies and transfers and the complexity of  the equalisation formula which complicates its application to the regions;

d. the absence of a clear division of powers and administrative activities between central government administration and local and regional authorities, which may give rise to overlapping or duplication in the exercise of powers and cause interference from the central level (in the person of the Head of the Administration) in the activities of local authorities and to non-compliance with the provisions of Article 8 of the Charter;

e. the rural exodus which has been the cause of a demographic decline and difficulties in maintaining local economic vitality in many municipalities, and a recentralisation of the competences of small towns by the allocation of these powers, initially granted to local authorities, to the State;

f. the slow pace of the reform despite the strong statements made at the highest level of the State, and the new draft laws recentralising competences at the central level in spite of the aims of the reform.

7. In the light of the above, the Congress recommends that the Committee of Ministers invite the Ukrainian authorities to take into consideration the following recommendations:

a. reinforce subsidiarity by granting  local authorities competence for a substantial share of public affairs and increase the capacity of local authorities to act, by promoting voluntary amalgamations between local authorities in the manner to be specified by the central authorities, such as, for example, mergers and inter-municipal co-operation;

b. organise, in the shortest possible time, elections for mayors in the cities  where this post has been vacant for a long time, and in particular in the capital city of Kyiv;

c. reinforce  the financial autonomy of local authorities and improve the equalisation system, providing a fair and transparent redistribution of funds, based on clear criteria and objectives, by including it in the reform agenda to ensure conformity with Article 9 of the Charter ;

d. transfer the competences of the administrations in districts and regions to elected representatives in order to establish an administration under their responsibility;

e. develop specific strategies, notably by transferring competences to the local level, aimed at revitalising the periurban and rural areas exposed to demographic, economic and social decline, and involve local authorities in these geographical areas in the development of these strategies by the central government authorities;

f.implement the reform in a timely manner by adopting legislation based on the "Amending Motion on Chapter XI of the Constitution of Ukraine", presented at the meeting of the Constitutional Assembly on 21 June 2013 and, if necessary, by a revision of the Constitution;


g. ratify, in the near future, the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (CETS No. 207),  already signed by Ukraine on 20 October 2011, particularly in order to strengthen public access to locally important planning document.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Local and regional democracy in Albania

Recommendation 349 (2013)[33]

1. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe refers to:

a. Article 2, paragraph 1.b. of Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2 of the Committee of Ministers relating to the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, which stipulates that one of the aims of the Congress is “to submit proposals to the Committee of Ministers in order to promote local and regional democracy”;

b. Article 2, paragraph 3, of the above-mentioned Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2, which stipulates that “The Congress shall prepare on a regular basis country-by-country reports on the situation of local and regional democracy in all member states and in states which have applied to join the Council of Europe, and shall ensure, in particular, that the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government are implemented”;

c. Resolution 307 (2010) (revised) on Procedures for monitoring the obligations and commitments entered into by the Council of Europe member states in respect of their ratification of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No.122);

d. Recommendation 219 (2007) on the status of capital cities, Recommendation 132 (2003) on municipal property in the light of the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government;

e. Resolution 299 (2010) of the Congress on Follow-up by the Congress of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Local and Regional Government (Utrecht, Netherlands, 16‑17 November 2009), which states that the Congress will use the Council of Europe Reference Framework for Regional Democracy in its monitoring activities, as well as the reply made by the Committee of Ministers to the Congress Recommendation 282 (2010) (CM/CONG(2011)Rec282final, encouraging the governments of member states to take account of the above mentioned Reference Framework;

f. the previous Recommendation 201 (2006) on local and regional democracy in Albania;

g. the explanatory memorandum on the situation of local and regional democracy in Albania, presented by Mr Ždenek BROŽ, Czech Republic (L, ECR) and Mr Åke SVENSSON, Sweden (R, SOC).


2. The Congress recalls that:

a.Albania signed the European Charter of Local Self-Government (CETS No. 122, hereafter "the Charter") on 27 May 1998 and fully ratified it on 4 April 2000, with entry into force on 1 August 2000;

b. Albania has not signed the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (CETS No. 207).

3. The Congress delegation carried out an official visit to Albania from 12 to 14 December 2012.[34]

4. The delegation would like to thank the Permanent Representation of Albania to the Council of Europe and the Albanian authorities at all levels of government, the associations of local and regional authorities, experts and other interlocutors for their valuable co-operation at different stages of the monitoring procedure and for the information conveyed to the delegation.

5. The Congress notes with satisfaction that:

a. the Albanian authorities have adopted a strategy for decentralisation that is a roadmap for more local and regional development in Albania, which constitutes an important step forward, in the establishment of multi-level governance and electoral democracy in the country;

b.the Albanian system of local and regional self-government can, in general, be considered to correspond to the spirit and principles of the Charter;

c. the establishment of the “Regional Development Fund” has been instrumental in reducing the disparities between various local authorities which should be recognised as a successful example of the decentralisation policy in Albania.

6. The Congress nevertheless expresses its concern that:

a. the partisan behaviour of local government leaders continues to prevent them from speaking with one unified voice, resulting in a situation where local elected representatives cannot find consensus inside local government associations and consolidate their position vis-à-vis the central government;

b. the co-existence of regional councils and the prefects as parallel structures in each region (qark) makes it unclear what competences are under the exclusive mandate of the council and is not in conformity with the provisions of Article 3 of the Charter, also giving rise to the risk of duplication and constituting the main obstacle for regional autonomy in Albania;

c. the organic law regulates, in a confusing manner, the structure, roles and competences of both the local and the regional authorities;

d. there are no clear regulations formalising the participation of the local government associations in the process of consultation with the central government ;

e.the system of administrative supervision allows for a wide interpretation as regards the scope of supervision of local authorities’ own functions;

f. local authorities do not have concomitant financial resources or local revenues commensurate with their own and shared competences, which is not in compliance with Article 9 para. 2 of the Charter;


g. local authorities are heavily dependent on financial assistance from the State, which resorts to the practice of cutting unconditional grants in certain cases. This is in contradiction with the provisions of Article 9 para. 5 of the Charter;

h. the city of Tirana does not have financial, fiscal and budgetary instruments adapted to its status as capital city.

7. In light of the above the Congress requests the Committee of Ministers to invite the Albanian authorities to take account of the following recommendations:

a. intensify the decentralisation process in the light of the Charter and the recommendations provided by the Congress, and begin a reform of the territorial system that will allow communes and municipalities to carry out their responsibilities, particularly in the area of the spatial development of their territories and urban planning;

b. revise legislation to clarify the competences of local and regional authorities, revising in particular Articles 2, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of Law No. 8652 in the light of Article 4 of the Charter;

c. clarify the respective areas of competence of the prefect and the regional (qark) council, and consider setting up a unified administrative structure accountable to the regional council, as well as introducing direct and universal elections for the regional council;

d. consolidate the institutions of the regional level and reform the system of regional finances;

e. introduce a specific provision in Law No. 8652 aiming to formalise the process of consultation of local authorities by the central authorities, to ensure consultation “in due time and in an appropriate way, on matters which concern them directly”, as required by Article 4 paragraph 6 of the Charter;

f. provide support to the Council of Europe and the Congress in the implementation of their project entitled "Strengthening the local government structures and co-operation between local officials in Albania" funded by the Swiss Confederation and, in particular, support the efforts of local officials to build a platform of pluralist dialogue involving all representative bodies of local communities to protect their interests;

g. ensure, through legislation, that the supervision exercised by the central authorities on the decisions taken by the communes and municipalities within the remit of their delegated and shared competences, does not  allow for a disproportionate control over local government affairs;

h. improve the legal status of Tirana in order to provide the capital city with the relevant financial, fiscal and budgetary instruments to allow it to function adequately as a capital city;

i. sign and ratify, in the near future, the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (CETS No. 207).


25th Session

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Local and regional democracy in Denmark

Recommendation 350 (2013)[35]

1. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe refers to:

a. Article 2 paragraph 1.b. of Statutory Resolution CM/Res (2011) 2 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, which states that one of the aims of the Congress is “to submit proposals to the Committee of Ministers in order to promote local and regional democracy”;

b. Article 2 paragraph 3 of the aforementioned Resolution CM/Res(2011)2, which states that “the Congress shall prepare on a regular basis country-by-country reports on the situation of local and regional democracy in all member States and in States which have applied to join the Council of Europe, and shall ensure, in particular, that the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government are implemented”;

c. Resolution 307 (2010) revised on procedures for monitoring the obligations and commitments entered into by the Council of Europe member States in respect of their ratification of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122; hereafter “the Charter”);

d. Recommendation 219 (2007) on the status of capital cities, Recommendation 132 (2003) on municipal property in the light of the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government;

e. Resolution 299 (2010) of the Congress on Follow-up by the Congress of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Local and Regional Government (Utrecht, Netherlands, 16‑17 November 2009), which states that the Congress will use the Council of Europe Reference Framework for Regional Democracy in its monitoring activities, as well as the reply made by the Committee of Ministers to the Congress Recommendation 282 (2010) (CM/CONG(2011)Rec282final, encouraging the governments of member states to take account of the above mentioned Reference Framework;

f. Recommendation 164 (2005) on local and regional democracy in Denmark adopted by the Congress in May 2005;

g. The explanatory memorandum [CG(25)12] on the situation of local and regional democracy in Denmark, presented by Ms Julia COSTA, Portugal (L, EPP/CCE), and Mr Jean-Pierre LIOUVILLE, France (R, SOC).


2. The Congress stresses the following:

a. The Kingdom of Denmark became a member of the Council of Europe on 5 May 1949. It is one of the Organisation’s founding States. It signed the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122, hereafter “the Charter”) on 15 October 1985 and ratified it on 3 February 1988. Denmark adopted all the provisions of the Charter. At the time of ratification it made a declaration to the effect that the Kingdom of Denmark considered itself bound by the European Charter of Local Self-Government in its entirety, but that the provisions of the Charter would apply to the Danish municipalities (kommuner) and counties (amtskommuner), apart from the Metropolitan Council (Hovedstadsradet), which was abolished in 1989, and that the Charter would apply neither to Greenland nor to the Faroe Islands;

b. Denmark has not signed the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self-Government on the right to participate in local government affairs (CETS No. 207).

3. It notes that:

a. Ms Julia COSTA (Portugal, L, EPP/CCE), Rapporteur on Local Democracy, and Mr Jean‑Pierre LIOUVILLE (France, R, SOC), Rapporteur on Regional Democracy, were instructed by the Monitoring Committee to prepare a report on Denmark and to submit it to the Congress;[36]

b. The monitoring visit took place from 3 to 5 October 2012. During this visit, the Congress monitoring delegation met with the relevant central government bodies, members of the parliamentary committee concerned,  national associations of local and regional authorities and representatives of the council of the Capital Region, Dragør, Soro and Maribo, as well as with representatives of the Faroe Islands and Greenland and the Danish Ombudsman;

c. The delegation would like to thank the Permanent Delegation of Denmark to the Council of Europe, the Danish authorities, the national associations of local authorities and all those with whom it held discussions, for their readiness to help, their interest in the work of the Congress and their co-operation throughout the visit.

4. The Congress notes the following with satisfaction:

a. the generally positive (and in some ways exemplary) nature of local democracy in Denmark, which is reflected in a “Charter Culture” as regards the implementation of the principles enshrined in the Charter;

b. the merging of municipalities on a voluntary basis and after consultation with local authorities on the one hand, and the possibility of inter-municipal co‑operation agreements, in case of refusal of the mergers by the concerned local authorities on the other hand;

c. the consultation with local and regional authorities during the process of planning and decision-making in all matters directly affecting them;

d. the compliance with most of the principles of the Charter, particularly those laid down in Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 11;

e. the active participation by Danish citizens in the political decision making processes;

f. the 2007 reform which had been conducted in a participatory manner and which had the primary aim of reinforcing local democracy in Denmark.


5. The Congress regrets:

a. the lack of clarity as regards certain responsibilities, which are not clearly allotted to local authorities – a situation which may lead to duplication (Article 4 para.1);

b. the inadequacy of financial resources freely available to local authorities in the framework of their competences (Article 9 para.2);

c. the insufficiency of the mechanisms and procedures for financial equalisation at the local and regional levels and the consequent unequal distribution of financial burdens (Article 9 para.5);

d. the often strict State supervision of municipal access to the capital markets (Article 9 para.8);

e. the decreased powers and responsibilities of the Capital City of Copenhagen;

f. the restricted competences of the regions and their inability to levy taxes or obtain financial resources other than contributions from the national level.

6. The Congress recommends that the Committee of Ministers invite the Danish authorities to:

a. clearly define, in the light of Article 4 para.1 of the Charter, the areas of responsibility of local authorities, including the competences set out in municipal decrees which are vague and which often overlap;

b. allocate appropriate and concomitant financial resources to all competences exercised by local authorities;

c. improve the procedures for financial equalisation among the municipalities in order to bring them into line with Article 9 para.5 of the Charter in connection with local authorities, and draw on the Reference Framework on Regional Democracy in structuring the Danish regions;

d. revise the State’s supervisory procedures vis-à-vis local authorities in order to facilitate their access to the national capital markets;

e. reinforce the responsibilities of the Capital City in the light of Recommendation 219 (2007) of the Congress on the Status of Capital Cities;

f. revise the responsibilities of the regions and consider empowering them to levy taxes or to obtain their own specific financial resources;

g. sign and ratify in the near future the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self‑Government on the right to participate in local government affairs (CETS No. 207).

7. The Congress invites the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to take account of the present recommendation on local and regional democracy in Denmark, as well as its explanatory memorandum, in its own monitoring procedures and other activities relevant to this member state.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Observation of local and regional elections – strategy and rules of the Congress

Resolution 306 (2010) REV[37]

1. The rights of citizens to vote – and to be elected – at periodic, genuine democratic elections are internationally recognised human rights. Genuine democratic elections cannot be achieved unless a wide range of other human rights and fundamental freedoms can be exercised without discrimination. They serve to resolve peacefully the competition for political power within a country. They are part of a process to establish democratic governance. Like other human rights and like democracy in general, they cannot be achieved without the protection of the rule of law.

