Ministers’ Deputies
Decisions

CM/Del/Dec(2009)1057 22 May 2009
———————————————

1057th meeting, 20 May 2009

Decisions adopted

———————————————

CONTENTS

Page

List of those present 6

1. General questions

1.1 Adoption of the agenda 9

1.2 Preparation of forthcoming meetings 9

1.3 Communication from the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General 9

1.4 Report of the Bureau 9

1.5 119th Session of the Committee of Ministers (Madrid, 12 May 2009) – Follow-up 10

2. Democracy and political questions

2.1 The Council of Europe and the conflict in Georgia 11

2.1bis Current political questions +

2.2 Situation in Cyprus+

2.3 Co-operation between the Council of Europe and the Task Force for International Co-operation
on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research (ITF) –
Draft Memorandum of Understanding 11

3. Parliamentary Assembly

3.1 2nd Part of the 2009 Session of the Parliamentary Assembly (Strasbourg, 27-30 April 2009) –
Texts adopted 11

3.2 Written Questions by members of the Parliamentary Assembly to the Committee of Ministers
a. Written Question No. 555 by Mr Elzinga: “Discrimination against sexual orientation” 13
b. Written Question No. 565 by Mr Lindblad: “The situation for a political prisoner in Azerbaijan” 13

4. Human rights

H46-1 Cases of unfair proceedings requiring reopening of domestic proceedings –
28490/95 Hulki Güneş, judgment of 19/06/03, final on 19/09/03
72000/01 Göçmen, judgment of 17/10/2006, final on 17/01/2007
46661/99 Söylemez, judgment of 21/09/2006, final on 21/12/2006 14

4.1 European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI)
a. Exchange of views with the Chair of ECRI +
b. Annual report on ECRI’s activities covering the period from 1 January to 31 December 2008 14
c. Abridged report of ECRI’s 48th plenary meeting (Strasbourg, 31 March – 2 April 2009) 14

6. Social cohesion

6.1 European Health Committee (CDSP) –
Draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2009)… of the Committee of Ministers to member states on monitoring the protection of human rights and dignity of persons with a mental disorder 14

Page

6.2 European Pharmacopoeia (EDQM) 15
a. European Committee on Blood Transfusion (CD-P-TS) –
Abridged report of the 4th meeting (Strasbourg, 6-7 November 2008)
b. European Committee on Organ Transplantation (CD-P-TO) –
Abridged report of the 4th meeting (Ljubljana, 16-17 October 2008)

6.3 “Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance” – Recommendation 244 (2008) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe 15

6.4 “The state of democracy in Europe – Specific challenges facing European democracies:
the case of diversity and migration” – Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1839 (2008); and
“The state of democracy in Europe – Measures to improve the democratic participation of migrants” –Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1840 (2008) 15

6.5 “Activities of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)” –
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1842 (2008) 16

6.6 “Migration and mobility in the Eurasian region – Prospects for the future” –
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1852 (2008) 16

10. Legal questions

10.1 Ad hoc Committee on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (CAHVIO) – Revised terms of reference 16

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 1057th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
(item 1.1) (Strasbourg, 20 (10 a.m.) May 2009)
Agenda 17

APPENDIX 2 1060th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
(item 1.2) (Strasbourg, 10 (10 a.m.) June 2009)
Draft Agenda 20

APPENDIX 3 1061st meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
(item 1.2) (Strasbourg, 17 (10 a.m.) June 2009)
Draft Agenda 23

APPENDIX 4 Reply to Written Question No. 555 by Mr Elzinga:
(item 3.2a) “Discrimination against sexual orientation” 25

APPENDIX 5 Recommendation CM/Rec(2009)3
(item 6.1) of the Committee of Ministers to member states

          on monitoring the protection of human rights and
          dignity of persons with mental disorder 26

APPENDIX 6 Reply to Recommendation 244 (2008)
(item 6.3) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe
on “Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance” 42

APPENDIX 7 Joint reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1839 (2008)
(item 6.4) on “The state of democracy in Europe – Specific challenges facing European

          democracies: the case of diversity and migration” and Parliamentary Assembly
          Recommendation 1840 (2008) on “The state of democracy in Europe –
          Measures to improve the democratic participation of migrants” 47

APPENDIX 8 Reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1842 (2008)
(item 6.5) on “Activities of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)” 50

APPENDIX 9 Reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1852 (2008)
(item 6.6) on “Migration and mobility in the Eurasian region – Prospects for the future” 52

APPENDIX 10 Revised terms of reference of the Ad hoc Committee on preventing and
(item 10.1) combating violence against women and domestic violence 54

The 1057th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies opened on 20 May 2009 at 10.00 a.m. under the chairmanship of Ms M. Bole, Deputy for the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Slovenia.

