26thSESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Adopted texts

Recommendations

Recommendation 351                 Local democracy in Armenia

Recommendation 352                 Local and regional democracy in the Netherlands

Recommendation 353                 Local and regional democracy in the United Kingdom

Recommendation 354                 Empowering Roma youth through participation: effective policy design at local and regional levels

Recommendation 355                 The situation of Leyla Güven and other local elected representatives in detention in Turkey

Recommendation 356                 Post-monitoring of local and regional democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Recommendation 357                 Local and regional democracy in Sweden

Resolutions

Resolution 364                  Verification of new members’ credentials

Resolution 365                  Best practices of implementation of human rights at local and regional                                                    level in member states of the Council of Europe and other countries

Resolution 366                           Empowering Roma youth through participation: effective policy design                                                   at local and regional levels

Resolution 367                           The situation of Leyla Güven and other local elected representatives in detention in Turkey

Resolution 368                           Strategy on the right of local authorities to be consulted

                                                by other levels of government

Resolution 369                           Post-monitoring of local and regional democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Declaration

Declaration 2                             The situation in Ukraine

26th Session

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Local democracy in Armenia

Recommendation 351 (2014)[1]

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 provides 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, 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 of Local Self-Government are implemented’’;

c. Resolution 307 (2010) REV2 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 140 (2003) and Resolution 167 (2003) on local democracy in Armenia adopted by the Congress in November 2003;

e. the explanatory memorandum to the recommendation on local democracy in Armenia.

2. The Congress recalls that Armenia signed the European Charter of Local Self-Government (hereinafter "the Charter") on 11 May 2001 and ratified it on 25 January 2002; it entered into force in respect of Armenia on 1 May 2002. Armenia stated that it does not consider itself bound by Articles 5, 6, 7(2) and 10(3) of the Charter.

3. It notes that:

a. the Monitoring Committee instructed Nigel Mermagen (United Kingdom, L, ILDG), rapporteur on local democracy,[2] to prepare and submit to the Congress, the report on local democracy in Armenia;

b. The monitoring visit toArmenia took place from 26 to 28 November 2013 in Yerevan, Ashtarak and Oshakan.

4. The Congress wishes to thank the Permanent Representation of Armenia to the Council of Europe and the Armenian authorities at central and local levels, representatives of Armenian NGOs working in the field of development of municipalities as well as other interlocutors for their valuable cooperation at different stages of the monitoring procedure and the information conveyed to the delegation.

5. The Congress notes with satisfaction that:

a. Armenia has made significant efforts to implement  the provisions of the Charter, starting with important constitutional changes in 2005 and following up with the adoption of the new law on Local Self-Government of Yerevan in 2008;

b. progress has been made in clarifying the legal status of municipal servants and in organising vocationaltraining for them;

c. Armenia ratified the Additional Protocol to the Charter on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (CETS No. 207) on 13 May 2013 with entry into force on 1 September 2013 and that new legislation was adopted immediately after with the aim of strengthening citizens’ participation in local government;

d. the Council of Europe project “Support to the consolidation of local democracy in Armenia”, in which the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities is also involved, was launched February 2014 with the support of the Danish Government.

6. The Congress draws attention however to the following points of concern:

a. local authorities take part in service delivery only to a limited extent and they do not regulate and manage “a substantial share of public affairs under their own responsibility” (Article 3.1 of the Charter);

b. the existence of numerous small and weak municipalities continues to be a structural problem, creating imbalance between local authorities and  limiting the service delivery capacity of municipalities;

c. the weak capacity of community councils in the exercise of their initiatives with regard to all matters relating to their competences (Article 4.2 of the Charter);

d. local authorities play a very limited role and in practice do not have always full and exclusive powers, with local government bodies serving more as agents for the central government, than as autonomous actors of local public administration (Article 4.4 of the Charter);

e. the own tasks and delegated powers of local authorities while defined in law are not applied in practice (Article 4.5 of the Charter);

f. the absence of a formal mechanism of consultation between central government and local authorities on decision making process relating to all matters which concern them directly (Article 4.6 of the Charter);

g. the supervisory powers of central government extend not only to a review of the legality of the local community's action, but also to the economic and financial aspects of local government matters, in contradiction to the Charter provisions (Article 8.2 of the Charter);

h. local communities have limited own resources (Article 9.1 of the Charter);

i. local authorities cannot impose real local taxes or determine the rate within reasonable limits set by law (Article 9.3 of the Charter);

j. the financial equalisation mechanisms are not appropriate as regards the fiscal capacities and financial needs of communities (Article 9.5 of the Charter) and the other state transfers on allocation of grants are not regulated by any law (Article 9.7 of the Charter).

7. In the light of this, the Congress recommends that the Armenian authorities:

a. review the legislation in order to better implement the principle of subsidiarity and to allow the local authorities to regulate and manage a substantial share of public affairs under their own responsibility and in the interest of the local population;

b. improve and strengthen territorial governance in order to make it more effective through, for instance, inter-municipal co-operation or mergers of small communities and to mitigate the over-centralisation of public administration;

c. increase the capacity (legally and in practice) of the community councils with regard to all matters related to their competences, in order to increase the efficient administrative capacity of local communities and strengthen their role and importance in relation to the chief executives;

d. ensure that local authorities enjoy full and exclusive powers, as autonomous actors of local public administration, and do not have these powers undermined by the central authorities;

e. clarify the administrative nature of the various tasks and functions that fall within the scope of local government, particularly as regards whether they are mandatory or delegated powers, and strengthen the position of local authorities by leaving the management of important local matters to the discretion of local authorities;

f. set up a formal consultation mechanism in domestic law, to ensure that local authorities and national associations of local authorities are duly consulted on matters which concern them directly “in due time and in an appropriate way”, and that central government decisions are accessible to local elected representatives and their associations, which should be considered in practice as privileged and active partners;

g. ensure that the administrative supervision of local authorities is limited to a review of the legality of the local community's action, and that the controlling authority’s intervention is kept in proportion to the importance of the interests which it is intended to protect;

h. increase the “own” financial resources of local authorities as required above (see 7. a and c);

i. improve the efficiency of the tax mechanism in municipalities, by allowing them the right to determine the rate within reasonable limits set by law in order to strengthen their autonomy;

j. review the financial equalisation mechanism to implement it in a more appropriate way, and develop measures for the allocation of equalisation grants on the basis of fiscal capacities and financial needs of communities, in order to correct the effects of the unequal distribution of potential sources of finance, in accordance with Article 9.5 of the Charter;

k. review the relevance of the declarations made by Armenia on Articles 5, 6, 7 para. 2, and 10 para 3 of the Charter at the time of deposit of this instrument in the light of the recent developments which occurred in Armenia in this respect;

l. take into account the present recommendation in the implementation of the Council of Europe project “Support to the consolidation of local democracy in Armenia”.