2. The citizens’ rights to exercise their democratic choice in a universal, equal, free, secret and direct suffrage is above all the grounding of political participation at territorial level that is enshrined in the preamble to the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority adopted in November 2009[38] (“…the right to participate in the conduct of public affairs is one of the democratic principles that are shared by all member States of the Council of Europe”).

3. Election observation – as a matter of concern for international organisations – has become widely accepted and plays an important role in providing accurate and impartial assessments about the nature of electoral processes. It has the potential to enhance the integrity of electoral processes, by deterring and exposing irregularities and fraud and by providing recommendations for improving processes. It can promote public confidence, promote electoral participation and mitigate the potential for election-related conflict. It also serves to enhance international understanding through the sharing of experiences and information about democratic development.

4. The practice of observing elections in the Council of Europe began after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, as part of the application process of a number of new democracies. With the objective of supplementing the work done by the Parliamentary Assembly regarding national and presidential elections, the Congress – as guardian of territorial democracy – was charged with observing local and regional elections. Since 1990 the Congress has carried out more than 100 election observation missions in Europe and, occasionally, beyond.


5. Having regard to:

a. the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;

b. the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

c. the European Charter of Local Self-Government and its Additional Protocol on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority;

d. the Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2 adopted by the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers, defining observation of local and/or regional elections as one of the priorities of Congress’ action;

e. the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters (2002) of the European Commission on Democracy through Law of the Council of Europe (hereafter “Venice Commission”), to its Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation (2004);

f. Congress Recommendation 124 (2003) on “the Code of Good Practice in electoral matters”;

g. Congress Resolution 233 (2007) on “co-operation between the Congress and national associations of local and regional authorities”;

h. Congress Resolution 274 (2008) on “Congress policy in observing local and regional elections”,

6. the Congress underlines the importance of election observation at local and regional level and its complementarity to the monitoring of implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government which constitutes the cornerstone of local democracy in Europe.

7. The Congress refers to the specific role of local and regional elected representatives as observers of local and regional elections and stresses:

a. that this contributes to the legitimacy and credibility of electoral processes at the grassroots level;

b. that the state and conditions of electoral processes at the grassroots level are assessed by local and regional elected political representatives of the 47 Council of Europe member states on a peer‑to‑peer basis.

8. The Congress notes that, in principle, observation of local and regional elections shall not be limited to certain countries. In accordance with the above-mentioned complementarity of election observation to the monitoring of implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government, observation of local and regional elections is relevant with regard to the entire family of Council of Europe member states.

9 The Congress affirms its interest in observing local and regional elections specifically in those countries where the monitoring process revealed shortcomings and/or issues of concern with regard to local and regional democracy.

10. The Congress organises an election observation mission only following the invitation of the authorities of the country concerned.

11. With regard to those countries where the Congress’ monitoring process revealed certain weaknesses with regard to local and regional democracy, the Congress will adopt an active attitude and express its interest to be invited by those authorities to observe local or regional elections.


12. The Congress, in order to make an accurate assessment of the conduct of elections, is of the opinion that it is not enough to evaluate the organisational framework of elections. With a view to achieving this goal, the Congress decided in 2010 to adopt a policy for the widening of the scope of observation of local and regional elections in Council of Europe member states. It examines the whole election environment including elements which are key for the functioning of democracy and for genuinely democratic elections, notably:

a. the political landscape of the country (historical background, political system, electoral system);

b. the legal framework (constitution, laws, electoral code);

c. the role of the media (freedom of expression, media pluralism);

d. the financing of the parties and of the election campaign;

e. the election campaign (visibility, media coverage, balance, voter education);

f. the post-election situation (formation of the local/regional government, role attributed to the opposition, follow-up of complaints and appeals);

g. other elements of possible relevance for the elections.

13. The Congress is of the opinion that, in accordance with the “Rules for the practical organisation of Congress election observation missions” specified in the present resolution, with regard to a pertinent follow-up to the recommendations that arise from the observation of local and regional elections, a post-observation procedure may be put into place in certain cases.

14. The Congress and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe will exchange, on a regular basis, every two years, the conclusions of election observation reports in accordance with the decision taken at the 43rd Meeting of the Council for Democratic Elections (Venice Commission).

15. The Congress, aware of its institutional responsibility within the Council of Europe for consistently organising high-quality election observation missions according to recognised international standards, will continue to ensure that Congress members who take part in such missions will benefit from specialised training.

16. In the same way as it strengthened its co-operation with national associations, the Congress may invite the EU Committee of the Regions to join the Congress delegation on its election observation missions after receiving the invitation of the state in which the election observation takes place. Reciprocity between both institutions will be guaranteed when the report is presented to the Congress and the EU Committee of the Regions, as both the rapporteur of the Congress and a speaker of the EU Committee of the Regions will be invited when the report is debated.

17. In the interest of complementarity between the Congress and other international institutions involved in election observation, co-operation will be maintained and strengthened with the OSCE/ODIHR when the latter is observing local and/or regional elections in a country which invited the Congress to observe such elections.

18. In pursuance of Congress Resolution 353 (2013) REV on Congress post-monitoring and post-observation of elections: Developing political dialogue, the Monitoring Committee of the Congress examines and adopts the report following an election observation mission and approves the resolution and recommendation for adoption by the Congress Session (or by its Chambers).

19. In pursuance of Congress Resolution 353 (2013) REV, at the request of the Congress Monitoring Committee, the Bureau of the Congress may propose to national authorities to whom the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers addressed a Congress recommendation on observation of local or/and regional elections, an post-election observation procedure which comprises different steps, according to the aforementioned resolution.


20. In pursuance of Article 2.5 of the Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2, recommendations shall be transmitted as appropriate to the Parliamentary Assembly and/or the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers as well as to European and international organisations and institutions. The recommendations shall also be transmitted to the head and the secretary of the national delegation to the Congress. In addition, the reports and recommendations will be made available to interested Council of Europe bodies, notably to the Venice Commission.

* * *

In order to implement the present resolution, the Congress adopts the following rules for the practical organisation of Congress election observation missions and the Code of conduct for Congress observers.

A. Rules for the practical organisation of Congress election observation missions

1. Following an invitation by the authorities of a country to observe local and/or regional elections the Congress Bureau decides on the acceptance of the invitation and on the scale of the operation (assessment mission, pre-election mission, observation mission). The Congress is free to emphasise the different steps. In the absence of a Bureau meeting, the Congress President will take the necessary decision, after consultation with the Presidents of the Chambers.

2. The Bureau of the Congress may also decide to send a letter, expressing the interest in observing local or regional elections, to the authorities of the country in which such a vote is scheduled, in particular in countries where the monitoring process revealed shortcomings and/or issues of concern with regard to local and regional democracy, as well as, on the contrary, cases of innovation or good practice.

3. A draft observation programme will be drawn up by the Congress Secretariat. The Permanent Representative of the country concerned, the head and the secretary of the national delegation to the Congress will be duly informed. In general, the Congress Secretariat will provide for a regular correspondence with all the relevant stakeholders, in particular with the head of the Council of Europe outpost, in countries where such an office does exist.

4. The Congress Secretariat must ensure high-quality information for the members of the election observation delegation.

5. The Congress Secretariat will send a call for interest, including the application form, to the email addresses of all Congress members. Secretaries of national delegations will receive a copy. Congress members who express their interest in taking part in the mission and send back the form within a given deadline will be taken into account. Candidatures from members of national associations whose associations agree to cover their costs shall also be taken into consideration.

6. Based on candidatures received within the required deadline, a draft delegation including the delegation’s leadership will be proposed by the Congress Secretary General including, normally, between 5 and 20 members.

7. The composition of delegations is determined according to an appointment system taking into account a balanced representation of the different political groups of the Congress, gender balance and a fair geographical representation and also taking into account the chronological order of candidacies put forward by Congress members.

8. In order to ensure a meaningful participation in the work of the mission, the candidate’s language skills (in at least one of the official languages of the Council of Europe) will be taken into consideration. In addition, experience in election observation and participation in training sessions are amongst the criteria.

9. Adequate language skills (in at least one of the two official languages of the Council of Europe), conversation techniques and capacities in political dialogue as well as experience in election observation and monitoring activities as well as participation in training sessions of the Congress determine the appointment of the head of delegation.

10. Observation delegations should not include Congress members from countries with special relations with the country where elections are going to be monitored.

11. Members taking part in a pre-election visit are expected to also be available for the election observation mission.

12. The rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee for the country where elections are monitored shall be ex-officio members of the election observation delegation, but shall not have the right to act as head/rapporteur of the election observation delegation.

13. On the basis of the proposal provided by the Congress Secretary General, the Bureau will decide on the delegation including the head of delegation and rapporteur (both functions can be carried out by the same person), in accordance with the aforementioned principles. In the absence of a Bureau meeting, the President of the Congress, in consultation with the Presidents of the Chambers, will take the necessary decisions.

14. In order to inform the media about the preliminary conclusions of the Congress election observation delegation, a press conference – chaired by the head of the delegation – will be held the day following the Election Day. Members of a Congress election observation delegation are expected to be present at this press conference.

15. If the Congress is not the only international institution to observe local or regional elections in the respective country, an IEOM (“International Election Observation Mission”) may be formed together with such institutions, notably with the OSCE/ODIHR. This implies – according to standard procedure – a joint press conference on the day following the Election Day and a joint preliminary statement. However, if, after an election, a joint final assessment cannot be achieved in the framework of the IEOM, the Congress reserves itself the right to hold – if necessary – its own press conference making public its own assessment.

16. If a “joint IEOM” is formed together with other international organisations, all related activities (press conferences, drafting of media releases or political statements) have to be carried out in compliance with Congress requirements (the corporate identity of the Congress mission has to be retained, the specific role and nature of Congress observers should be highlighted, the scale of Congress operations must not be reduced and political messages by the Congress must not be distorted).

17. The Report will be drawn up by the rapporteur with the support of the Congress secretariat and reflects the opinion of the members of the entire delegation. The Report must be comprehensive, noting positive and negative factors, distinguishing between significant and insignificant factors. It should identify patterns that could have an impact on the integrity of the election process and on the genuineness of the vote.

18. The Report must also take account of Resolutions/ Recommendations previously adopted by the Congress, including those arising from monitoring Reports with regard to the country concerned as well as relevant opinions and recommendations from other Council of Europe bodies and international organisations and institutions.

B. Code of conduct for Congress observers

1. Congress members taking part in election observation missions have to have signed the Congress’ Declaration of Principle. They shall avoid, in the framework of the accomplishment of such missions, conflicts between any actual or potential financial or any other interests, on a professional, personal or family level, in connection with the country concerned by such an election observation. If a member is unable to avoid such a conflict of interest it should be made known to the Congress Secretariat. Any gifts or similar benefits of a value in excess of 200 Euros that a member has accepted in the last 24 months from the authorities of the country concerned shall be also registered with the Secretariat. During such missions, Congress members shall avoid any situation that could appear to be a conflict of interest or receiving an inappropriate payment or gift.


2. Members of Congress election observation missions should always stress that the rights of citizens to vote (and to be elected) at periodic, genuinely democratic elections are internationally recognised human rights. In particular, they should comply with the following rules:

a. to respect the sovereignty of the host country and to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms of its people at the same time;

b. to respect the laws of the host country (and to follow lawful instructions from the country’s governmental, security or electoral authorities);

c. to note if laws, regulations and actions of state/governmental/electoral officials unduly burden or obstruct the exercise of election;

d. to protect the integrity of the election observation mission (to follow the instructions of the Congress’ delegation leadership, to attend the required training sessions, briefings, debriefings, to fully dedicate themselves to the observation mission, to read the background materials provided, to become familiar with the legal framework for elections and with other relevant rules and regulations);

e. to maintain strict political impartiality at all times (to avoid expressing or showing any bias or preference in relation to national authorities, political parties, candidates, issues etc.);

f. to avoid obstructing the election process (to take note of significant problems, irregularities, fraud etc. – but not to intervene, not to give instructions to election officials, political party representatives or other observers);

g. to ask questions of election officials, political party representatives and other observers (without obstructing the election process);

h. to maintain accuracy of observations and professionalism in drawing conclusions (observations should be comprehensive, noting positive and negative factors, distinguishing between significant and insignificant factors; observations should identify patterns that could have an impact on the integrity of the election process);

i. to keep a well-documented record of the observation (in particular by using the Election Evaluation Guide provided by the Venice Commission and the questionnaire);

j. to refrain from making statements/declarations to the media, via social networks or in public on conclusions drawn from the observation before the final statement of the mission (possible requests from the media have to be clarified with the Congress’ delegation leadership); statements/declarations as described should not contradict or conflict the overall final assessment of the elections;

k. to co-operate with other international election observers, notably with OSCE/ODIHR; it should be pointed out that English is the de facto working language of OSCE/ODIHR election observation missions.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Procedures for monitoring the obligations and commitments entered into by the Council of Europe member states in respect of their ratification of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122)

Resolution 307 (2010) REV2[39]

1. The European Charter of Local Self-Government (hereafter “the Charter”) is the authoritative legal instrument guaranteeing respect for a minimum of rights forming the first European platform for local self-government.

2. The Congress refers to its Resolution 31 (1996) on Guiding principles for the action of the Congress when preparing reports on local and regional democracy in member states and applicant states.

3. It also recalls the Committee of Ministers’ Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2[40], which stipulates that it is for the Congress to monitor implementation of the Charter by the countries having ratified it, and states, inter alia, that:

“2-3. The Congress shall prepare on a regular basis country-by-country reports on the situation of local and regional democracy in all member States and in States which have applied to join the Council of Europe, and shall ensure, in particular, that the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government are implemented (…)

2-5. Recommendations and opinions of the Congress shall be sent as appropriate to the Parliamentary Assembly and/or the Committee of Ministers as well as to European and international organisations and institutions. Resolutions and other adopted texts which do not entail possible action by the Assembly and/or the Committee of Ministers shall be transmitted to them for their information.”