PRESENT

ALBANIA
Ms M. Gega
Mr F. Peni
Ms A. Doko

ANDORRA
Mr R. Fiter Vilajoana
Ms F. Aleix

ARMENIA
Mr Z. Mnatsakanian
Ms N. Hambarzumyan
Mr A. Hovhannisyan

AUSTRIA
Ms E. Ellison-Kramer

AZERBAIJAN
Mr A. Mammadov
Mr M. Kangarlinski
Mr H. Nasibov
Mr J. Musayev

BELGIUM
Mr F. Bontemps

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
Ms M. Muharemagić

BULGARIA
Mr I. Petkov
Mrs L. Draganova
Ms D. Stambolova-Ivanova
Ms Y. Parparova

CROATIA
Ms V. Batistić-Kos

CYPRUS
Mr E. Evriviades
Mr D. Samuel
Mr G. Ioannides

CZECH REPUBLIC
Mr O. Abrhám
Ms K. Markovová
Ms J. Valentová

DENMARK
Mr C. Oldenburg
Mr C. von Barnekow

ESTONIA
Mr S. Kannike
Mr I. Siil
Mrs N. Luts
Mr E. Harremoes

FINLAND
Ms I. Ertman
Ms A.-C. Krank
Mr P. Kotilainen

FRANCE
Mr B. Gain
Mr L. Serot-Almeras
Ms C. Schmerber
Ms C. Larene

GEORGIA
Mr Z. Tchiaberashvili
Mr M. Jgenti
Ms L. Goginava
Ms I. Mamuchishvili

GERMANY
Mr H. Haupt
Ms C. Althauser
Ms A. Weerth

GREECE
Mr A. Dendoulis
Mr D. Karabalis
Mr G. Daskalopoulos

HUNGARY
Mr V. Garai

ICELAND
Ms P.M. Rúnarsdóttir

IRELAND
Ms M. Hennessy
Ms M. Connery
Ms B. Walshe
Mr D. Howard

ITALY
Mr S. Busetto
Mr F. Crisafulli

LATVIA
Mr P. Elferts
Ms I. Kase

LIECHTENSTEIN
-

LITHUANIA
Mr D. Simaitis
Ms N. Juodkaitė-Putrimienė
Ms J. Juodagalvienė

LUXEMBOURG
Mr R. Mayer

MALTA
Mr J. Licari
Mr M. Pace

MOLDOVA
Ms E. Kistruga
Ms R. Postu
Mr D. Vataman

MONACO
-

MONTENEGRO
Mr Z. Janković
Mr I. Ivanišević

NETHERLANDS
Mr M. van der Kolk
Ms M. Ouwens

NORWAY
Ms T. Kongsvik
Ms A. Enger
Ms E. Widsteen

POLAND
Mr J. Grabowski
Ms A. Wyżnikiewicz
Ms E. Suchożebrska

PORTUGAL
Mr A. Madeira Bárbara
Mr J. Patricio
Mr L. Sequeira

ROMANIA
Mr S. Stoian
Mr N. Nastase
Mr C.H. Rogoveanu
Mr L. Flueraru

RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Mr A. Alekseev
Mr I. Kapyrin
Mr V. Egorov
Mr V. Kashin-Padun
Mr I. Maltsev
Mr I. Subbotin
Ms M. Kostyanaya
Mr A. Tarasov
Mr K. Kosorukov

SAN MARINO
Ms M. Bovi
Ms S. Bollini

SERBIA
Ms D. Filipovic
Ms K. Lalic Smajevic
Ms T. Rastovac Siamashvili
Mr A. Tomic

SLOVAK REPUBLIC
Mr E. Kuchár
Mr J. Kubla
Ms S. Danová

SLOVENIA
Mrs M. Bole, Chairperson
Mrs M. Kušer
Mr J. Brenčič
Ms U. Omerzu
Ms M. Šmid

SPAIN
Mr P. Jiménez Nacher
Mr P. Desportes

SWEDEN
Mr P. Sjögren
Ms A. Lundkvist
Ms J. Egermark

SWITZERLAND
Mr M. Wey, Vice-Chairman
Ms B. Schaer

“THE FORMER
YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC
OF MACEDONIA”
Mr R. Saliu

TURKEY
Mr D. Batibay
Mr H. Ulusoy
Mrs B. Tuğ
Mr C. Kahyaoğlu
Mr T. Oral
Mr B. Ulusoy
Mr Y. Yeşilada
Ms B. Kabakçi
Ms H. Demirer
Ms G. Acar
M. T. Oba

UKRAINE
Mr Y. Perelygin
Ms N. Shakuro
Mr O. Ivaschenko

UNITED KINGDOM
Ms E. Fuller
Ms H. Mulvein
Ms P. Gordon

*

* *

EUROPEAN COMMISSION
-

*

* *

CANADA
-

HOLY SEE
Mgr A. Giordano

JAPAN
Mr T. Kawada
Mr Y. Iizawa

MEXICO
Ms L. Madero
Ms A.R. Arizmendi

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Mr V. Carver

Item 1.1

Adoption of the agenda

Decision

The Deputies adopted the agenda of their 1057th meeting, as it appears at Appendix 1 to the present volume of Decisions.

Item 1.2

Preparation of forthcoming meetings

Decisions

The Deputies

1. approved the draft agenda for their 1060th meeting (10 (10 a.m.) June 2009), as it appears at Appendix 2 to the present volume of Decisions;

2. approved the draft agenda for their 1061st meeting (17 (10 a.m.) June 2009), as it appears at Appendix 3 to the present volume of Decisions.