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

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Local and regional democracy in the Netherlands

Recommendation 352 (2014)^[3]

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) REV2 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. 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;

e. Recommendation 55 (1999) on local and regional democracy in the Netherlands and Recommendation 180 (2005) on the state of local finances in the Netherlands.

2. The Congress stresses the following:

a. The Kingdom of the Netherlands (hereafter “the Netherlands”) 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 7 January 1988 and ratified it on 20 March 1991. The Charter entered into force with respect to the Netherlands on 1 July 1991. At the time of ratification, the Netherlands made several “declarations” pertaining to different articles of the Charter, on the grounds of Article 12, paragraph 2 of the Charter: namely, that the Netherlands will not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 7, paragraph 2; Article 8, paragraph 2; Article 9, paragraph 5; and Article 11 of the Charter. Moreover, and in accordance with Article 13 of the Charter, the Netherlands declared that it intended to confine the scope of the Charter to provinces and municipalities and that the Charter would apply to the Netherlands in Europe (on the grounds of Article 16 of the Charter).

b. The Netherlands signed the Additional Protocol to the European Charter of Local Self-Government on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (ETS No. 207) on 16 November 2009 and ratified it on 16 December 2009 with entry into force on 1 June 2012.

3. It notes that:

a. Artur Torres Pereira (Portugal, L, EPP/CCE), Rapporteur on local democracy, and Jean‑Pierre Liouville (France, R, SOC), Rapporteur on regional democracy, were instructed by the Monitoring Committee to prepare a report on the Netherlands and to submit it to the Congress;^[4]

b. the monitoring visit took place from 14 to 16 May 2013. During this visit, the Congress monitoring delegation met with representatives of State institutions (Parliament, Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Finance), judicial institutions (Council of State, Raad van State), the Ombudsman (at national and local level) several local authorities (Amsterdam, Zoeterwoude, Gouda, local audit offices) the Association of Municipalities (VNG) and the Association of Provinces (IPO);

c. the delegation would like to thank the Permanent Delegation of the Netherlands to the Council of Europe, the Dutch Association of Municipalities (VNG) and the Dutch Association of Provinces (IPO) for their very warm welcome and proactive assistance throughout the visit.

4. The Congress notes with satisfaction:

a. the generally positive nature of local democracy in the Netherlands as regards the implementation of the principles enshrined in the Charter, particularly those laid down in Articles 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10;

b. the “Dualisation” reform from 2002-2003 by which the whole municipal organisation has been reformed, separating the composition, functions and powers of the council and the executive board;

c. the modification of the Municipalities Act which regulates the involvement of the council in the appointment procedure of the mayors;

d. the generally good relationship between central and local authorities;

e. the positive impact in the work of local and regional authorities, of the 2013 version of the Code on Inter-administrative relations, concluded between the Government, the IPO and the VNG, especially on the process of consultation and regarding matters of co-operation, co-ordination, mutual assistance supervision and control;

f. the fact that Dutch authorities are ready to consider the pertinence of ratifying some of the provisions not accepted at the time of ratification of the Charter;

g. the attention for active participation of Dutch citizens in the political decision-making process.

5. The Congress regrets:

a. that the principle of local self-government is not explicitly or directly recognised either in the applicable domestic legislation (Municipalities Act) or in the Constitution as required in Article 2 of the Charter;

b. the lack of clarity as regards competences for municipalities and provinces (Article 4 para.1);

c. that under the co-governance mechanism of Medebewind, local authorities’ capacity to act and to take decisions is much more reduced when compared to their “autonomous” competences (Article 4 para.4);

d. the fact that the mechanisms of consultation with municipal and provincial authorities during the process of planning and decision making in all matters directly affecting them, such as laid down in the Code of Inter-administrative relations, are not yet fully complied with (Article 4 para. 6);

e. the inadequacy of financial resources freely available to local authorities, their dependence on State transfers and their limited own income in the framework of their competences (Article 9 para. 1 and 2);

f. that the local taxation reform has limited the income of municipalities and provinces (Article 9 para. 3).

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

a. clearly define the principle of local and regional self-government in domestic law or in the Constitution, in the light of Article 2 of the Charter;

b. clarify the areas of competence of municipal and provincial authorities, including those set out in the different sectors of government activity, in line with the spirit of Article 4 para. 1 of the Charter;

c. reinforce the “autonomous” and “proper” competences of municipalities and provinces and reduce the tasks performed under the “Medebewind” procedure, in the light of the Article 4 para. 4;

d. strengthen the mechanism of consultation between the State and the municipal and provincial level during the process of planning and decision making in all matters affecting the local authorities directly (Article 4 para. 6 of the Charter);

e. amend the law on municipal and provincial finances in order to grant local authorities more autonomy from State transfers and allocate appropriate and concomitant financial resources for all competences exercised by municipal and provincial authorities, as required by Article 9 paras. 1 and 2;

f. improve local taxation so that local authorities can raise their own funds, in line with the requirements of Article 9 para. 3 of the Charter;

g. reconsider the ratification of some non-accepted provisions of the Charter by a legislative amendment of the domestic law, notably its Article 7. 2 which is apparently applied de facto.

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 the Netherlands, as well as its explanatory memorandum, in its own monitoring procedures and other activities relevant to this member State.

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Local and regional democracy in the United Kingdom

Recommendation 353 (2014)[5]

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 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 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 of Local Self-Government are implemented’’;

c. Congress Resolution 299 (2010), which provides that the Congress will use the Council of Europe Reference Framework for Regional Democracy in its monitoring activities, as well as the reply given 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 aforementioned Reference Framework in their policies and reforms;

d. the explanatory memorandum on local and regional democracy in the United Kingdom;

2. The Congress recalls that:

a. theUnited Kingdom signed the European Charter of Local Self-Government (hereafter “the Charter”) on 3 June 1997 and ratified it on 24 April 1998. It made a declaration to the effect that it intends to confine its scope to the following categories of authorities: in England, county councils, district councils and London borough councils and the Council of the Isles of Scilly; in Wales, to all councils constituted under Section 2 of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994 and in Scotland, to all councils constituted under Section 2 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1994;

b. it has not ratified 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) nor signed the Additional Protocol to the European Outline Convention on Trans-frontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities (ETS No. 159);

c. the Monitoring Committee instructed Mrs Angelika KORDFELDER (Germany, L, SOC) and Mr Alexander USS (Russian Federation, R, EPP/CCE) as co-rapporteurs on local and regional democracy respectively, to prepare and submit to the Congress the report on local and regional democracy in the United Kingdom;[6]

d. the Congress delegation carried out two visits, from 29 to 31 May 2013 (London, Leeds, Edinburgh) and from 5 to 7 November 2013 (London, Cardiff) respectively, to review the situation of local government in the United Kingdom;

e. the rapporteurs are aware that, the United Kingdom being in reality made up of four countries which retain territorial and cultural distinctions of their own, their recommendations will be addressed to the United Kingdom as Member State of the Council of Europe, but the implementation thereof will be subject to the powers and responsibilities of the United Kingdom as well as to those of the governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland according to the distribution of competences regarding local government.