4. The Congress monitoring procedure is a crucial tool for checking that Council of Europe countries which have ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government honour their commitments. In addition to checking in respect of states’ commitments, the procedure makes it possible to establish open and constructive dialogue between the Congress and the national, local and regional authorities of member states, via impartial and independent rapporteurs appointed on the basis of objective criteria. This monitoring procedure facilitates open and constructive dialogue between the Congress and the national, local and regional authorities of the member states.


5. The Congress believes it necessary to organise these monitoring procedures on a regular basis in each member state which ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government. Given the ever-changing nature of local and regional democracy, it believes that it should be possible to organise these visits approximately every five years.

6. The Congress stresses how important it is for the Council of Europe to ensure that the commitments entered into by all its member states are fully honoured.

7. Pursuant to the aforementioned texts, the Congress must ensure that it monitors the commitments entered into by the member states having ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government and/or its Additional Protocol on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority.[41]

8. Furthermore, pursuant to Resolution 299 (2010), the Reference Framework for Regional Democracy will be taken into consideration.[42]

9. Alongside the monitoring activities vis-à-vis the European Charter of Local Self-Government, the Congress will promote the Council of Europe conventions inasmuch as they entail obligations in respect of local and regional authorities.

10. For the purposes of supporting the development of local and regional democracy in the territory covered by the members states of the Council of Europe and promoting at this level the values of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, the Bureau of the Congress shall decide to implement the monitoring programme of the European Charter of Local Self-Government proposed by its Monitoring Committee as part of systematic monitoring exercises (monitoring the Charter in its entirety), under specific monitoring exercises (monitoring a particular aspect of the Charter) or by means of fact-finding missions (clarifying a specific question allegedly in breach of one of the provisions of the Charter).

11. The Bureau of the Congress shall instruct its Monitoring Committee to organise monitoring procedures on the honouring of these commitments in this/these country(ies). The monitoring procedure is also geared to verifying the content of any declarations made by the State, under Article 12 of the Charter, when depositing the instrument of ratification, and, where applicable, exploring with the authorities the possibility of ratifying, at a later date, the article(s) to which their declaration related.

12. On the basis of a list of candidates, the Chair of the Monitoring Committee shall appoint two rapporteurs from among its members, namely one full member or alternate from its Chamber of Regions and one full member or alternate from its Chamber of Local Authorities. Appointment of the rapporteurs shall comply with Article 2 of the rules governing the organisation of Congress monitoring procedures, as appended to the present resolution.

13. The Congress believes that, in the interest of ensuring compliance with the criteria of independence and impartiality of the rapporteurs, which are the very keys to the effectiveness of a monitoring mission, a rapporteur’s mandate may not exceed five years and they may not be tasked with monitoring the same country for the five years following that initial period.

14. For the sake of the smooth running of the monitoring procedure, the committee may decide to extend the mandate of one of the rapporteurs, where there are grounds and if it is possible, for six months at the most, in particular to enable the rapporteur to present a report already entered on the agenda of a Congress part-session.

15. For the purposes of the present resolution, the mandate of rapporteurs shall commence on the date of their appointment.


16. The delegation shall be assisted by a consultant drawn from the Group of Independent Experts on the European Charter of Local Self-Government or by an independent consultant who has specialist knowledge of the country to be visited and substantial knowledge of the Charter and of local and regional democracy issues in Council of Europe member states.

17. The monitoring delegations shall meet with the authorities responsible for local and regional democracy and human rights issues, at the national, regional and local level, as well as any individuals liable to provide the delegation with relevant information under the procedure for monitoring commitments entered into by ratifying the Charter.[43]

18. The report must be drafted, as far as possible, within six weeks following the visit.

19. The report on the situation of local and regional democracy in a country to which a monitoring or fact-finding visit has been made shall be drafted by the rapporteurs in collaboration with the consultant and the secretariat.

20. It must also take into account the recommendations and/or resolutions previously adopted by the Congress, particularly recommendations addressed to the country visited. The report shall also take into consideration the political context in which the monitoring visit took place and examine the situation of local and regional democracy in the light of other relevant Council of Europe texts[44] ratified by the country in question.

21. Once validated by the rapporteurs, the draft report shall be sent to the authorities of the country concerned and all talking partners with whom the delegation met, so that they may respond and send back their comments. The rapporteurs may use these contributions to amend the text of their report, which will be submitted to the Monitoring Committee for adoption. They may decide to publish the comments in an appendix to their report in order to illustrate a different viewpoint from that set out in the report.

22. The report shall be accompanied by a draft recommendation and if necessary a draft resolution.

23. Pursuant to Rule 42-5 of the Rules of Procedure of the Congress and its Chambers,[45] draft reports, recommendations and, where applicable, resolutions, shall be submitted for adoption to the Monitoring Committee, and then for adoption by the Congress at a plenary session or a session of the Chambers.

24. Pursuant to Article 2-5 of the Statutory Resolution mentioned above, the recommendation shall be transmitted to the Committee of Ministers and to the Parliamentary Assembly.

25. Rules governing the organisation of Congress monitoring procedures and a Code of Good Conduct for monitoring delegation members are appended to the present resolution.

* * *


A. Rules governing the organisation of Congress monitoring procedures pursuant to Resolution 307 (2010) REV2 and the Code of Good Conduct

I.     Rules governing the organisation of Congress monitoring procedures

1.      Pursuant to Resolution 307 (2010) REV2, the purpose of the present rules is to define the arrangements for organising procedures for monitoring the commitments of Council of Europe member states having signed and ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government[46] with the aim of achieving the objective set forth in the aforementioned resolution.

2.      This procedure applies in the same way whatever type of monitoring is being implemented, ie systematic monitoring (monitoring the Charter in its entirety), specific monitoring (monitoring a particular aspect of the Charter) and fact-finding missions (clarification of a specific issue which may lead to infringement of a Charter provision).

3.      Each year the Monitoring Committee shall submit to the Bureau of the Congress, for adoption, the programme of visits scheduled under the Charter monitoring programme.

1.       The monitoring procedure

4.             The monitoring procedure shall be carried out approximately every five years in each Council of Europe member state having signed and ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government. It shall comprise five phases:

a.    the monitoring visit;

b.    the consultation procedure with the authorities encountered on the preliminary draft report;

c.    examination of the report by the Monitoring Committee and the Congress and adoption of a recommendation by the Congress during the sessions. If the rapporteurs think it necessary, they may propose a draft resolution for adoption by the Congress;

d.    transmission for debate to the Committee of Ministers, which may decide on its subsequent transmission to the authorities of the country concerned;

e.    an invitation issued to the authorities of the country concerned to address the session of the Congress or the session of one of its Chambers.

This serves as a basis for future cooperation activities to come.

2.       Composition of the monitoring delegation

5.      A monitoring delegation shall comprise two rapporteurs, one on local democracy and one on regional democracy, one consultant, and one or more members of the Congress Secretariat. The delegation is generally accompanied by interpreters to facilitate communication between the language of the country in question and the delegation’s working language (French or English).

6.      The whole procedure shall be governed by the principles of independence, impartiality and equity, starting with the appointment of the rapporteurs and the consultant, which shall be based on geographical and political criteria geared to preserving the objectivity of the delegation which will conduct the monitoring visit.

7.       The rapporteurs shall be appointed from among the Full or Alternate members of the Monitoring Committee of the Congress who put forward their names as candidates.

8.      Upon express derogation by the Committee Chair, a member of the Congress who is not a member of the Monitoring Committee may be appointed rapporteur.

9.       Members of the Monitoring Committee who wish to be rapporteurs on local or regional democracy in a given country must submit their application to the secretariat of the Committee for the attention of the Committee Chair.

10.     The rapporteurs must be appointed in a manner that ensures a balanced representation of the political groups and the group of members not registered with a political group of the Congress.

11.     Candidates for monitoring exercises may be appointed for only one monitoring exercise at a time. The criteria for the composition of the delegation are as follows:

a.      The rapporteurs and the consultant must not be nationals of the country concerned by the monitoring procedure, or a bordering country or a country which has a particular relationship with the country to be monitored;

b.      Members of the Monitoring Committee are ineligible as rapporteurs for a given country if they have already been rapporteurs in respect of this country during the five years preceding their candidature;

c.      The two rapporteurs must also belong to different political groups (or be non-registered);

d.      The delegation’s working language can be either French or English.

12.     The Chair of the Monitoring Committee shall verify the conformity of the candidates’ profile with the aforementioned criteria (see Rule 12 of the present Rules), and shall appoint the rapporteurs on local democracy and on regional democracy. He shall notify the appointments to the Monitoring Committee at its following meeting.

13.    The maximum duration of the rapporteurs’ mandate shall be five years, dating from their appointment.

14.    A rapporteur’s mandate may exceptionally be extended for a maximum of six months, on grounds of the timetable for the presentation of the monitoring report at a Congress session.

15.     The delegation shall be strictly limited to the rapporteurs, the consultant and the member(s) of the Secretariat, in accordance with Rule 3 of the present Rules and Resolution 307 (2010) REV2. Consequently, delegation members must not be accompanied by assistants or other persons whose participation is not explicitly provided for in Resolution 307 (2010) REV2.

16.    The secretariat shall suggest dates for the visit to the rapporteurs and the consultant in line with the Monitoring Committee’s general timetable of activities, the respective commitments of the members of the monitoring delegation and the availability of the delegation’s talking partners in the country visited. If the members of the delegation agree on the dates for the visit, the Congress secretariat shall inform the country’s Permanent Representation with the Council of Europe by letter from the Secretary General of the Congress. The rapporteurs and the consultant shall undertake to respect the dates established for the mission and refrain from any other commitment on these dates.

17.    Monitoring of local and regional democracy cannot take place in a country which is currently chairing the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Similarly, a monitoring report on a given country cannot be debated in session during this country’s chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Lastly, the occurrence of a serious political crisis in a country in which a monitoring visit is scheduled may justify postponing the mission. The Monitoring Committee may propose to the Bureau of the Congress, for decision, postponing a monitoring mission, notably where there is a risk of interference between the visit and the holding of elections in the country in question.

18.    Where two members of the Monitoring Committee have been appointed rapporteurs for a county by the Committee Chair and the consultant has agreed to provide technical assistance to the delegation, the rapporteurs and the consultant shall enter into a working relationship with the secretariat of the Monitoring Committee for the duration of the monitoring procedure.


19.    The rapporteurs and the consultant must ensure proper communication with the Congress Secretariat, which shall be informed in advance of any meetings or briefings organised with representatives of the authorities of the country visited or with members of the national delegation to the Congress.

3.    Working languages for the monitoring exercise

20.    The working languages used for monitoring activities shall be the two official languages of the Council of Europe (French and English). Consequently, the rapporteurs and the consultant shall be chosen in such a way as to ensure that the members of the delegation can speak, communicate among themselves, and read and write in the official language pre-selected as the delegation’s working language.

21.    The working documents intended for monitoring activities will be available in English or in French.

4.    The monitoring visit programme

22.    The Congress Secretariat shall organise the visit. It shall draw up the programme with the rapporteurs in conjunction with the head and secretary of the national delegation to the Congress, the national associations of local and regional authorities where applicable, the co-ordinating bodies of federate entities and lastly, with the country’s Permanent Representation with the Council of Europe.

23.    Once the rapporteurs have approved the programme, the working meetings shall be planned and organised by the secretariat, which shall manage the specific logistics for the visit.

24.    The visit programme must make provision for meetings with the authorities responsible for questions of local and regional democracy or dealing with these questions, and also with the officials of the administrations concerned, notably:

§   the minister(s) responsible for local and regional authorities;

§   members of parliament (national and/or regional) – particularly those responsible for local or regional issues;

§   local and regional elected representatives, including the Congress delegation, the mayor of the capital city and mayors of small and medium-sized municipalities;

§   the president of the Constitutional Court and the national member of the Venice Commission;

§   the national, regional and/or local ombudsman;

§   a specialist on questions linked to the application of the Charter in the country concerned;

§   associations representing local and regional authorities;

§   representatives of civil society from non-governmental organisations, trade unions of the country visited, the media, etc.

Generally speaking, the rapporteurs can meet any individual whom they consider useful to interview for their task.

25.    The consultant shall contribute to the preparation of the visit by drawing up a list of questions to be broached with the talking partners mentioned in the programme concerning problems linked to the application of the Charter. This list shall also include the questions raised during the previous visit to the country. The consultant must also take into account any declarations made by the state when ratifying the Charter, and of the current political context.

26.    The list of topics which the delegation wishes to broach shall be sent, at least one week prior to the visit, to the permanent representation to the Council of Europe of the state concerned as regards government interlocutors, and to the talking partners listed in the programme.


5.         Monitoring visits

i.        Number of visits

27.    The monitoring procedure shall in principle comprise one visit to the country concerned. If they consider it necessary, the rapporteurs may conduct a second visit subject to the agreement of the Monitoring Committee and after having informed the Bureau.

ii.       Running of the monitoring visit

28.    The secretariat shall supply all the delegation members with all the documents relevant to the visit, namely the programme, the substantive documents, information to help prepare the questions for talking partners (prepared in co-operation with the consultant), and information to help the rapporteurs introduce the exchanges during each visit.

29.    These documents are designed to prepare the rapporteurs in such a way that they possess sound knowledge of the situation of local and regional democracy in the country visited, and that their questions are as relevant as possible to the country’s political and institutional context.

30.    Before the first meeting scheduled on the programme, the secretariat shall organise a briefing of the delegation, generally at the hotel in which the monitoring delegation is staying. This briefing shall be attended by both rapporteurs and the consultant. The briefing is vital to the proper overall running of the visit, because it provides an opportunity for clarifying specific points and apportioning speaking time between the rapporteurs, anticipating any difficulties and organising the running of each meeting listed on the programme. For example, the briefing serves to define the roles of each participant during the meetings, particularly deciding which rapporteur is to introduce the delegation, ask the first question and sum up at the end of the meeting. This meeting also helps ensure the correct pronunciation of the names of persons to be interviewed or of municipalities to which they may have to refer during their exchanges of views.