3. The Congress wishes to thank the Permanent Representation of the United Kingdom to the Council of Europe and the British authorities at central, devolved entity and local levels, all the local government associations, experts as well as other interlocutors for theirvaluable co-operation during the different stages of the monitoring procedure and the information conveyed to the delegation.

4. The Congress notes with satisfaction that:

a. local government in the United Kingdom, in general, complies with the obligations taken under the Charter and that the situation has improved since the United Kingdom ratified the Charter in 1998, notably through the devolution process which brought the powers related to local government under the responsibility of the devolved entities;

b. the Localism Act 2011, by introducing a “general power” for local authorities, greater freedom to decide their internal arrangements and appoint their own auditors, has taken an important step in the direction of  incorporating principles related to local government into domestic legislation;

c. a successful partnership approach has been adopted in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland that facilitates consultation with local authorities in matters concerning them;

d. the local government associations in the United Kingdom play an important role, gathering representatives from local authorities from different political backgrounds, giving local government an overarching voice and negotiating with the central government and with the devolved governments, although in many cases it is informal and not based upon legal guarantees.

5. The Congress expresses concern, however, that:

a. the Constitutional or legislative recognition and entrenchment of (the right to) local self-government does not exist in the United Kingdom (including in Scotland), and that  the introduction of a general power for local authorities does not go far enough in satisfying the spirit of the Charter;

b. while legal duties for local authorities to be consulted do exist and are used in practice, the ways and the time-frame for consultation seem to be controversial, the time-frame depending on the concrete subject, and in particular on the nature and the possible impact of a proposal;

c. local authorities do not have adequate financial resources, are under severe constraints as a consequence of cuts and indebtedness, and are faring worse than other public sectors and the national government in weathering the effects of the economic crisis (in spite of the very welcome government reform of 2013, localising business taxes in England and Wales but not in Scotland), all of which contribute to a situation that raises issues under Article 9 of the Charter;

d. the status of elected councillors does not fully correspond to their responsibilities and the low turnouts at local elections indicate the necessity to strengthen the democratically elected institutions as well as the role of elected office holders who are the backbone of the local government system;

e. local authorities do not have sufficiently prominent leadership and co-ordinating functions vis-à-vis other service providers within their local area, although they manage a considerable share of public affairs and services and represent the local community in important issues beyond that, such as planning and licensing;

f. oversight through extensive reporting duties and active involvement in local affairs by various ministries of the central government poses considerable limits on local authorities’ discretion to manage local affairs, although it must be said that significant steps have been taken by the Government to reduce centralised performance assessments.

6. In the light of this, the Congress asks the Committee of Ministers to invite the United Kingdom authorities to:

a. explore the constitutional and practical issues around the possibility of formalising the principles and mechanics of the relationship between central and local government, in the light of the Charter, the arguments developed by both local elected representatives, their associations and the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee of the House of Commons and the devolved parliaments where applicable for a more codified approach;

b. develop more institutionalised, uniformly time-framed and legally guaranteed consultation arrangements for local government, taking into account the necessity or opportunity for local authorities to consult their local population, at least regarding important issues, and in this regard, consider the partnership approach and the co-operation experiences in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland for the relations between central government and English local authorities;

c. reduce the financial burden of local authorities, particularly in England (where local government has powers without sufficient funding to implement them, a situation which curbs local authorities’ freedom of action and decision making considerably) but also in the other entities of the United Kingdom, further developing a diversified base of local revenue to cope with the services they provide;

d. re-evaluate the work of executive councillors so that their status corresponds better to their responsibilities, with a view to improving the engagement of citizens and particularly the younger generation who might be discouraged by the economic disadvantages of full-time council work;

e. give elected representatives of local government leadership and co-ordinating functions vis-à-vis other service providers within their local area;

f. carry out the oversight of local government in a manner to ensure that the involvement of the controlling authorities is kept in proportion to the importance of the interests which it is intended to protect as set by Article 8 para. 3 of the Charter;

g. review, in the near future, the United Kingdom’s declaration in the light of the current situation as this refers in part to authorities which do not exist anymore and do not include the Greater London Authority and Northern Ireland;

h. consider the ratification of 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) and the Additional Protocol to the European Outline Convention on Trans-frontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities (ETS No. 159).

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Empowering Roma youth through participation: effective policy design at local and regional levels

Recommendation 354 (2014)^[7]

1. The history of European repression against the Roma, which has taken many forms, goes back several hundred years. This discrimination continues today, and indeed has escalated in recent years.

2. Numerous efforts have been launched at European level which aim to guarantee respect for the human rights of Roma and promote their social inclusion, however it is debateable whether these instruments are sufficient to cover the needs and address the problems faced by young Roma in their everyday lives.

3. The Council of Europe Youth Department drew up a Roma Youth Action Plan, based on proposals made by 60 Roma youth leaders during a Roma Youth Conference, to address the difficulties encountered by young Roma and to make proposals for action to overcome these challenges to empower Roma Youth.

4. The Congress’s European Alliance of Towns and Regions for Roma Inclusion can be instrumental in promoting empowerment of young Roma at local and regional levels.

5. Young Roma face similar challenges to the rest of the Roma community, such as discrimination, anti‑Gypsyism and poor access to social rights.  However, they also have to cope with the weight of securely anchored Romani traditions and cultural heritage. In addition, they have to endure the same problems as all young people today: unemployment, social and economic exclusion, difficult transitions to adulthood, an uncertain future.

6. However, Roma youth are not perceived as priority stakeholders in the programmes designed within the EU Framework for National Roma Strategies and the National Action Plans of the Decade of Roma Inclusion. In general, policies at national level do not address the needs of and difficulties faced by Roma youth.