31.    The rapporteurs are the main talking partners for the authorities encountered, and they must introduce the delegation and ask the questions. The consultant and the members of the secretariat can also put questions to the talking partners at the invitation of the rapporteurs.

32.    A short preparatory meeting is also scheduled with the interpreters before the first meeting in order to ensure that they have all the necessary information and the terminology used for the Congress’s work on the Charter, the proper pronunciation of the names and exact titles of delegation members and talking partners.

33.    After the last meeting scheduled in the programme, the secretariat shall organise a debriefing meeting with the delegation members before they split up. This working meeting is geared to establishing an initial assessment, identifying the salient points of the visit, and listing the problems noted vis-à-vis the application of the Charter, the good practices registered and the main thrust of the recommendations to be addressed to the authorities of the country visited. This meeting enables participants to take stock of the situation with an eye to the draft report, so that the consultant has all the data necessary for preparing a preliminary draft reflecting the rapporteurs’ final assessment as closely as possible.

6.         Preparation of the draft report, draft recommendation and draft resolution

34.    After the visit, the consultant has six weeks to send the secretariat of the Congress a written contribution for preparing the report on the situation of local and regional democracy in the country visited, to be presented by the rapporteurs. This contribution must be drawn up in French or English, in accordance with the outline report applicable to all monitoring reports, drawing on the conclusions discussed at the debriefing meeting. Furthermore, it must comply with the practical specifications set out in the contract letter drawn up by the secretariat and signed by the parties. Beyond the quality of the legal analysis, the consultant must endeavour to reflect in his/her contribution the thrusts indicated by the rapporteurs for the preparation of the report.


35.    The report must also take account of the recommendations and/or resolutions previously adopted by the Congress, particularly the recommendations previously addressed to the country visited. It must also take into consideration the political context in which the monitoring visit took place and examine the situation of local and regional democracy in the light of other relevant Council of Europe texts[47] ratified by the country in question.

36.    After discussion with the rapporteurs and possible transmission of the text among the rapporteurs, the secretariat and the consultant, and once the rapporteurs’ agreement on the preliminary draft report has been obtained, the latter shall be sent to all the talking partners encountered during the visit for comments. This consultation procedure shall include a deadline for sending all the comments received to the rapporteurs for examination. Factual errors will be corrected, and comments or proposed amendments to the rapport leaving room for interpretation or appraisal will be left to the discretion of the rapporteurs, who may decide to integrate these comments, in whole or in part, directly in the preliminary draft report, or to reject it, or else to append it to their report.

37.    Under the authority of the rapporteurs and on the basis of the conclusions of the report, the text of the preliminary draft recommendation shall be drawn up by the secretariat. It shall then be submitted to the rapporteurs for final agreement.

38.    The draft report and the preliminary draft recommendation are then debated by the Monitoring Committee, which shall adopt the draft report (which becomes final 15 days after the Committee meeting) and approve the preliminary draft recommendation, which shall be submitted at the Congress Session for adoption. The latter text may be amended in accordance with the formal procedure set out in Rule 34 of the Rules of Procedure of the Congress and its Chambers.

39.    After adoption by the Congress, the Congress recommendation shall be sent to the Committee of Ministers, which may decide to transmit it to the national authorities of the monitored member state for implementation.

7.    Post-monitoring procedure

The rules described above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the post-monitoringprocedure.[48]

8.    Adoption and follow-up of recommendations

40.    In pursuance of Rule 42-5 of the Rules of Procedure of the Congress and its Chambers[49], the preliminary draft recommendation and, where applicable, resolution, shall be submitted to the Monitoring Committee for examination and adoption.

41.    The draft report, recommendation and, where applicable, resolution, shall be presented by the rapporteurs and considered by the Congress with a view to their adoption during its session or a chamber sitting.

42.    In pursuance of Article 2-5 of the Statutory Resolution of the Committee of Ministers, the recommendation shall be transmitted to the Committee of Ministers for debate. It may decide to transmit it to the authorities of the state in question and to the Parliamentary Assembly.

43.    The implementation of the recommendation shall be monitored by the member states concerned and by the Congress, as well as by the Council of Europe intergovernmental bodies responsible for local and regional democracy under the continuous dialogue established with the authorities during the visit.


Flow chart for monitoring procedures

ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE AND APPROVAL BY THE BUREAU OF THE CONGRESS OF ITS WORK PROGRAMME, INCLUDING THE LIST OF COUNTRIES SELECTED FOR MONITORING VISITS

â

APPOINTMENT OF RAPPORTEURS

â

MONITORING VISIT

â

PRELIMINARY DRAFT REPORT

â

CONSULTATION PROCEDURE WITH THE AUTHORITIES ENCOUNTERED
DURING THE VISIT

â

EXAMINATION BY THE RAPPORTEURS OF COMMENTS RECEIVED AND REVISION OF THE PRELIMINARY DRAFT REPORT

â

EXAMINATION BY THE MONITORING COMMITTEE OF THE DRAFT REPORT FOR ADOPTION, AND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY DRAFT
RECOMMENDATION/RESOLUTION

â

EXAMINATION BY THE CONGRESS
OF THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION/
RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION

â

EXAMINATION AND TRANSMISSION
TO THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS, AND, FOR INFORMATION, TO THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

â

TRANSMISSION
TO THE AUTHORITIES OF THE COUNTRY CONCERNED ON A DECISION FROM THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS


B.      Code of Good Conduct for monitoring delegations

44.    A monitoring mission represents a huge workload and therefore requires major investment on the part of each person involved in the monitoring delegation.

45.    The members of a monitoring delegation have different roles to play, but whatever their function and role, compliance with the same rules of conduct throughout the procedure is vital for the smooth running of the visit and for guaranteeing good relations with the national authorities encountered. Compliance with these rules will help to ensure the ultimate success of any monitoring mission and to prepare the work of co-operation with the authorities under any possible post-monitoring procedure.

46.    Congress members taking part in monitoring missions have to have signed the Congress’ Declaration of Principle. They shall avoid, in the framework of the accomplishment of such missions, conflicts between any actual or potential financial or any other interests, on a professional, personal or family level, in connection with the country concerned by such a monitoring procedure. If a member is unable to avoid such a conflict of interest it should be made known to the Congress Secretariat. Any gifts or similar benefits of a value in excess of 200 Euros that a member has accepted in the last 24 months from the authorities of the country concerned shall be also registered with the Secretariat. During such missions, Congress members shall avoid any situation that could appear to be a conflict of interest or receiving an inappropriate payment or gift.

i.          The work of the rapporteurs

47.    Where two rapporteurs have been appointed to participate in a monitoring visit, they undertake to find out about the situation of local and regional democracy in a given country, to stay abreast of the current context before, during and after the visit, to attend all the meetings scheduled, including the briefings organised by the secretariat, and all working breakfasts, lunches and dinners. They also undertake to help prepare the report by examining the comments received.

48.    Rapporteurs must obtain detailed information on the situation in the country by carefully reading the file prepared by the secretariat. Before the visit begins, they must know the main relevant features of the country and its political mode of functioning at the different government levels. In particular, they must know the general history of the country, its administrative organisation, the structures, number and nature of authorities existing, the different infra-national levels of government, the political system, etc. The secretariat will assist the rapporteurs with such preparatory work.

49.    In this spirit, the rapporteurs may also use their knowledge of the country visited with the talking partners encountered during the visit, particularly by means of relevant questions directly relating to the Charter.

50.    The rapporteurs’ role is not one of inspection. Their task is to establish political dialogue with the authorities encountered on local democracy issues. They take part in a monitoring mission in their capacity as elected representatives, politicians going to meet the political authorities in the monitored country, to encourage the implementation of local and regional democracy in this country and to dialogue with the authorities encountered.

51.    Consequently, if the rapporteurs wish to make any comparative comments, they should do so in an objective and constructive manner without trying to establish any classification of values among the Council of Europe member countries.

52.    Listening, exchanging and showing courtesy are the key elements of positive discussion with the authorities.

53.    During the meetings, the rapporteurs must foster exchanges of views, avoiding monologues as far as possible. They should try to prevent any tendency towards one-sided discourse.


54.    The discussions should focus on the subject of the Congress’s mandate, namely the implementation of the Charter and the operational system for local and regional self-government. This means that the delegation should not dwell on general political questions unrelated to the Charter, or more broadly on topics irrelevant to consideration of the situation of local and regional democracy in the country. The monitoring delegation must strictly comply with the Congress’s mandate and field of activity.

55.    The times of the meetings scheduled on the programme, as regularly recalled by the secretariat, must be scrupulously respected. Meeting overruns can upset the rest of the day’s programme, and late arrival at the ensuing appoints can cause difficulties for authorities expecting the delegation to attend a meeting scheduled for a specific time on the programme.

56.    The rapporteurs are representing the Congress. More generally, they are representing the Council of Europe in the member states visited. As in all representative duties, it is important to show professionalism and to observe elementary rules of courtesy during the meetings. Monitoring delegation members must accordingly pay attention throughout the meetings scheduled and actively participate in the exchanges of views with the talking partners, asking questions directly connected with the Charter. As for all working meetings, mobile phones must be put on silent mode and no phone calls may be taken during the meetings.

57.    These rules apply to the rapporteurs, the consultant, the secretariat and the interpreters.

ii.          The work of the consultant

58.    The consultant must sign a contract setting out the following obligations: preparation of items of information for the talking partners, familiarity with the file, participation in the visit, technical expert assistance before, during and after the visit, preparation of a preliminary draft report in line with the indications provided by the rapporteurs, and follow-up to the comments from the rapporteurs and then from the authorities on this preliminary draft report.

59.    The consultant must adhere to the established plan for Congress monitoring reports as transmitted to him or her in advance by the secretariat.

60.    During the visit, he or she shall clarify a number of legal or financial technical questions with the rapporteurs. In this connection, he should attend the briefing and all the meetings set out in the programme, including delegation meetings (briefings and debriefings) and meetings with talking partners. He may, at the rapporteurs’ suggestion, put questions to specified talking partners mentioned in the programme.

61.    He shall prepare a preliminary draft report within six weeks following the visit, in accordance with the undertakings set out in his contract (respecting the report plan, the number of pages and the guidelines set out by the rapporteurs at the debriefing).

iii.         The work of the secretariat

62.    The secretariat of the Monitoring Committee of the Congress is the permanent dialogue partner for delegation members. It must help the delegation with the administrative, logistical and substantive aspects of the mission. The Congress secretarial staff responsible for the visit must discuss and establish the dates of the visit with the delegation members, propose a draft programme prepared in co-operation with the secretary and head of the national delegation to the Congress, organise the visit, prepare the rapporteurs’ file, and work in co-operation with the consultant on the outline questions for the talking partners and the preliminary draft report.

63.    The secretariat provides logistical assistance to delegation members. In this connection, it requests estimates for and recruits interpreters for the mission (French or English/language of the country visited), as well as the transporter driving the delegation on the spot to the meetings scheduled on the programme. It may organise travel for delegation members on request (prepaid tickets), reserves the hotel where the delegation will be staying during the visit, and manages the rapporteurs’ the consultant’s applications for reimbursement after the mission.


64.    The secretariat also provides continuous basic assistance to the rapporteurs before, during and after the visit. It carries out the requisite research for compiling an information file for delegation members, and draws up notes, analyses and country profiles, as well as notes for introducing the rapporteurs during the visit. On request, the secretariat may also draft the speech presenting the draft report and draft recommendation for the committee and Congress session debates.

65.    Its work consists in channelling political information between the rapporteurs and the talking partners, supplying the rapporteurs with relevant and substantive information so that they can assess the application of the Charter in the country visited under optimum conditions.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Congress post-monitoring and post-observation of elections: developing political dialogue

Resolution 353 (2013) REV[50]

1. Referring to:

a. its Resolution 31 (1996) and to Statutory Resolution Res(2011)2 of the Committee of Ministers or the Council of Europe, which reiterates that the Congress shall prepare on a regular basis country-by-country reports on the situation of local and regional democracy in all member states and in states which have applied to join the Council of Europe, and shall ensure, in particular, that the principles of the Charter of Local Self-Government are implemented. The same Statutory Resolution states that the Congress shall also prepare reports and recommendations following the observation of local and/or regional elections;

b. Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2 which makes clear that recommendations and opinions of the Congress shall be sent as appropriate to the Parliamentary Assembly and/or the Committee of Ministers as well as to European and international organisations and institutions. Resolutions and other adopted texts which do not entail possible action by the Assembly and/or the Committee of Ministers shall be transmitted to them for their information;

c.its Resolution 307 (2010) REV2 in which it stresses the importance for the Council of Europe to ensure that the commitments entered into by all its member states are fully honoured;

d. its Resolution 306 (2010) REV which underlines the importance of election observation at local and regional level and its complementarity to the political monitoring process of the European Charter of Local Self-Government which constitutes the cornerstone of local democracy in Europe. This resolution points to the specific role of local and regional elected representatives as observers of local and regional votes for the legitimacy and credibility of the electoral process at local and regional level;

e. the Priorities 2012-2013 proposed by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and supported by the Committee of Ministers,[51] which stress the need to increase the coherence and effectiveness of monitoring, allowing a better integration of monitoring results into the programme of activities;

2. The Congress:

a. contributes at local and regional level to the fundamental aims of the Council of Europe to foster democracy on our continent;

b. underlines that its recommendations addressed to the Committee of Ministers following monitoring and election observation missions cannot be effective if not implemented by the authorities of the member state to which the text refers;

c. considers that its political dialogue with national authorities, in the framework of the monitoring process, should be pursued after the adoption of a recommendation, in the form of a post-monitoring dialogue, in order to discuss - together with the authorities - a roadmap to improve local and regional democracy in line with the recommendations addressed to national authorities by the Committee of Ministers;

d. stands ready, at the request of its Bureau or of its Monitoring Committee, approved by its Bureau, to hold political exchanges of views on the European Charter on Local Self-Government with national authorities and all stakeholders involved in the monitoring process, with the aim to agree on a roadmap to implement Congress recommendations resulting from the monitoring procedure;

e. is prepared to enter , at the request of its Bureau or of its Monitoring Committee, approved by the Bureau, into a post‑election observation dialogue with the national authorities and all stakeholders involved in the electoral process, with the aim to agree on a roadmap to implement its recommendations resulting from election observation missions;

f. concurs, on the basis of the defined roadmaps, with the relevant departments of the Council of Europe in the field of co-operation activities, aiming at providing input to, if appropriate, action plans or co‑operation programmes;

g. confirms its will to continue contributing to the preparation and implementation of Council of Europe co-operation activities with the member States concerned to make the whole process meaningful and effective. It offers its operational capacities, mainly financed externally, for the implementation of projects to develop and improve local and regional democracy, and also for activities supported by member States and/or other donors, especially the European Union;

h. carries out, in the framework of the objectives set up in the reform programme of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe[52] a regular follow-up of the implementation of its recommendations in order to ensure the effectiveness and impact of its monitoring and election observation activities.