7. In the light of the above, the Congress recommends that the Committee of Ministers encourage member States to:

a. support local and regional Roma youth policies;

b. include the Roma youth dimension in their youth policies, and develop strategies that focus on Roma youth and reflect the reality of their everyday lives;

c. support research on the situation of Roma youth to enable the development of evidence-based policies;

d. set up national advisory councils on Roma youth issues, run on a co-management basis, to advise on national policies.

8. The Congress also recommends that the Committee of Ministers prolong the Roma Youth Action Plan beyond 2015 to enable its longer term objectives to be achieved.

9. Furthermore, the Congress welcomes the fact that the ROMACT project, the joint Council of Europe/European Commission ROMED programme and the Open Society Foundation project MERI (Mayors Making the Most of EU Funds for Roma Inclusion) will co-ordinate their activities within the framework of the European Alliance of Towns and Regions for Roma Inclusion, thus avoiding any duplication of efforts in municipalities’ action to promote Roma inclusion. The Congress encourages the three initiatives to cooperate on the development of Roma youth policies.

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

The situation of Leyla Güven and other local elected representatives in detention in Turkey

Recommendation 355 (2014)^[8]

1. On 29 December 2009, Leyla Güven was arrested, one of many people detained in a wave of arrests. At the time she was mayor of Viranşehir, elected in the 2009 local elections and member of the Congress. Today, more than four years later, she is still in detention. She has been on trial since 2010, with no end to her trial in sight.

2. She is not alone in this case. As Turkey prepares itself for new local elections, in March 2014, 15 mayors, 23 deputy mayors and several dozen municipal councillors find themselves in similar long-term remand detention, a situation unparalleled in Council of Europe member states.

3. On 7 December 2013, in accordance with the decision taken by the Congress Bureau at its meeting of 3 December 2012, the Congress rapporteurs visited Leyla Güven in Diyarbakir prison. The report of their visit, which they presented to the Congress Bureau at its meeting on 10 February 2014, is reproduced in the explanatory memorandum to this recommendation.

4. The Congress, believing that a basic principle of justice is that you are innocent until proven guilty, notes that:

a. according to Mrs Güven’s lawyers, her pre-trial detention has already long exceeded any sentence which could result from her charges;

b. on 4 December 2013, Turkey’s Constitutional Court issued a landmark ruling in the similar case of the MP Mustafa Balbay, also detained since 2009 and ordering his release, on the grounds that his remand detention had been excessive and therefore unlawful and that his right to be elected had been violated as he was unable to perform his public duties while in detention;

c.  as a result of this ruling, the Turkish courts have now released the five members of parliament who had been detained in similar circumstances and on similar charges to Leyla Güven, while the 15 mayors, 23 deputy mayors and several dozen municipal councillors remain in detention, unable to carry out the mandates for which they were elected.

5. The Congress therefore asks the Committee of Ministers:

a. to invite the Turkish authorities to apply the same standards and principles to local elected politicians as it does to its members of parliament, and therefore:

b. to release Leyla Güven and all the Turkish local elected representatives who find themselves in a similar situation and to do so in the context of the March 2014 Turkish municipal elections.

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Post-monitoring of local and regional democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Recommendation 356 (2014)[9]

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 relating to the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, 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 relating to the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, which provides 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) REV2 laying down the rules of procedure for monitoring application of the European Charter of Local Self-Government;

d. Congress Resolution 299 (2010), which provides that the Congress will use the Council of Europe Reference Framework for Regional Democracy in its monitoring activities, as well as the reply given 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 aforementioned Reference Framework in their policies and reforms;

e. Resolution 353 (2013) REV on post-monitoring and post observation of elections: developing political dialogue;

f. Recommendations 202 (2006) and 324 (2012) on local and regional democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

2. The Congress notes that:

a. Bosnia and Herzegovina ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122, hereinafter “the Charter”) on 12 July 2002 without reservations or declarations, and the instrument came into force in respect of the country on 1 November 2002;

b. Bosnia and Herzegovina 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. Two years after the adoption of its last recommendation, the Congress notes with satisfaction:

a. the general compatibility of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s legislation on local self-government with the principles of the Charter, in particular the improvement of the legislative framework in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the entities which includes explicit references to the Charter;

b. the successful implementation of the population census carried out in October 2013, which is fundamental in order to draw up and implement effective public policies at local authority level;

c. the repeated expression of consensus by the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina about the need to ensure consistency in the legislation on local self-government at all levels.

4. The Congress notes, however, the lack of action on Congress Recommendation (324) 2012 on local and regional democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In particular, it notes with concern that:

a. this lack of action is due to the continuous political and institutional deadlock at State level as well as in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH). Such deadlock is preventing constitutional reform which appears essential for a series of fundamental issues, not least for guaranteeing the fundamental rights of all citizens and for fulfilling the obligations of the country’s membership in the Council of Europe. If such a reform were not implemented, the interests of the population would not be properly defended;

b. the citizens are becoming increasingly bewildered in the face of a political system which has proven incapable of reforming itself in the interests of its population;

c. a lack of action regarding the implementation of Congress Recommendation (324) 2012 can be observed even in areas where constitutional reform is not an essential precondition for implementation, such as, inter alia, the recognition of municipal property and the improvement of inter-municipal co-operation.

5. In the light of the above, the Congress recommends that the Committee of Ministers urge the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina to:

a. guarantee the fundamental functions of local self-government in practice, including the allocation of sufficient financial resources to local authorities, commensurate with their powers and responsibilities, in particular by revising the existing legal provisions on financial equalisation;

b. review the legislation on local self-government within the entities, and the sub-level of government with a view to ensuring clear apportionment of the powers of local authorities in line with the principle of subsidiarity, setting a timeline for the implementation of reforms related to the implementation of Congress Recommendation (324) 2012;

c. strengthen and promote inter-municipal co-operation and the joint delivery of certain public services, in particular across the Inter-Entity Boundary Line, in order to guarantee that all municipalities are able to exercise their powers despite the great fragmentation of the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and to actively support existing initiatives in this direction;

d. adopt a legal framework recognising municipal property, thus enabling the calculation of the revenue base of local authorities;

e. consider signing and then ratifying 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);

f. support the post-monitoring process in 2014 in order to continue the political dialogue with authorities of all levels of governance in Bosnia and Herzegovina on the implementation of Recommendation 324 (2012) and the present recommendation;

g. call on the expertise and assistance of the Congress in drawing up, in co-operation with all the relevant stakeholders, and in particular with the national associations of local authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, any reform programmes aimed at increasing decentralisation in line with the Charter.