* * *

Rules governing the implementation of political dialogue in the framework of Congress post-monitoring/post-observation of elections pursuant to Resolution 353 (2013) REV

Pursuant to Resolution 353 (2013) REV, the purpose of the present rules is to define the arrangements for organising the post-monitoring and post-election observation political dialogue with all levels of government of the Council of Europe member states, with the aim of achieving the objective set forth in the aforementioned resolution, namely to pursue a political dialogue with national authorities of member states in order to implement the Congress recommendations addressed to the authorities.


1.         The post-monitoring dialogue

1.1.       The post-monitoring procedure may be carried out at the joint request of the Congress and the national authorities to which the Committee of Ministers addressed a Congress recommendation on local and regional democracy. It shall comprise five phases following the adoption of the recommendation by the Committee of Ministers:

a) an exchange of views with the Permanent Representative to the Council of Europe of the country concerned;

b) a political exchange with national authorities and other relevant stakeholders in order to identify the priorities laid down in the adopted recommendation;

c) the development of a roadmap by the Congress delegation, in co-operation with national authorities, in order to determine the main steps necessary to implement the recommendations;

d) a political dialogue with the national authorities in order to agree on a roadmap;

e) the roadmap will be the basis for developing, if appropriate, an action plan or co-operation programmein association with the other relevant departments of the Council of Europe.

1.2.       Composition of the delegation

The delegation may comprise the monitoring rapporteurs, the Chair of the Monitoring Committee or, in the case of non-availability of the above-mentioned persons, any Congress member who has a particular knowledge of the given country. In the latter case, the criteria provided by Resolution 307 (2010) REV2 shall apply.

2.         The post-election observation dialogue

2.1.       The post-election observation procedure may be put into place at the joint request of the Congress and the national authorities to which the Committee of Ministers addressed a Congress recommendation on observation of local or regional elections. It comprises the following steps:

a) an exchange of views with the Permanent Representative to the Council of Europe of the country concerned;

b) a political exchange with national authorities and other relevant stakeholders in order to identify the priorities laid down in the adopted recommendation;

c) the development of a roadmap by the Congress delegation in co-operation with national authorities and other relevant stakeholders, in order to decide on major steps necessary to implement the recommendations;

d) a political dialogue with the national authorities in order to agree on a roadmap;

e) on the basis of this roadmap, if appropriate, an action plan or co-operation programme will be developed in association with other relevant departments of the Council of Europe.

2.2.       Composition of the delegation

The delegation may comprise the head of delegation/rapporteur – or in case of non-availability of the above-mentioned person(s) – any member of the Congress election observation mission as well as the rapporteur of the Monitoring Committee in charge of the respective country.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Verification of new members’ credentials

Resolution 356 (2013)[53]

The Congress:

1. Draws national delegations’ attention to the provisions relating to the term of office of delegates as set out in Article 3.3 of the Congress’ Statutory Resolution, namely that such delegates are appointed until the next renewal session and that withdrawal from the delegation by the responsible authority before the end of that term of office may be made only if delegates have lost their local or regional mandate, have resigned or have died, regardless of whether local or regional elections have taken place;

2. Indicates that, in the context of the resignation of all members of a delegation before the next Congress renewal session, the new delegation proposed by the responsible authorities of the member state in question must respect the equitable representation of the various political forces on the basis of the results of the last local and regional elections, as well as the other criteria;

3. Reminds all delegates of their obligation to sign a written declaration affirming and stating that they subscribe to the aims and basic principles of the Council of Europe;

4. Approves the credentials of the members of national delegations, as contained in the appendix to this resolution.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Local and regional authorities responding to the economic crisis

Resolution 357(2013)[54]

1. The financial and economic crisis which hit the world in 2008 has had a particularly severe impact on local and regional authorities as they have had to face at the same time a shrinking revenue base due to the economic downturn, cuts in budgetary transfers from national governments, decreasing local tax authority, mandatory participation in fiscal consolidation programmes and the need to manage debt – excessive sometimes because of so-called “toxic loans” – as well as the obligation to increase social support to citizens, against the background of growing demands for assistance to vulnerable groups affected by the crisis.

2. In 2009-2010, local revenues fell in many countries across Europe, in some by as much as 20%. Regional output also shrank on average by 3.4% in 2008-2009, with such extremes as a 20% fall in Latvia, but saw an upswing in most regions in 2010-2011. A weak economic recovery in 2010, with a 2% GDP growth in the EU, tapered to 1% in 2011 and reversed into 0.1% recession in 2012, with a further 0.4% recession forecast for 2013. Over 2008-2012, local budget investment fell by an average 14%, with as much as 30% in some countries, against the backdrop of an almost 5% decrease in intergovernmental transfers in 2011 alone, which almost completely offset a 5.5% rise in local tax revenues.

3. Local and regional authorities are faced with increasing social costs such as housing and utility allowances, safety net payments to the unemployed and others eligible for minimum income guarantees, and emergency aid to distressed families. In 2012, the number of households where essential household costs (such as rent, mortgage payments and utility charges) exceeded 40% of income grew by 13%, pushing local social expenditure on these households up by 16%, against the background of rising unemployment, which exceeded 12% in 2013 in the Eurozone alone, with a high end of 27% in Spain and Greece. Extremely high unemployment, in particular among young people, which reached 62% in Greece and 56% in Spain, is threatening to undermine prospects for long-term sustainable growth.

4. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities is deeply concerned about the impact of the crisis on local communities and regions of Europe, and in particular about the significant social problems caused by the reduction of social welfare programmes in many European countries and lower investment levels in strategic policy areas, such as education, health and social assistance to vulnerable population groups.


5. The Congress is convinced that local and regional authorities are crucial stakeholders and actors in ensuring European economic revival, due to both their economic and social roles. Local and regional authorities represent 65% of all public investment and 30% of public spending (including 60% of all public spending on education and more than 30% on health), and account for some 16% of public debt and almost 13% of public deficits. They hold key responsibilities with regard to social protection of citizens, including housing, health care, education, sickness and disability, care for the elderly, family and children, measures against unemployment and exclusion.

6. The Congress welcomes the fact that the important role of local and regional authorities in economic recovery was recognised by the Ministers of the Council of Europe member States responsible for local and regional government at their Conference in Utrecht (Netherlands) in 2009, and reaffirmed at their Conference in Kyiv (Ukraine) in 2011, with the approval of the “Kyiv Guidelines” and proposal for an Agenda in Common, which identifies as the top priority joint action by national governments and local and regional authorities in responding to the economic crisis.

7. The Congress expresses its concern that the crisis has had an adverse impact on the financial autonomy guaranteed under the European Charter of Local Self-Government (CETS No. 122), in particular its provisions relating to the financial resources and budgetary authority, equalisation, devolution of competences, as well as consultations with local authorities on matters affecting them and local financing in particular. The Congress stresses that the full implementation of the Charter must be ensured in particular in this time of crisis, when local and regional authorities face greater responsibilities in providing services and assistance to households in need.

8. In this context, the Congress is particularly concerned about the tendencies for recentralisation of local and regional competences, forced municipal amalgamations and regional mergers, imposition of severe austerity measures and fiscal consolidation rules, and slow-down of decentralisation and regionalisation processes as a response to the crisis.

9. The Congress shares the position of the EU Committee of the Regions, expressed in its Opinion of 12 April 2013 on “Devolution in the European Union and the place for local and regional self-government in EU policy making and delivery”, that the economic crisis and austerity measures cannot be used as an excuse to further centralise or devolve powers without providing corresponding financial resources, and that the allocation of powers not linked to corresponding financial resources or to income-raising powers cannot be used as an argument for centralisation.

10. The Congress is convinced that decentralisation is a key to better economic performance and growth and that many local communities and regions in fact did not have enough means and responsibilities to respond adequately to the crisis. The five years of the crisis have shown that, while decentralised economies are no more immune to its impact than the centralised ones, they recover better as they adapt more quickly to changing circumstances and show greater resilience overall. Local and regional authorities know best the needs and circumstances of their communities, and they are in a position to act more effectively and efficiently and to ensure an optimal use of local resources – not least also for reason of better transparency and accountability to citizens.


11. The Congress is therefore convinced that any crisis exit strategies must be based on the following principles:

a. recognition of local and regional authorities as key stakeholders in joint action of all tiers of governance to devise common responses and to ensure coherence of response policies and measures as well as solidarity in equitable burden-sharing, through the process of regular consultations and dialogue;

b. further decentralisation of competences in keeping with the principle of subsidiarity, as well as greater budgetary autonomy and tax authority at local and regional levels;

c. reviving investment to stimulate employment, innovation and economic growth;

d. increasing citizen participation in decision making at local and regional levels through elements of direct democracy, in particular through greater use of new information technologies;

e. building partnerships with the private and non-governmental sectors, as well as with other local and regional authorities in the process of voluntary inter-municipal and inter-regional co-operation.

12. The Congress notes with deep concern the 2013 findings of the International Labour Organisation, indicating that government austerity policies have been accompanied since 2010 by increasing wage inequalities, in which middle-income groups’ revenues declined while those of top salary earners began to grow again, posing a threat to the social fabric of European societies and increasing the risk of social unrest, which rose within the EU alone from 34% in 2006-2007 to 46% in 2011-2012.

 

13. In this context, the Congress supports the position of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, expressed in its Resolution 1886 (2012) on the impact of the economic crisis on local and regional authorities in Europe, as well as in its Resolution 1884 (2012) on austerity measures – a danger for democracy and social rights, and welcomes the recent recommendations of the European Commission aimed at shifting the economic policy emphasis from austerity to structural reforms.

14. The Congress also welcomes with caution reform measures entailing decentralisation of competences, being undertaken or planned in a number of member states, while expressing its concern that they are not always accompanied by the decentralisation of resources to finance new competences.

15. The Congress further welcomes the 10 recommendations for regions to overcome the crisis, adopted at the 3rd Summit on Regions and the Economic Crisis (Paris, 16 May 2013), organised by the Assembly of European Regions, which are aimed at using the potential of future-oriented sectors as a key for the regional economic revival, designing youth-oriented regional policies to reinvigorate the economy, promoting regional entrepreneurship, assuring a more sustainable regional and local financing, developing socially inclusive regional economies, regaining citizens’ trust and building partnerships with other tiers of governance.


16. In view of the above, and in reference to its Resolution 347 (2012) on the right of local authorities to be consulted by other levels of government, the Congress calls on European local and regional authorities and their national associations to lobby their national and, where appropriate, regional governments to establish mechanisms for regular consultations and dialogue on developing anti-crisis policies and measures, in order to ensure coherence of policy responses to the crisis and to provide their input and innovative ideas aiming in particular to:

a. obtain greater competences, especially in local and regional economic policy and social protection areas, and in particular in the fields of infrastructure, health care, education and research, social welfare, and recreation and culture, including first and foremost an increase in local and regional tax authority and greater budgetary autonomy, also within internal stability pacts where appropriate;

b. obtain in particular local tax authority over property taxes based on statutory real estate values in countries where this is not yet the case, and reduce the dependence of local budgets on highly volatile tax bases such as corporate profits and property transactions, using as guidance the 2005 Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation REC (2005)1 on the financial resources of local and regional authorities;

c. ensure a steady level of intergovernmental transfers into local and regional budgets, without disproportionate cuts, and a minimum one-year advance notice from national authorities in cases when such transfers are to be reduced;

d. maintain a balanced mix of intergovernmental transfers and local and regional taxes to finance local and regional budgets;

e. reinforce the equalisation and regional solidarity systems among states, and revise national equalisation systems and programmes to improve burden sharing between different tiers of governance and to alleviate better the excessive strain on economically weaker regions and local communities;

f. revise government financing of the local and regional levels to provide a balance between allocations into social support programmes and investments into projects to stimulate innovation and economic growth;

g. revive investment in local and regional infrastructure and generally increase local and regional budget investment as a priority in order to promote local competitiveness, encourage private sector investment and stimulate employment;

h. follow the example of some countries and exclude priority social services such as health, education and social protection for vulnerable groups (families in economic distress, the unemployed, children, young people, people with disabilities, the elderly) from local and regional budget expenditure limits, and exempt them from fiscal consolidation programmes and rules, as well as ensure that vulnerable groups are well protected and that their opportunities in life are not diminished by budgetary measures;

i. remove legal requirements which impose expensive service provision or make sure that, in cases when central authorities do impose uniform standards of service provision at local and regional levels, such as for health care, education and social welfare, the required expenditure is matched by national government financing;

j. design special measures and programmes to alleviate the excessive local and regional debt burden, through a combination of budget deficit limits and ‘debt ceilings’, restrictions on borrowing and on the issue of municipal or regional bonds, creation of special funds for dedicated local government loans, and the introduction of ‘debt brakes’ to ensure that local and regional budgets are financed without structural deficits;


k. make sure that restraints on local and regional government borrowing are based on prudential criteria, which assess capacity for repayment on an objective and non-discretionary basis, and that every tier of governance is responsible for financing its own deficits and debt positions;

l. design special measures to deal with the recovery of local and regional authorities in financial difficulty, including cases of insolvency, using as guidance the 2004 Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation REC (2004)1 on financial and budgetary management at local and regional levels, and including the availability of special financial assistance;  

m. achieve a balanced level of centralisation of competences and put a stop to the trend for recentralisation of competences towards central authorities and for slowing down decentralisation and regionalisation processes;

n. put a stop to forced amalgamations at local and regional level while encouraging and facilitating voluntary inter-municipal and inter-regional co-operation aimed at sharing administrative resources, service provision and procurement between adjoining authorities;

o. make sure that decisions on territorial reforms, including on the creation of new tiers of governance or abolition of existing ones, are taken only after consultations with the authorities and citizens concerned, and promote a regional governing guideline, allowing regions and local communities in general to directly manage their development policies.

17. The Congress welcomes the strategies and measures already developed by local and regional authorities in response to the crisis, and further calls on local and regional authorities to:

a. in partnership with local and regional economic actors including banks, business enterprises and research and training institutions, develop a shared vision of economic opportunities and a strategy for the economic development of the community, aimed at reviving investment in infrastructure and environmental quality to promote competitiveness, encourage private sector investment and stimulate employment, and paying particular attention to the development potential of future-oriented sectors such as green economy, e-health and creative industries;

b. increase citizen participation in decision making by introducing elements of direct democracy, including through greater use of new information technologies, regular consultations with citizens and their associations, and the use of participatory budgeting;

concerning efficiency savings:

c. develop stronger inter-municipal and inter-regional co-operation to benefit from economies of scale by seeking efficiency gains through shared service provision and administrative costs as well as through joint procurement, and to facilitate labour mobility, cross-investment and business networking; 

d. devise procedures to increase transparency in public procurement and other uses of public funds through, for example, online competitive bidding, electronic auctioning, the use of benchmarking to restrain expenditure, etc.;

e. to develop, at regional level in particular, competition between regions, using as incentives tax rates on income and profits, supply policies and service delivery costs, to increase effectiveness and efficiency of public spending;

f. seek efficiency savings through innovation and greater use of new technologies by, for example, computerising public services, ensuring online service provision and developing e-governance in general;

g. pay particular attention to investing in energy efficiency and developing strategies for cost-saving energy uses;


concerning business development:

h. give priority to promoting local and regional entrepreneurship and providing assistance to enterprise development, in particular to small and medium-sized enterprises, as well as support to youth entrepreneurship in accordance with para 9.c of Congress Resolution 346(2012) on “youth and democracy: the changing face of youth political engagement” through, for example, simplified administrative procedures for setting up a company, assistance to new enterprises during the start-up process, development of micro-credits, tax exemptions or discounts, interest rate subsidies, employment subsidies, lease of business incubator premises, and free or subsidised provision of land and/or utility connections;

i. develop policies and projects aimed at the regeneration of disused public areas;

j. increase allocations to vocational training and apprenticeship which focus on digital skills, especially for young people who continue to face difficulties in accessing the labour market, so as to improve employability, the skills base and thus competitiveness;

concerning fiscal policies:

k. take measures to increase their own taxes or fees (when they have sufficient autonomy to do so), and further increase revenue by fighting tax evasion;

l. improve the administration of property taxation and maintain local and regional taxes on business enterprises, while making sure that their rates do not exceed those of personal taxes;

concerning social responsibilities:

m. use good practices in cutting employment costs, but not employment thus avoiding layoffs, including through salary cuts, pay or vacancy freezes, fewer work hours or abandoning bonus payments, among others, while respecting the provisions of the Council of Europe’s Revised European Social Charter (CETS No.163) with regard to employment rights;

n. take great care when closing underused service institutions so as to avoid adverse social consequences (for example, in cases of rural schools or minority language schools);

o. give consideration to targeting social assistance subsidies for the provision of public services to those most in need, by applying means tests and allocating subsidies directly to households and individuals based on their financial means, rather than to service providers;

p. also give consideration to using community care rather than institutional care for the elderly and people with disabilities, with the support of voluntary and family carers and non-governmental organisations active in community care, while ensuring that carers are able to balance work, private life and caring responsibilities and are protected from exploitation and discrimination, in line with the provisions of the Council of Europe’s Revised European Social Charter (CETS No.163);  

q. increase partnership with the non-governmental sector, in particular organisations involved in specialised forms of social and health care, through special partnership agreements for service provision.

18. The Congress instructs its Monitoring Committee to continue including in its monitoring and post-monitoring activities the question of the impact of the economic and financial crisis at local and regional levels, and in particular its consequences for the effective implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government, and to address this issue in its draft recommendations to national governments.


19. The Congress further instructs its Governance Committee and its Current Affairs Committee to keep the question of the impact of the economic and financial crisis and responses at local and regional levels under constant review, and to ensure the dissemination of relevant good practices to local and regional authorities, including through their European and national associations.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Integration through self-employment:

promoting migrant entrepreneurship in European municipalities

Resolution 358 (2013)[55]

1. The immigrant population in Europe is growing and rapidly becoming more diverse in terms of ethnic or national origin, as well as in terms of length of stay, educational achievement, and socio-economic position. Increasing migration to Europe raises the questions of both integration of migrants into the host community and their meaningful contribution to the local economy and economic development, which is especially important in the current situation of economic crisis.

2. An increasing number of migrants are becoming entrepreneurial, with a greater number of migrants interested in setting up their own businesses than among the native population. The ongoing rise in migrant entrepreneurship is expected to contribute significantly to the integration of immigrants at local level, to the economic development of their city of residence, and to the creation of new businesses in Europe in general, which has been identified as a crucial issue in the EU proposal for the programme for business competitiveness and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs),[56] in the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy.

3. Micro-businesses and SMEs represent 99% of all enterprises in the EU,[57] employ 67% of the workforce in the private sector, account for 58% of the total turnover[58] and create 4 million new jobs every year.[59] It is the entrepreneurs behind these businesses who are the backbone for building stability and success for European economic recovery and development. However, Europe lags behind other world regions in the creation of new businesses, with only 37% of Europeans interested in starting a business – down from 45% three years ago – compared to 51% in the USA and 56% in China.[60] Improving the possibilities and conditions for starting and operating businesses in Europe as well as for supporting and protecting entrepreneurs is therefore crucial for European economic development.

 


4. Migrant entrepreneurs can be important for various reasons: they create their own jobs; create jobs for others; develop different social networks than immigrant workers and shape their own destinies rather than waiting for cues from the host society’s institutions. As entrepreneurs, they may provide a different range of goods and services; they can enhance the vitality of particular streets or neighbourhoods in cities or of specific economic sectors and most of all, they play their part in the ‘natural’ process of succession and renewal of the total corpus of entrepreneurs.

5. However, migrants face significant obstacles when starting business careers, which are specific to their situation and include, among others, difficulties in contacting the authorities, receiving funding or accessing local social networks. The typical barriers they encounter are related to the availability of information about entrepreneurial opportunities and the relevant rules and regulations; to the availability of business locations; to the availability of financial capital; to having access to a pool of customers; to their embeddedness in local, national and transnational networks; to staff management and to the availability of skills and competencies.

6. At the same time, many national and local authorities today consider that migrant entrepreneurship is first and foremost a question of entrepreneurship, that efforts toward entrepreneurs are also beneficial for migrants, and that no specific measures are therefore needed to promote migrant entrepreneurship. At the municipal level, migrant entrepreneurship has not played, until now, a major role in the overall strategy supporting the integration of immigrants, which is often separate from entrepreneurship and economic policy, and places emphasis on social aspects of integration and employment rather than self-employment.

7. Over the past years, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities has addressed various aspects of the integration of migrants at local level, in particular in its Resolution 141 (2002) on “The participation of foreign residents in local public life: consultative bodies”; Resolution 181 (2004) on “A pact for the integration and participation of people of immigrant origin in Europe’s towns, cities and regions”; Resolution 270 (2008) “Improving the integration of migrants through local housing policies”; Resolution 280 (2009) on “Intercultural cities”; Resolution 281 (2009) “Equality and diversity in local authority employment and service provision”; and Resolution 323 (2011) “Meeting the challenge of inter-faith and intercultural tensions at local level”. The integration of migrants through local entrepreneurship and self-employment is another aspect that deserves full attention.

8. The challenge of integrating migrants into local communities as a major factor for better social cohesion and intercultural harmony, and the crucial role of local authorities in this process, were also highlighted in the report on “Living together: Combining diversity and freedom in 21st century Europe”, commissioned by the Council of Europe and prepared by its Group of Eminent Persons in 2011.[61]

9. Maintaining and improving social cohesion through better integration and inclusion of migrants and other minority groups has become a major challenge for all Council of Europe member states, in particular in this time of economic crisis. The implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy in EU countries should provide impetus and positive examples to trigger similar policies and action in non-EU member states as well. 

10. In this regard, the Congress welcomes the January 2013 communication by the European Commission on “Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan: Reigniting the entrepreneurial spirit in Europe”, in which it commits itself to proposing “policy initiatives to attract migrant entrepreneurs and to facilitate entrepreneurship among migrants already present in the EU or arriving for reasons other than setting up business, building on the best practices developed in the Member States, including by local authorities.”[62]


11. In light of the above, the Congress calls on its own bodies and members, as well as on its partner organisations, in particular the Committee of the Regions of the European Union, the Council of European Municipalities and Regions and national associations of local authorities, to raise awareness of the importance of migrant entrepreneurship for local integration and economic development, of its contribution to European economic development and meeting Europe’s challenges, as well as of the role and responsibilities of local authorities in improving conditions for the creation and operation of migrant businesses.

12. The Congress invites local authorities of the Council of Europe member states to implement specific measures to promote migrant entrepreneurship by improving the personal capability of migrant entrepreneurs and the business environment for their enterprises, as well as through measures to increase their participation in community life, as part of the overall participation of migrants at local level, and in particular to:

a. include migrant entrepreneurship issues in local economic development and integration strategies, with special focus on job creation and social integration, and with the aim of creating local migrant businesses and thereby contributing to better-equipped trade and industry and a good integration policy;

b. fill the information gap by investing in targeted and efficient ways of collecting information on the situation and conditions of migrant entrepreneurs;

c. support, together with chambers of commerce, structures and mechanisms to provide migrant entrepreneurs with assistance in:

i.        offering access to advice and information services, familiarising entrepreneurs with regulations and procedures upon start-up of their businesses by themselves;

ii.       learning the local language;

iii.      finding a business location, either through help in finding premises or through the provision of premises within business incubators;

iv.      getting access to finance, in particular through microcredit loans;

v.       finding customers, by providing marketing advice;

vi.      building local connections and mobilising transnational links;

vii.     finding and managing personnel;

viii.     improving business and entrepreneurial skills; and

ix.      overcoming additional hurdles due to multiple discrimination (for example, migrant women entrepreneurs);

d. develop and implement measures to improve the business environment, including:

i.        deregulation measures and simplification of administrative procedures;

ii.       programmes for urban revitalisation, including the spatial distribution of businesses and their accessibility; and

iii.      measures to set up and promote migrant business associations;

e. put in place mechanisms and structures to involve migrant entrepreneurs in community affairs as part of the overall measures to increase the participation of migrants in decision making at local level, including through local consultative councils of foreign residents, consultations with migrant entrepreneurs and their business associations, their involvement in local chambers of commerce, etc.;

f. promote and facilitate co-operation between different stakeholders in the local economy, including mainstream and migrant business associations, trade bodies, media and professional training organisations;

g. work closely with the migrant community as well as with the business community to strengthen bridges between the two and ensure proper support, such as mentorship and adequate information for migrant entrepreneurship;

h. use the existing knowledge from the projects and practices already implemented in Europe (such as, for example, non-repayable subsidies and real-estate tax exemption for entrepreneurs in Wroclaw, regional guarantee funds in Alsace, guarantor services on loans in Amsterdam, specialised enterprise agencies in Helsinki and in Budapest, the Mentoring for Migrants programme in Vienna, co-organised by the Economic Chamber, the Austrian Integration Fund and the Employment Service to support qualified migrants in their labour market access, etc.), and promote experience sharing and dissemination of best practices;

i. stimulate network-building between different actors and co-operation between different levels of governance to raise awareness and increase the knowledge about migrant entrepreneurship.

13. The Congress further reaffirms the continued relevance of its proposals for the integration of migrants contained in its resolutions referred to in paragraph 7 above, and calls on European local authorities to implement them fully. In this regard, the Congress expresses its appreciation to the Cities for Local Integration Policy (CLIP) Network for the work it has carried out since 2006, and instructs its Current Affairs Committee to continue close co-operation with the Network’s successor within the proposed European Pact for Integration.

14. The Congress further instructs its Governance Committee and its Current Affairs Committee to keep the question of migrant entrepreneurship under review and to ensure the dissemination of relevant good practices to local authorities, including through their European and national associations.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Election of the members of the Avagani (Assembly of Aldermen) of the City of Yerevan, Armenia

(5 May 2013)

Resolution 359 (2013)[63]

1. Following an invitation by the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia, the Congress decided to observe the elections of members of the Avagani (Assembly) of the City of Yerevan held on 5 May 2013. Stewart DICKSON (United Kingdom, L, ILDG) was appointed Head of Delegation and Rapporteur.

2. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities recalls that Armenia became a member state of the Council of Europe on 25 January 2001 and ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government (CETS No. 122) on 25 January 2002.