26thSession

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Local and regional democracy in Sweden

Recommendation 357 (2014)[10]

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 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 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 of Local Self-Government are implemented’’;

c. Congress Resolution 299 (2010), which provides that the Congress will use the Council of Europe Reference Framework for Regional Democracy in its monitoring activities, as well as the reply given by the Committee of Ministers to Congress Recommendation 282 (2010) [CM/Cong (2011)
Rec 282 final] encouraging the governments of member states to take account of the aforementioned Reference Framework in their policies and reforms;

d. the explanatory memorandum on local and regional democracy in Sweden [CG(26)12FINAL].

2. The Congress makes reference to the fact that:

a. Sweden signed the European Charter of Local Self-Government on 4 October 1988 and ratified it on 29 August 1989 with a declaration that it intends to confine the scope of application to the following local and regional authorities: municipalities (Kommuner) and county councils (Landstings);

b. Sweden signed the Additional Protocol on the right to participate in the affairs of a local authority (CETS No. 207) on 5 May 2010 with entry into force on 1 June 2012;

c. the Monitoring Committee instructed Luzette Wagenaar-Kroon (Netherlands, L, EPP/CCE) and Gudrun Mosler-Törnström (Austria, R, SOC) to prepare and submit to the Congress, as rapporteurs, the report on local and regional democracy in Sweden;

d. the Congress delegation carried out a monitoring visit to Sweden from 23 to 25 September 2013^[11] visiting Stockholm, Norköpping and Flen.

3. The Congress wishes to thank the Permanent Representation of Sweden to the Council of Europe and the Swedish authorities at central, county council and local levels, the Swedish Association of Local and Regional Authorities (SALAR), experts as well as other interlocutors for their valuable co-operation at different stages of the monitoring procedure and the information conveyed to the delegation.

4. The Congress notes with satisfaction that:

a. constitutional reform took place in 2011 amending the Instrument of Government which is one of the four fundamental laws that make up the Constitution, adding a new chapter under the title “Local Authorities” (Chapter 14), introducing the principle of proportionality, with the aim of strengthening the constitutional protection of local self-government;

b. the local authorities manage a very substantial share of public affairs (approximately 75 %) and the association representing local and county authorities, SALAR, is a strong partner of the national authorities with regard to local government affairs;

c. the equalisation system has been changed and the application of the funding principle has been given clearer guidelines as recommended by the Congress in 2005;

d. three county councils and one municipality have taken over additional responsibilities in regional development and that, from 2015 on, six additional county councils will take over similar responsibilities.

5. The Congress draws attention to issues that require further improvement for an optimal functioning of local government including the:

a. lack of a mention of the principle of subsidiarity in the Swedish Constitution, although the newly introduced Chapter 14 of the Instrument of Government has strengthened the role and scope of local authorities and, in any event, de facto, a very high percentage of public services are carried out at the local level;

b. significantly increased amount of detailed state regulations for local level activities, for example in such areas as working conditions, health care, education and public procurement, which carry the risk of infringement on local affairs and  the need for an improvement in the consultation procedure in order avoid such infringements;

c. non-indexation of state grants. Although these are frequently revised, they remain nominally fixed.  Therefore a decrease (in value) occurs in real terms through inflation. This situation could be addressed by adopting firm rules on the indexation of grants which, in turn, would strengthen the long‑term planning conditions for local authorities and county councils;

d. insufficient involvement of local authorities in the estimation of cost implications of new state legislation concerning the local level, which sometimes leads to situations where the national authorities do not take into account all related cost factors.

6. In the light of this, the Congress asks the Committee of Ministers to invite the Swedish authorities to:

a. strengthen the principle of subsidiarity, which requires that tasks that can be performed at the local level should be performed at the local level, by ensuring a consistent application of the recently introduced principle of proportionality, laid down in the Constitution;

b. set up a formal consultation procedure that would allow the local authorities and their representative association to make input into all decisions taken at State level which might limit local authorities’ autonomy;

c. invite the Government to consider the local authorities’ demand for indexation of state grants and linking them to demographic changes;

d. ensure the stronger involvement of the local authorities in the estimation of cost implications of any new state legislation that is to be implemented at local level;

e. grant more county councils responsibility in regional development, by extending this competence to all elected county councils, and to make use of the Council of Europe Reference Framework for Regional Democracy as a guideline in this respect;

f. invite the government to ratify Protocol No. 3 to the European Outline Convention on Transfrontier
Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities concerning Euroregional Co-operation Groupings (ECGs) (ETS No. 206).

26thSESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Verification of new members’ credentials

Resolution 364 (2014)[12]

The Congress,

1. Takes note of the conclusions of the verification, by the Bureau of the Congress in accordance with Article 4.1 of the Congress Charter, of the credentials of the members listed in appendix;

2. Wishes to remind all delegates of their obligation to sign a written declaration stating that they subscribe to the aims and basic principles of the Council of Europe;

3. Invites the authorities of the member States to notify, without delay, the loss of the local or regional mandate of the members of their delegation;

4. Reiterates its request to the authorities to indicate specifically the functions and conditions of revocation of the Congress members whose mandate does not result from direct elections but who are politically accountable to a directly elected assembly, and add the text of law in which these conditions of revocation are notified;

5. Proposes to approve the credentials of the members of the national delegations, as contained in appendix to this resolution.

26^th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Best practices of implementation of human rights at local and regional level in member states of the Council of Europe and other countries

Resolution 365 (2014)[13]

The Congress,

1. Considering:

a. Resolution 296 (2010) REV and Recommendation 280 (2010) REV on the Role of local and regional authorities in the implementation of human rights;

b. the reply adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 July 2011at the 1118th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies on the role of local and regional authorities in the implementation of human rights [CM/Cong(2011)Rec280 final] whereby the Committee of Ministers welcomes the Congress initiatives in the field of human rights at local level;

c. the explanatory memorandum attached to this resolution;

2. Taking note of the previous reports adopted by the Congress, respectively on “The role of local and regional authorities in the implementation of human rights” (2010), “Developing indicators to raise awareness of human rights at local and regional level” (2011) and on “Best practices of implementation of human rights at local and regional level in member states of the Council of Europe and other countries” (2014);

3. Conscious of the pre-eminent and leading role that governments play in the promotion and protection of fundamental human rights;

4. Encourages local and regional authorities in member States and non-member States with whom the Council of Europe is carrying out co-operation activities, to exchange good practices in the area of human rights at local and regional level;

5. Invites the Monitoring Committee to make use of the opportunity provided by monitoring visits to meet local elected representatives and continue its activities of awareness raising on the role the local authorities can play in promoting human rights at local and regional level, in co-operation with other bodies of the Council of Europe and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights;

6. Undertakes to organise a human rights forum with the participation of elected local and regional representatives, experts and other stakeholders at regular intervals to exchange information and good practices.