3. The Congress refers to its Report CPL(10)8 Part II[64]  and its Recommendation 140(2003)[65] on local democracy in Armenia as well as to its Recommendations 277 (2009)[66] on the first Municipal elections in Yerevan (observed on 31 May 2009) and 338 (2013)[67] on Local by-elections in Armenia (observed on 9 and 23 September 2012) and recognises the reforms undertaken by the country in respect of strengthening local democracy since then, in conformity with the requirements of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (CETS No. 122) which was ratified by Armenia on 25 January 2002, and entered into force on 1 May 2002.

4. In particular, it observes with satisfaction that a few of the recommendations made by the Congress on the observation of local by-elections in Armenia on 9 and 23 September 2012 have already been taken into account for the elections held on 5 May 2013.

5. The Congress reiterates its conviction that free and fair elections, at national but also at territorial level, constitute an integral part of democratic processes in Council of Europe member states and refers to the Explanatory Memorandum and the draft Recommendation regarding the findings of the Congress delegation which observed the Yerevan elections on 5 May 2013.


6. Given the above, and in conformity with its Resolutions 306 (2010)[68] on the strategy and rules for the observation of local and regional elections, Resolution 353 (2013)[69] on Congress post-monitoring and post-observation of elections as well as the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters (2002) of the Council of Europe Venice Commission, and the Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation (2004), the Congress:

a. asks its Monitoring Committee to take note of the above-mentioned draft Recommendation and to take it into account in the framework of its mission to assess the progress made by the country in honouring its commitments to the European Charter of Local Self-Government;

b. expresses its will to participate in activities aimed at strengthening electoral processes and improving the situation of local and regional democracy in Armenia in the framework of the existing post-election observation dialogue of the Congress, in association with other relevant departments of the Council of Europe.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Municipal elections in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (24 March 2013)

Resolution 360 (2013)[70]

1. Following the invitation of the government of “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” to observe local elections on 24 March 2013, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities recalls that “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” became a member of the Council of Europe on
9 November 1995 and ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government ETS No.122 (“the Charter”) on 6 June 1997. Further to the entry into force of the Charter on 1 October 1997, the Congress has carried out two monitoring missions on the state of local and regional self-government in the country and its compliance with the Charter: in 2007 (see Rec217(2007) and CPL(14)2 REP on Local Democracy in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”) and in 2011
(see Rec329(2012) and CPL(23)2 Explanatory Memorandum on Local democracy in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”.

2. The Congress reiterates that free and fair elections, at national but also at territorial level, constitute an integral part of democratic processes in Council of Europe member states and refers to its Resolution 306 (2010) on the strategy and rules for the observation of local and regional elections which underlines the importance of election observation at the grassroots level and its complementarity to the political monitoring process of the Charter.

3. The Congress takes note of Recommendation 345 (2013) regarding the findings of the Congress delegation which observed the municipal elections in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” on 24 March 2013 and asks its Monitoring Committee to ensure the appropriate follow-up to this recommendation and to take it into account in the framework of its work programme to assess the progress made by the country in matters of local democracy and the honouring of commitments of the Charter.

4. In conformity with its Resolution 353 (2013) on post-monitoring and post-observation of elections, the Congress expresses its will and availability to participate in activities aimed at strengthening local democracy and electoral processes in “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” through continued political dialogue with the authorities and in co-operation with the Association of Units of Local Self-Governments (ZELS).


25th SESSION

29-31 October 2013

Regions and territories with special status in Europe

Resolution 361 (2013)[71]

1. A number of Council of Europe member states have granted special status to specific regions as a means of addressing the specific identities and the common wish of their populations to have a greater say in the management of their own affairs.

2. The Congress study of the functioning of such regions shows that they often have stronger and more effective regional democracy and can provide a model for other states to follow, providing that certain conditions are met, such as properly defined competences and  well defined relations and working arrangements with the central authorities.

3. The persistence of regional conflicts within some member states suggests that there is further scope for the provision of specific constitutional arrangements for regions with strong identities. The Congress believes that special regional autonomy status can be an effective counterbalance to secessionist tendencies and that the peaceful and prosperous development of the European space will depend on making greater progress in internal conflict resolution.  This will require the political will to pursue peaceful political dialogue to identify and negotiate suitable legal and constitutional solutions and develop satisfactory models of decentralised democratic governance for the regions concerned.

4. Therefore the Congress resolves to:

a. work with the Committee of Ministers and the Venice Commission to identify indicators and characteristics of successful regions with special status and to develop effective models of such status;

b. examine the  attribution of legislative powers to specific regions as a factor in successful regional development ;

c. assess the functioning of existing special region status arrangements in its country monitoring of the implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government;


d. pay particular attention in the framework of this monitoring, in its political dialogue with the central governments of countries with internal regional problems, tensions or conflicts, to the potential of the ‘special status’ model  for achieving a negotiated settlement in those conflicts;

e. continue to give the democratic institutions of such regions representation in its Chamber of Regions;

f. regularly discuss developments and exchange good practice on this subject, in particular in its Chamber of Regions.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Migrants’ access to regional labour markets

Resolution 362 (2013)[72]

1. The rapidly growing cultural diversity of European societies has brought to the forefront the questions of both integration of migrants into the host community and their participation in the economic development, in particular at regional and local levels. The migrant population in Europe is becoming more diverse not only in terms of ethnic or national origin, but also of length of stay, educational achievement, and socio-economic position, meaning that migrants today have better opportunities for making a meaningful contribution to the regional and local economy, which is especially important in the current economic crisis.

2. In 2011, 33.3 million foreigners were living in the European Union alone (6.6% of the total population). The majority (20.5 million) were third-country nationals (4.4% of the total population). About 80% of third-country nationals in the EU are of working age (15–64 years) and constitute a significant pool of the labour force. In the period prior to the economic crisis, from 2000 to 2007, third-country nationals contributed to a quarter of the overall rise in employment.[73] Yet this migrant human capital remains widely underused, to a large extent due to the lack of recognition of foreign qualifications, complexity of procedures for obtaining work authorisation as well as a range of discriminatory practices. During the economic crisis, the employment situation of migrant workers has deteriorated more rapidly than that of natives.

3. Migrants’ access to the labour market or to creating their own businesses is of utmost importance for successful integration processes because gainful activities – as employee on the labour market or as entrepreneur – constitute a central dimension of both the structural and social integration of migrants. Many opportunities for their participation in society and economic processes become available through employment or self-employment, influencing their social status as individuals. Successful integration through employment contributes to better social cohesion at the local and regional levels and renders a wide range of benefits for the communities and regional population, including by reducing costs associated with social assistance and conflict resolution.


4. Thus, employment and self-employment have been widely recognised as a crucial step in the process of migrants’ integration: they are an integral part of building intercultural relations and improving social cohesion of regional and local communities. Although the regulatory framework for integration is set mostly at the national or European level, regional and local authorities have considerable leeway in implementing related regulations and in moderating their impact and outcome at the grassroots level. Since integration always takes place in a concrete local context, they share the responsibility for the inclusion of migrants in regional and local economic processes,[74] and play a crucial role in creating specific conditions of access to regional and local labour markets or to entrepreneurial activity. This has also been emphasised in the European Agenda for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals.[75]

5. The challenge of integrating migrants in regional and local communities as a major factor for better social cohesion and intercultural harmony, and the crucial role of regional and local authorities in this process, were also highlighted in the report on “Living together: Combining diversity and freedom in 21st century Europe”, commissioned by the Council of Europe and prepared by its Group of Eminent Persons in 2011.

6. Over the past years, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities has addressed various aspects of the integration of migrants, in particular in its Resolution 141 (2002) on “The participation of foreign residents in local public life: consultative bodies”; Resolution 181 (2004) on “A pact for the integration and participation of people of immigrant origin in Europe’s towns, cities and regions”; Resolution 280 (2009) on “Intercultural cities”; Resolution 281 (2009) on “Equality and diversity in local authority employment and service provision”; Resolution 323 (2011) on “Meeting the challenge of inter-faith and intercultural tensions at local level”; and Resolution 362 (2013) on “Integration through self-employment: promoting migrant entrepreneurship in European municipalities’’. While these texts are addressed primarily to local authorities, their relevant provisions are also applicable at the regional level, as appropriate. Improving migrants’ access to regional labour markets is another aspect crucial for migrant integration at the grassroots.

7. Regional policy can directly influence the conditions of migrants’ employment, even if it has to operate in a framework of national and federal state regulations and legislations. In many countries, regional authorities have significant competences in regulating employment and access to labour markets in terms of evaluation of skills and qualifications, issuance of work permits, and provision of proper education and training, as well as of financial assistance, among others. Yet, in many regions, even highly skilled migrant workers are unable to work and integrate professionally, which is often due to the complexity of procedures and discriminatory attitudes and prejudice towards hiring migrants.

8. The Congress is convinced that promoting migrants’ access to regional labour markets and business activities requires a broad range of policies and measures, which must be part of the general economic development and social policy, and which must be guided by the principles of equality, non-discrimination and respect for human rights. Such policies must be based on an integrated approach encompassing most aspects of traditional integration policy, improvement of intercultural relations and diversity management. The challenge of supporting the integration of migrants into increasingly diverse societies calls indeed for innovative measures in all relevant institutions of the host society, and the regional level offers unique opportunities for a bottom-up development of such innovation.


9. In the light of the above, the Congress invites regional authorities of the Council of Europe member States to implement specific measures to improve and facilitate the access of migrants to regional labour markets, and in particular to develop regional action plans based on an integrated approach aiming to:

a. mainstream migrant employment policies and strategies into regional economic development plans;

b. ensure the collection of statistical information to map the existing employment and self-employment (entrepreneurial) situation of migrant communities;

c. adopt and enforce regional non-discrimination legislative measures regarding employment;

d. review, where applicable, procedures for the evaluation of skills and qualifications, in particular for medium-and highly-skilled migrants, in order to facilitate their obtaining of work authorisation without undue delay;

e. review and facilitate, where applicable, general procedures for obtaining work authorisation by migrants;

f. review and facilitate employment procedures in order to reduce bureaucratic hurdles and to remove excessive requirements for certain categories of jobs, in particular language requirements where applicable;

g. develop intercultural policies aimed at fostering dialogue and interaction between migrants and the host community, in order to change the prejudiced attitudes of the local population (in particular employers) towards hiring migrants, and pursue effective communication policies in this regard;

h. provide training to regional staff to improve their intercultural competences and promote respect for diversity and non-discriminatory attitudes and practices, including the training of middle management in diversity issues to ensure the equal treatment of employees with migrant background;

i. ensure that the migrant population is proportionally represented among the staff employed by regional public institutions and services, by pursuing inclusive hiring practices as well as implementing equal treatment provisions in promotion procedures, and apply in this regard the relevant provisions of Congress Resolution 281 (2009) on "equality and diversity in local authority employment and service provision”;

j. include diversity and equality standards in contracts with external providers;

k. develop measures, through intra and inter-regional co-operation, to facilitate labour mobility, which would be beneficial also to the migrant population, in particular by removing excessive job requalification requirements when changing the region of residence;

l. promote migrant entrepreneurship as a measure to increase job creation and expand regional labour markets, which would be beneficial also to migrant employment, in particular by supporting migrant business start-ups through access to microcredits as well as by providing information on business start-up procedures, and apply in this regard the relevant provisions of Congress Resolution 362 (2013) on “Integration through self-employment: promoting migrant entrepreneurship in European municipalities”;


m. provide the migrant population, in particular new arrivals, with information, assistance and advice on employment procedures and existing employment opportunities;

n. assist the migrant population in receiving proper training to prepare for employment, in particular with regard to language learning and skills development, including through co-operation with professional training schools;

o. improve education opportunities for migrants and their access to educational institutions, including by providing language tuition and other financial assistance as necessary;

p. promote a visible, high-profile political leadership style in support of the integration of migrants to be adopted by regional administrations and councils, and co-operation with leaders of the relevant ethnic, cultural and religious groups and their organisations;

q. engage associations of migrants to ensure communication with the migrant community, and promote co-operation and interaction between migrants’ associations and other stakeholders (such as non-profit social enterprises, business and employers’ associations, trade unions and chambers of commerce);

r. develop co-operation and co-ordination between different regional departments involved in implementing integration policies, as well as with local authorities, civil society and other stakeholders in elaborating and implementing such regional action plans.

10. The Congress invites regional authorities of the Council of Europe member States to establish, within their administrative structures, designated offices or units entrusted with co-ordinating the implementation of the measures listed in paragraph 9 of this resolution.

11. The Congress further reaffirms the continued relevance of its proposals for the integration of migrants contained in its resolutions referred to in paragraph 6 above, and calls on regional authorities in Europe to implement their relevant provisions applicable at the regional level.

12. The Congress further instructs its Governance Committee and its Current Affairs Committee to keep the question of migrants’ access to labour markets under review and to ensure the dissemination of relevant good practices to regional authorities, including through European and national associations.


25th SESSION

Strasbourg, 29-31 October 2013

Prospects for effective transfrontier co-operation in Europe

Resolution 363 (2013)[76]

1. The perception of national borders in Europe is changing.  Today they are regarded less and less as barriers and obstacles and increasingly as potential sources of co-operation that can benefit citizens on either side of the border.  This co-operation involves targeted collaboration between individual and institutional actors coming from different jurisdictions but located in the same transfrontier territory. The aim is to solve problems and develop synergies based on the social, economic and natural characteristics of the territory.

2. Europe is on the threshold of a transfrontier co-operation of a completely new dimension, due to its investment in territorial cohesion and a new generation of actors, who are seeking more concrete results to this co-operation. There is a new spirit of pragmatism when it comes to transfrontier issues, a practical search for joint solutions to common local problems resulting from the increasing border-crossing socioeconomic dynamics, in areas such as transportation, spatial planning, environmental protection, risk prevention, citizen’s advice and health co-operation.

3. Europe’s economic downturn is also generating a renewed interest in transfrontier co-operation with its potential for developing complementary fields of specialisation and sharing infrastructures with local and regional actors from the neighbouring state. There are huge potential savings to be made from such a rationalisation of resources.

4. Many of the obstacles to effective transfrontier co-operation lie in the diversity of the politico-administrative systems concerned, the technical nature of the work and the fragmentation of knowledge in this sector. Developing horizontal co-operation between partners from very different institutional and administrative cultures often entails a considerable change in traditional and deep-rooted working methods.

5. Unlocking the huge potential of effective transfrontier co-operation will require sustained capacity building and training programmes and a pooling of the existing expertise in order to co-ordinate and make the best use of research resources and to develop indicators to measure the impact of co-operation activities.  The development of model legal clauses for thematic bilateral agreements could also facilitate such co-operation.


6. The Congress welcomes the entry into force on 1 March 2013 of Protocol No. 3 to the European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities concerning Euro-regional Co-operation Groupings (ECGs), and the forthcoming appendix to this treaty, which will contain practical solutions to facilitate the creation or functioning of Euro-regional Co-operation Groupings.  These groupings, composed of local authorities and other public bodies, will serve to put transfrontier and inter-territorial co-operation into practice for their members,

7. The Congress believes that it has a valuable role to play in bringing together the European actors working on transfrontier co-operation issues, co-ordinating and facilitating capacity building activities, providing a forum for dialogue and exchange and assisting with the dissemination of results, ensuring that lessons are shared to the benefit of all.

8. Therefore the Congress resolves to:

a. organise in 2014 a conference of the main European actors working on transfrontier co-operation issues, with a view to agreeing an action plan to:

i.        establish a pool of expertise on transfrontier co-operation issues;

ii.       co-ordinate research in this area, including data collection and the development of indicators;

iii.      develop capacity building and training programmes;

b. review the implementation of this action plan in 2017.

9. The Congress asks national associations of local and regional authorities and the national delegations to:

a. support this work and examine how to further develop transfrontier co-operation in territories within their own borders;

b. encourage the respective national authorities to sign and ratify Protocol No. 3 to the European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities concerning Euro-regional Co-operation Groupings (ECGs);

c. disseminate this Protocol and the forthcoming appendix to their members.

10. The Congress asks its Governance Committee to:

a. appoint a thematic spokesperson to follow this issue;

b. evaluate the replies from the associations and the national delegations;

c. continue to follow and to contribute to the work of the intergovernmental sector on this issue.



[1]. Debated and adopted by the Congress on 29 October 2013, 1st Sitting (see Document CG(25)5, explanatory memorandum), rapporteurs: Barbara TOCE, Italy (L, SOC) et Svetlana ORLOVA, Russian  Federation (R, EPP/CCE)

[2] Debated and adopted by the Congress on 29 October 2013, 1st Sitting (see document CG(25)7PROV explanatory memorandum), rapporteurs: Artur Torres Pereira, Portugal (L, EPP/CCE) and Devrim Çukur, Turkey (R, SOC).

[3] They were assisted in their work by Ms Anne Gaudin, consultant, lecturer in public law at Sciences Po University in Bordeaux, and Ms Stéphanie Poirel, Secretary to the Monitoring Committee of the Congress.

[4] Debated and approved by the Chamber of Local Authorities on 30 October 2013, and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, third sitting (see Document CPL(25)5, explanatory memorandum, presented by Andris Jaunsleinis, Latvia (L, ILDG) and Merita Jegeni Yildiz, Turkey (R, EPP/CCE), rapporteurs).

[5] The co–rapporteur Mr Michael Cohen is no longer a member of the Congress since September 2013. A new co‑rapporteur has been appointed by the Chair of the Monitoring Committee in accordance with Resolution 307 (2010) REV.

[6] In their work, the rapporteurs were assisted by Professor Juraj Nemec, consultant, who is a member of the Group of Independent Experts on the European Charter of Local Self-Government, and by Sedef Cankoçak, Co-Secretary of the Monitoring Committee of the Congress.

[7] Debated and approved by the Chamber of Local Authorities on 30 October 2013, and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd sitting (see Document CPL(25)2, explanatory memorandum, presented by Henrik HAMMAR , Sweden (L, EPP/CCE), rapporteur).

[8] COM(2011) 834 – Proposal for a programme for the competitiveness of enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (2014-2020).

[9] CLIP – Promoting ethnic entrepreneurship in European cities, © European Union, 2011, ISBN 978-92-897-1038-1.

[10] COM(2011) 834 – Proposal for a programme for the competitiveness of enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (2014-2020).

[11] COM(2012) 795 – Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan: Reigniting the entrepreneurial spirit in Europe.

[12] Ibid.

[13] “Living together: Combining diversity and freedom in 21st century Europe”, Report of the Group of Eminent Persons of the Council of Europe, © Council of Europe,May 2011.

[14] COM(2012) 795 – Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan: Reigniting the entrepreneurial spirit in Europe.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Council of Europe Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level of 1992, CETS No. 144.

[17] Debated and approved by the Chamber of Local Authorities on 30 October 2013, and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd sitting (see Document CPL(25)3PROV, explanatory memorandum, presented by Stewart DICKSON, United Kingdom (R, ILDG), rapporteur).

[18] Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2.

[19] Observation of local and regional elections – strategy and rules of the Congress, RES 306(2010).

[20] First Municipal Elections of Yerevan, Armenia (31 May 2009), REC 277(2009).

[21] Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters, Guidelines and Explanatory Report, CDL-AD(2002)23rev, Venice Commission.

[22] Joint Final Opinion on the Electoral Code of Armenia, CDL-AD(2011)032, Venice Commission and OSCE/ODIHR.

[23] Debated and approved by the Chamber of Local Authorities on 30 October 2013, and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd sitting (see Document CPL(25)4PROV, explanatory memorandum, presented by Jüri LANDBERG, Estonia (L, ILDG), rapporteur).

[24] Congress deployment areas appear in Appendix III of the explanatory memorandum.

[25] According to the State Election Commission (SEC), since September 2012 more than 20 letters have been sent to the Government, Parliament and Mayors to request financial support for the 25 municipalities. Most Municipal Election Commissions (MECs) encountered financial problems due to failure to receive the necessary funds in a timely manner – in some cases MEC members used their personal funds.

[26] Debated and approved by the Chamber of Regions on 30 October 2013 and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd sitting (see Document CPR(25)2PROV explanatory memorandum), rapporteur : Bruno Marziano, Italy(R, SOC).

[27] . Debated and approved by the Chamber of Regions on 30 October 2013 and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd Sitting (see Document CPR(25)3, explanatory memorandum), presented by Inger Linge, Sweden (R, EPP/CCE) on behalf of Deidre McGowan, Ireland (R, ILDG), rapporteur.

[28] European Commission (EC) - Employment in Europe 2008, Luxembourg 2009.

[29] CdR 212/2009 fin - Own-Initiative Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Local and regional authorities at the forefront of integration policies, p. 4f,  Brussels 2009.

[30] COM(2011) 455 Final  – Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, European Agenda for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals, p. 8-9, Brussels 2011.

[31] Debated and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd Sitting (see Document CG(25)8PROV explanatory memorandum) rapporteurs: Marc Cools, Belgium (L, ILDG) and Pascal Mangin, France (R, EPP/CCE).

[32]The rapporteurs were assisted by Mr Bernd Semmelroggen, consultant and member of the Group of Independent Experts on the European Charter of Local Self-Government, and by Ms Sedef Cankoçak, Co-Secretary to the Monitoring Committee of the Congress.

[33] Debated and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd Sitting (see Document CG(25)11PROV explanatory memorandum), rapporteurs: Zdenek Broz, Czech Republic (L, ECR) and Ake Svensson, Sweden (R, SOC).

[34] In their work, the rapporteurs were assisted by David MELUA, consultant, who is a member of the Group of Independent Experts on the European Charter of Local Self-Government, and by Sedef CANKOÇAK, Co-Secretary of the Monitoring Committee of the Congress.

[35] Debated and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd Sitting (see Document CG(25)12PROV explanatory memorandum) rapporteurs: Julia Costa, Portugal (L, EPP/CCE) and Jean-Pierre Liouville, France (R, SOC).

[36] They were assisted in their work by Ms Esther Maurer, member of the Group of Independent Experts, and Ms Stéphanie Poirel, Secretary to the Monitoring Committee of the Congress.

[37] Debated and adopted by the Congress on 30 October 2013, 2nd sitting (see Document CG(25)13 explanatory memorandum), rapporteur: Lars O. Molin, Sweden (L, EPP/CCE).

[38] CETS No. 207

[39] Debated and adopted by the Congress on 30 October 2013, 2nd sitting (see Document CG(25)13 explanatory memorandum), rapporteur: Lars O. Molin, Sweden (L, EPP/CCE).

[40] Statutory Resolution (2011) – extracts from Article 2.

[41]Charter” is taken to mean the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122), including the additional protocol thereto (CETS No. 207).

[42] See the Final Declaration adopted by the European Ministers responsible for Local and Regional Authorities on 17 November 2009 in Utrecht (Netherlands) as part of their 16th Ministerial Conference. It should be noted that the Reference Framework is not a binding legal instrument.

[43] Cf. the rules establishing the practical procedure for organising monitoring visits (appended to the present resolution).

[44] Such as the Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level (ETS No. 144), the Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ETS No. 148), the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (ETS No. 157), Protocol No. 3 to the Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities (CETS No. 206), etc.

[45] As revised by the Congress at its 15th Plenary Session on 28 May 2008 (Resolution 256 (2008) and complemented by the Standing Committee on 2 December 2008 (Resolution 273 (2008)).

[46] ETS No. 122.

[47] Such as the Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level (ETS No. 144), the Charter for Regional and Minority Languages (ETS No. 148), the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (ETS No. 157), Protocol No. 3 to the Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities (CETS No. 206), etc.

[48] See Resolution 353 (2013) REV “Congress post-monitoring and post-observation of elections: developing political dialogue” Jean-Marie BELLIARD, France (R, EPP/CCE)

[49] As revised by the Congress at its 15th plenary session on 28 May 2008 (Resolution 256 (2008)) and complemented by the Standing Committee on 2 December 2008 (Resolution 273 (2008)).

[50] Debated and adopted by the Congress on 30 October 2013, 2nd sitting (see document CG(25)13 explanatory memorandum), rapporteur: Lars O. Molin, Sweden (L, EPP/CCE).

[51] Documents CM(2011)48 rev and CM/Del/Dec(2011)1112/1.6)

[52] Speech DD(2010)22rev delivered by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe at the 1075th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies – Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 20 January 2010

[53]. Debated and adopted by the Congress on 29 October 2013, 1st Sitting (see Document CG(25)2), Rapporteurs: Anders KNAPE, Sweden (L, EPP/CCE) and Ludmila SFIRLOAGA, Romania (R, SOC)

[54]. Debated and adopted by the Congress on 29 October 2013, 1st Sitting (see Document CG(25)5, explanatory memorandum), rapporteurs: Barbara TOCE, Italy (L, SOC) et Svetlana ORLOVA, Russian  Federation (R, EPP/CCE).

[55] Debated and approved by the Chamber of Local Authorities on 30 October 2013, and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd sitting (see Document CPL(25)2, explanatory memorandum, presented by Henrik HAMMAR , Swede (L, EPP/CCE), rapporteur).

[56] COM(2011) 834 – Proposal for a programme for the competitiveness of enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (2014-2020).

[57] CLIP – Promoting ethnic entrepreneurship in European cities, © European Union, 2011, ISBN 978-92-897-1038-1.

[58] COM(2011) 834 – Proposal for a programme for the competitiveness of enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (2014-2020).

[59] COM(2012) 795 – Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan: Reigniting the entrepreneurial spirit in Europe.

[60] Ibid.

[61] “Living together: Combining diversity and freedom in 21st century Europe”, Report of the Group of Eminent Persons of the Council of Europe, © Council of Europe,May 2011.

[62] COM(2012) 795 – Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan: Reigniting the entrepreneurial spirit in Europe.

[63] Debated and approved by the Chamber of Local Authorities on 30 October 2013, and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd sitting (see Document CPL(25)3PROV, explanatory memorandum, presented by Stewart DICKSON, United Kingdom (R, ILDG), rapporteur).

[64] Local democracy in Armenia CPL(10)8 Part II,Rapporteur: Christopher NEWBURY, United Kingdom (L, EPP/CCE)

[65]Local democracy in Armenia, REC 140(2003), Rapporteur : Christopher NEWBURY, United Kingdom (L, EPP/CCE)

[66] First Municipal Elections of Yerevan, Armenia (31 May 2009), REC 277(2009).

[67] Local by-elections in Armenia (9 and 23 September 2012), REC 338(2013).

[68] Observation of local and regional elections – strategy and rules of the Congress, RES 306(2010).

[69] Congress post-monitoring and post-observation of elections: developing political dialogue, RES 353(2013).

[70] Debated and approved by the Chamber of Local Authorities on 30 October 2013, and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd sitting (see Document CPL(25)4PROV, explanatory memorandum, presented by Jüri LANDBERG, Estonia (L, ILDG), rapporteur).

[71] Debated and approved by the Chamber of Regions on 30 October 2013 and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd sitting (see Document CPR(25)2PROV explanatory memorandum), rapporteur : Bruno Marziano, Italy(R, SOC).

[72] . Debated and approved by the Chamber of Regions on 30 October 2013 and adopted by the Congress on 31 October 2013, 3rd Sitting (see Document CPR(25)3, explanatory memorandum), presented by Inger Linge, Sweden (R, EPP/CCE) on behalf of Deidre McGowan, Ireland (R, ILDG), rapporteur.

[73] European Commission (EC) - Employment in Europe 2008, Luxembourg 2009.

[74] CdR 212/2009 fin - Own-Initiative Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Local and regional authorities at the forefront of integration policies, p. 4f,  Brussels 2009.

[75] COM(2011) 455 Final - Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European. Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, European Agenda for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals, p. 8-9, Brussels 2011.

[76] Debated and adopted by the Congress on 30 October 2013, 2nd sitting (see Document CG(25)9PROV explanatory memorandum), rapporteur: Breda Pečan, Slovenia (R, SOC).