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Empowering Roma youth through participation: effective policy design at local and regional levels

Resolution 366(2014)^[14]

1. The history of European repression against the Roma, which has taken many forms, goes back several hundred years. This discrimination continues today, and indeed has escalated in recent years.

2. Numerous efforts have been launched at European level which aim to guarantee respect for the human rights of Roma and promote their social inclusion. The Council of Europe adopted its Strasbourg Declaration in 2010 in which it renewed its commitment to address human rights issues relating to Roma. The Declaration recognised that the primary responsibility for promoting inclusion lay within the member states at national, regional but especially local level.

3. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe responded to this Declaration by adopting Resolution 333(2011) and Recommendation 315(2011) on “the situation of Roma in Europe: a challenge for local and regional authorities” and launched, in March 2013, the European Alliance of Cities and Regions for Roma Inclusion.

4. It is debateable, however, whether these instruments, which also include the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies and the OSCE Action Plan on improving the situation of Roma and Sinti, are sufficient to cover the needs and address the problems faced by young Roma in their everyday lives.

5. The Council of Europe Youth Department launched a Roma Youth Action Plan, based on proposals made by 60 Roma youth leaders during a Roma Youth Conference in 2011, to address the difficulties encountered by Roma youth and to make proposals for action to overcome these challenges and to empower Roma Youth. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities decided to examine what strategies and policies local and regional authorities could implement to the same end.

6. Young Roma face similar challenges as the rest to the Roma community, such as discrimination, anti-Gypsyism and poor access to social rights. However, they also have to cope with the weight of securely anchored Romani traditions and cultural heritage.  In addition, they have to endure the same problems as all young people today: unemployment, social and economic exclusion, difficult transitions to adulthood, an uncertain future.

7. Poor educational attainment opens up a vicious cycle of poverty and social exclusion. Without qualifications and skills, employment is difficult to find.  For young people, taking up gainful employment is considered to be a crucial step in their personal development and in forming their identity. It is an important basis for securing one’s livelihood, for participating and positioning oneself in society. Paid employment is important for exiting the poverty cycle and opening up access to other social rights such as housing and healthcare. Without employment, Roma youth run the risk of being permanently excluded from mainstream society and falling into the underclass.

8. Young people today are facing challenges such as difficult transitions to autonomy and high unemployment, brought about by the economic and financial crisis. Young Roma people’s situation is worsened by the stigmatisation and discrimination to which they are subjected. This is even worse for young Roma women and girls and for vulnerable groups such as those with disabilities, LGBT persons, migrants and undocumented young people.

9. Because their knowledge of their heritage and culture is sometimes incomplete, but also because some Roma youth activists feel certain aspects of Romani traditions run contrary to the respect of human rights, young Roma are no longer sure of their own identity.

10. In order to be able to participate meaningfully in decision and policy making, Roma youth activists and organisations need to be strengthened by acquiring knowledge and skills to be able to undertake advocacy activities and formulate policy messages.

11. Local and regional authorities must go beyond expressions of good will and be proactive in implementing actions and policies that “support the creation of an environment where young Roma people can grow up free from discrimination and confident about their future perspectives, while appreciating their plural, cultural backgrounds and affiliations as young people, as Roma, as citizens of their countries, and as active Europeans”.^[15]

12. Local and regional authorities can be inspired by the Council of Europe’s Roma Youth Action Plan and the EU Youth Strategy’s guidelines to develop different ways of involving Roma youth. These specific policies can empower young Roma and help their integration into society.

13. In the light of the above, the Congress invites local and regional authorities to:

a. implement the recommendations in its Resolutions 333(2011) on “the situation of Roma in Europe: a challenge for local and regional authorities”, 346(2012) on “youth and democracy: the changing face of youth political engagement” and 319(2010) on the “integration of young people from disadvantaged neighbourhoods” as they pertain to young Roma;

b. publicly commit to: working with young Roma and their organisations to improve their access to their social rights; combatting discrimination and anti-Gypsyism; and promoting their participation in policy and decision making;

c. join the European Alliance of Cities and Regions for Roma Inclusion;

d. ensure youth policies are explicit but not exclusive, focusing on Roma youth as a target group but not to the exclusion of other young people who share similar realities;

e. with regard to education, invest in programmes promoting school attendance and reduce the number of dropouts; in schools, challenge non-inclusive practices and adopt a zero tolerance approach to bullying and discrimination, install complaint mechanisms; involve Roma parents to raise cultural awareness of teachers, staff and non-Roma parents; engage with Roma parents to help them to understand their rights, entitlements and duties with regard to their children’s education; arrange for extra-curricular schooling to improve pupils’ educational levels; organise information sessions for pupils with their peers having succeeded in the education system to encourage them to commit to their education; promote the recognition of competences and skills gained through non-formal education; employ members of the Roma community to liaise between schools, the education department and Roma families; raise awareness of good practices so schools can learn from one another; employ Roma teachers and teaching assistants;

f. with regard to employment, employ Roma mediators to offer career guidance and counselling; propose vocational and basic skills training; offer work placements in municipal institutions to help the transition from education to the labour market;

g. combat discrimination and anti-Gypsyism by providing grants or in-kind support to projects which strengthen young Roma people’s understanding of the key concepts of human rights, discrimination and anti-Gypsism, or informing on these concepts in schools and other institutions; organising events which bring together Roma and non-Roma youth to promote intercultural dialogue and learning to help break down prejudices and stereotypes and build trust;

h. help strengthen young Roma people’s identity by introducing Romani culture and history into school curricula or organising information activities on these subjects;

i. empower Roma youth by enabling them to participate meaningfully in joint decision-making structures by providing or funding training programmes on youth participation, human rights education and democratic citizenship or including these subjects in school curricula; supporting Roma youth organisations’ projects either financially or with in-kind contributions; ensuring local youth councils are fully representative of the local youth population;

j. contribute, either financially or with in-kind contributions, to initiatives to strengthen Roma youth leaders’ leadership skills and the capacity of Roma organisations, and generally create the conditions necessary for supporting the initiatives taken by the Roma youth themselves to strengthen the Roma youth movement; employ youth workers, especially of Roma origin, to work with Roma communities;

k. raise awareness of the Council of Europe No Hate Speech Movement.

14. The Congress welcomes the launch of the joint Council of Europe/European Commission ROMACT project in October 2013.  It encourages the European Alliance of Cities and Regions for Roma Inclusion to ensure its participants include a youth dimension in their policies to promote Roma inclusion.

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

The situation of Leyla Güven and other local elected representatives in detention in Turkey

Resolution 367 (2014)[16]

1. Leyla Güven was arrested on 29 December 2009, shortly after her appointment to the new Turkish delegation to the Congress and her keynote speech in the October 2009 Congress plenary session. She has now been in remand detention for more than four years.

 

2. The Congress continues to follow her case. The Congress Bureau already expressed its concern at the situation of Mrs Güven and the other detained elected representatives in its May 2010 “Declaration on elected representatives detained in Turkey”. In March 2013, in its “Declaration on the situation of local and regional politicians in Turkey”, the Congress reaffirmed its position that the massive detention of local politicians in Turkey is debilitating for local democracy.

3. On 7 December 2013, in accordance with the decision taken by the Congress Bureau at its meeting of 3 December 2012, the Congress rapporteurs visited Leyla Güven in Diyarbakir prison. The report of their visit, which they presented to the Congress Bureau at its meeting on 10 February 2014, is reproduced in the explanatory memorandum to this resolution.

4. As Turkey prepares itself for new local elections, in March 2014, a large number of mayors, deputy mayors and municipal councillors remain in long-term remand detention, a situation unparalleled in Council of Europe member states.

5. The Congress notes that, following the 4 December 2013 ruling of Turkey’s Constitutional Court in the Mustafa Balbay case, ordering his release on the grounds that his remand detention had been excessive and unlawful and that his right to be elected had been violated, the Turkish courts have now released all five members of parliament who were detained in similar circumstances and on similar charges to Leyla Güven.

6. The Congress regrets that ruling has not been applied to Leyla Güven, nor to the 15 mayors, 23 deputy mayors and several dozen municipal councillors who remain in detention in Turkey.

7. The Congress therefore:

a. bearing in mind the report of the visit of its rapporteurs to Leyla Güven in Diyarbakir E-type prison on 7 December 2013, as well as the report of their previous visit to Leyla Güven on 6 October 2011;

b. convinced that such detentions constitute a serious obstacle to the democratic process in Turkey and also raise serious questions about the rule of law and the protection of human rights and this country;

c. resolves to keep following the case Leyla Güven and all other local elected representatives who find themselves in similar situations;

d. instructs its Bureau to continue to examine this issue at each of its meetings, until the people in question have been released and to maintain a file on Leyla Güven, including her photo and information about her detention, on the homepage of its website.

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Strategy on the right of local authorities to be consulted

by other levels of government

Resolution 368 (2014)[17]

1. The Congress, in accordance with Congress Resolution 347 (2012) on the right of local authorities to be consulted by other levels of government;

2. Bearing in mind that, according to Statutory Resolution CM/Res(2011)2 of the Committee of Ministers, the Congress is a consultative organ of the Council of Europe, and the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly shall consult the Congress on issues which are likely to affect the responsibilities and essential interests of the local and/or regional authorities that the Congress represents:

a. adopts the Strategy on the right of local authorities to be consulted by other levels of government, as appended to this resolution;

b. calls on national associations of local and regional authorities to work with it to ensure the best possible implementation of the strategy.

Appendix

Strategy on the right of local authorities to be consulted by other levels of government

Purpose

The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe has asked the Governance Committee to present a strategy to strengthen the consultation processes between the different levels of government in the member States in order to make these more effective and thereby to improve the quality of legislation and local and regional policies.

Key activities

It is proposed that the strategy consist of the following activities, the most important being the first one, namely to develop guidelines on the application of the relevant articles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ECLSG).

1.     Provide guidelines for national associations and/or delegations of the Congress to use as a tool and inspiration in their dialogue with their regional and national governments about improving consultation processes.

2.     Make use of the findings of the Congress’s monitoring and, as appropriate, its co-operation activities, to extend the application of the relevant articles of the ECLSG to all member States. 

3.     Systematise the evaluation of national consultation processes in the light of the above-mentioned guidelines in the Congress country monitoring exercises.

4.     Collect data from member states, for example by using a questionnaire, at the end of 2015 to evaluate whether their national consultation processes are in line with the Congress guidelines and, if not, what action has been taken in response to the strategy.

5.     Prepare a report in 2016 in the light of the data collected (with the possibility of following on with a second strategy for 2017-2018).

Elements to be included in consultation guidelines

Purpose of consultations between the political levels

1.     It is in the interest of national and regional authorities, on the one hand, and local authorities on the other, to create forms of continuous consultations between ministries and the political representatives of the different political levels. This dialogue can:

a.      create a readiness to meet future challenges and deal with emerging crises;

b.      create conditions for a shared perception of the problems and opportunities related to local government and municipal operations;

c.      provide a forum for general discussion on the financing of the tasks that the state imposes on local government;

d.      increase government understanding of the reality in which local authorities have to deliver their share of the public services;

e.      increase understanding within the municipal sector of the overall responsibility of parliaments and governments and their ambitions for the whole public sector;

f.       contribute to the development of legislation and policies that will be more effective in that national and, where applicable, regional authorities regularly receive comprehensive advice on the manner in which local authorities consider and are able to handle various forms of government regulation;

g.      reduce the negative effects of sectorisation by involving all ministries responsible for large municipal areas in the consultation process.

Principles and procedures of consultations

2.     The right of local and regional authorities to be consulted constitutes one of the core principles of local democracy and should be enshrined in national or regional law, and where practical in the constitution.

3.     Local authorities should therefore be consulted by national and, where applicable, regional authorities, and have an active role in the preparation and adoption of decisions on all matters that concern them – namely the implementation of policies or legislation directly and indirectly affecting their legal status, tasks and functions and economic or financial situation – in a manner and timing such that local authorities have a real opportunity to formulate and articulate their own views and proposals, in order to influence the decision-making process.

4.     National associations of local and regional authorities should have an important role in representing their local and regional authorities at national consultations. Where member States have more than one national association, these should cooperate together as closely as possible, in order to define common positions on issues that affect them and to improve their ability to contribute to the development of legislation and policies of other levels of government.

5.     Consultation processes should be defined and initiated, by legislative bodies, in a clear and transparent manner, preferably enshrined in the constitution, otherwise in laws or rules of procedures of governments and parliaments, specifying the format of such consultations, who is consulting who and for what purpose, the level of participation of representatives of local authorities, the time –frame for consultations and covering all matters of interest for local authorities.

6.     Consultation with local authorities should be a required part of policy-making and the legislative process to enable these authorities to express their interests and opinions in time for them to be taken into account in policy and legislative formulation.

7.     All ministries that formulate policies that have implications for local authorities must consult with representatives of the authorities concerned.

8.     Consultations should be conducted in written form, in meetings and in hearings in front of parliaments and governments, making clear the participatory rights of local representatives in the consultation process and the form of national and, where applicable, regional level representation in the consultation process.

9.     Central and regional authorities should provide proper clear and detailed information, in writing, about proposed policies, well before the consultations are due to take place, in order for those consulted to be well informed about the motives and objectives of each planned decision or policy.

10.  Strategically important decisions should be based on a careful analysis of the implications for self-governance as well as of the economic consequences for the local and regional level.

11.  Local government expertise should be involved in the process of drafting policies and legislation at an early stage, for example through participation in working groups to prepare new legislation.

12.  Local authorities should have right of complaint or petition that is clearly defined, preferably in the constitution, if they believe that necessary consultations have not been properly conducted, and a right to redress if it is established that procedures were not properly followed.

13.  Consultations should be regular and systematic, with a clear and precise indication of the different possible forms of consultation, and the contexts in which they are used.

14.  The contributions of the different parties consulted and the results of consultation exercises should be made public; a detailed written explanation of the reasons for not retaining any proposals should be communicated and published.

15.  Authorities conducting consultations should make maximum use of the increased consultation opportunities provided by new media.

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

Post-monitoring of local and regional democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Resolution 369 (2014)[18]

1. The Congress notes that:

a. Bosnia and Herzegovina joined the Council of Europe in 2002, and in doing so, committed itself to contributing to the creation of a common democratic and legal area throughout the whole of the continent, ensuring respect for its fundamental values: human rights, democracy and the rule of law, and to complying with European standards;

b. Bosnia and Herzegovina ratified the European Charter on Local Self-Government (hereafter “the Charter”) on 12 July 2002 without any declarations, which entered into force on 1 November 2002. The country thereby committed itself to embedding the principle of local self-government in its domestic law in order to guarantee its effective implementation, to transferring competences to local communities with concomitant financial resources and to ensuring a full implementation of the principle of subsidiarity to guarantee the establishment of local self-government as provided by the Charter.

2. It refers to:

a. its Recommendation 324 (2012) on local and regional democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina;

b. its Resolution 353 (2013) REV on post-monitoring and post observation of elections: developing political dialogue.

3. The Congress welcomes the implementation of the census-taking process which was launched in October 2013, and which was one of the Congress’ recommendations.

4. However, it observes that most of the recommendations addressed, in 2012, to the national authorities have not been implemented; nor has a timeline been set to take them on board in the foreseeable future, making these recommendations still eminently relevant.

5. It expresses its grave concern with regard to, in particular, the lack of clarity in the apportionment of powers between the different levels of local governance (for example entities, and lower levels of governance), and the absence of implementation of the principle of subsidiarity and some fundamental principles set out in the Charter.

6. In light of these considerations, the Congress:

a. will invite the ministers for local authorities of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska to address the Congress during its October session in 2014, and to discuss the developments envisaged by the respective authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the light of Recommendation 324 (2012);

b. invites its Monitoring Committee:

i.    to organise urgently in 2014 in Sarajevo a seminar on the implementation of the Charter in Bosnia and Herzegovina in co-operation with the Association of Municipalities and Towns of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Association of Municipalities and Towns of Republika Srpska and relevant NGOs and experts in the field of local democracy;

ii.   to continue the post-monitoring process in 2014 in order to pursue the political dialogue with authorities of all levels of governance in Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to implement Recommendation 324 (2012) and the present recommendation – if adopted – on post-monitoring of local and regional democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and, in the meantime, to evaluate the progress made on a regular basis.

7. For the sake of efficiency, the Congress stands ready to adapt its action to the specificities of each entity in order to better target the desired objective.

26th SESSION

Strasbourg, 25-27 March 2014

The situation in Ukraine

Declaration 2 (2014)[19]

1. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe is deeply concerned at developments in the situation in Ukraine, particularly the attacks on the territorial integrity of the country.

2. It shares the concerns expressed on this subject by the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and more generally by the whole international community.

3. It does not accept the validity of the referendum, held on 16 March last, without the minimum democratic guarantees that should be in place for any vote and which are the preconditions required by the Congress when it observes local and regional elections.

4. This pseudo-consultation should on no account pave the way for a change of borders between Russia and Ukraine. The use of military force by Russia to redraw national boundaries is unacceptable. The Congress therefore condemns Russia’s annexation of Crimea and Sebastopol in violation of international law. The occupation of territories of independent states, as we saw in 2008 in Georgia and are facing now in Ukraine is unacceptable in international law and should not be tolerated.

5. The Congress reiterates its full support for Crimea and Sebastopol to be an undisputed part of Ukraine and for the integrity of the Ukrainian territory to be restored. The Congress also urges all parties to fully respect human rights and the rule of law.

6. The Congress points out that prior to this referendum Crimea enjoyed a broad degree of autonomy and that this could, if necessary, have been strengthened in consultation with the Ukrainian national authorities. In this regard, it recalls its Recommendation 346 (2013) on Regions and territories with special status in Europe, which was adopted on 31 October 2013.

7. In addition, it lends its support to the new and legitimate Ukrainian authorities for any initiatives they take to strengthen democracy in their country and to protect the rights of all Ukraine’s citizens, including those of cultural, national and linguistic minority groups, in the spirit of inclusiveness and to ensure genuine dialogue between all political forces.

8. In particular, this dialogue should enable all the persons belonging to a national minority in Ukraine, including the Russian-speaking population as well as the non-Russian speaking minorities of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, which was illegally annexed by the Russian Federation, to benefit fully from the provisions of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and those of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Lastly, it should lead to constitutional and administrative reforms providing this country with institutions which receive broad consensus and which, with regard to local and regional authorities, comply with the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-Government and those of the Reference Framework on Regional Democracy.

9. The Congress refers to its recommendations adopted at its session held from 29 to 31 October 2013, further to the report on local and regional democracy in Ukraine, and in particular those calling for the:

a. removal of the constitutional and legislative restrictions to which the local authorities are subject and the reinforcement of subsidiarity by granting local authorities competence for a substantial share of public affairs;

b. transfer of the administrative competences of the districts and regions to elected bodies in order to establish an administration under their responsibility.

10. Such reform would strengthen democracy and the social, economic and territorial cohesion of Ukraine.

11. The Congress is ready to discuss with the new authorities the implementation of these recommendations. It is particularly willing to send a delegation to Ukraine, including the region of Crimea, to examine the situation in the country. It is also at the disposal of the Ukrainian authorities to take part in a mission to observe the local elections to be held in several Ukrainian towns and cities on 25 May 2014.