Item 1.3

Communication from the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General
(SG/Com(2009)1057)

Decision

The Deputies took note of the communication by the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General, as it appears in document SG/Com(2009)1057.

Item 1.4

Report of the Bureau
(CM/Bur/Del(2009)16)

Decisions

The Deputies

1. agreed to hold an exchange of views with Ms Marta Santos Pais, UN Secretary General Special Representative on violence against children, at a date to be decided;

2. took note of the report of the meeting of the Bureau of 18 May 2009 (document CM/Bur/Del(2009)16) and approved the other recommendations contained therein.

Item 1.5

119th Session of the Committee of Ministers (Madrid, 12 May 2009) –
Follow-up
(CM(2009)PV prov, CM(2009)PV add1, CM(2009)PV add2, CM/Inf(2009)22, CM/Inf(2009)22 add1 et CM/Inf(2009)22 add2, CM(2009)50 final)

Decisions

The Deputies, on the basis of the decisions taken at the 119th Session and the discussions held,

On Guaranteeing the long-term effectiveness of the control system of the European Convention on Human Rights

1. invited their Rapporteur Group on Human Rights (GR-H) to further examine the specific measures envisaged in the report “Guaranteeing the long-term effectiveness of the control system of the European Convention on Human Rights” (document CM(2009)51) and to report back to it;

2. invited their Rapporteur Group on Human Rights (GR-H) to follow closely the work of the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) on effective remedies for excessive length of proceedings and to report back in due time;

3. called on all member states to ratify Protocol No. 14 to the European Convention on Human Rights as a matter of priority and, in the meantime, called on member states to accept, as soon as possible, that the provisions regarding the new single-judge formation and the new competence of the Committees of three judges contained in Protocol No. 14 to the European Convention on Human Rights are to be applied to them on a provisional basis either by signing and ratifying Protocol No. 14bis to the European Convention on Human Rights – and if possible accepting its provisional application – or by making a declaration of acceptance as foreseen in document CM(2009)71 rev2, subject to the absence of opposition by 31 May 2009 by the High Contracting Parties to the European Convention on Human Rights not represented at the Conference of High Contracting Parties held on 12 May 2009 in Madrid;

On the Relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union

4. invited their Rapporteur Group on External Relations (GR-EXT) to follow developments in the co-operation between the Council of Europe and the European Union on the basis of the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding between the two organisations signed in May 2007 and taking into consideration the priorities for future action adopted on 27 November 2008 (document CM(2008)169) and to prepare a comprehensive report, in close co-operation with the European Union, for the 120th Ministerial Session in May 2010;

On the Follow-up to other priorities resulting from the Warsaw Summit

5. invited their Working Party on Institutional Reforms (GT-REF.INST) to prepare a report on the ongoing reform process of the Council of Europe’s organisational structures and working methods for the 120th Ministerial Session in May 2010;

6. asked the Secretary General to ensure a wide distribution of the Declaration “Making gender equality a reality”, and invited their Thematic Co-ordinator on Equality between Women and Men (TC-EG) to follow the implementation of the Declaration in the member states and within the Council of Europe on the basis of reports by the Secretary General;

On the Declaration marking the 60th anniversary of the Council of Europe

7. agreed to transmit the Declaration marking the 60th anniversary of the Council of Europe to the Parliamentary Assembly, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, the European Court of Human Rights, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, and to all the committees answerable to the Committee of Ministers, for information.

Item 2.1

The Council of Europe and the conflict in Georgia
(CM(2008)150 rev, CM(2008)162, SG/Inf(2008)19, DD(2008)631, SG/Inf(2009)5, SG/Inf(2009)7, CM(2009)PV prov, CM(2009)PV add1, CM(2009)PV add2)

Decision

The Deputies instructed the Secretariat to prepare draft replies to Recommendations 1846 (2008), 1857 (2009) and 1869 (2009) of the Parliamentary Assembly, for examination at one of their forthcoming meetings.

Item 2.3

Co-operation between the Council of Europe and the Task Force for International Co-operation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research (ITF) –
Draft Memorandum of Understanding
(CM(2009)79, GR-EXT(2009)CB3)

Decisions

The Deputies

1. adopted the text of the Memorandum of Understanding on co-operation between the Council of Europe and the Task Force for International Co-operation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research (ITF), as it appears in document CM(2009)79 and authorised the Secretary General to sign it;

2. instructed its Rapporteur Group on External Relations (GR-EXT) to follow the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding.

Item 3.1

Parliamentary Assembly –
2nd part of the 2009 Session (Strasbourg, 27-30 April 2009) –
Texts adopted
(2009 Session (Provisional Compendium of texts adopted))

Decisions

The Deputies

1. concerning Recommendation 1865 (2009) – “The protection of human rights in emergency situations”

a. decided to bring it to the attention of their governments;

      b. agreed to communicate it to the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) and to the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law (CAHDI), for information and possible comments by 30 September 2009;
      c. in the light of possible comments, invited their Rapporteur Group on Human Rights (GR-H) to prepare a draft reply for adoption at one of their forthcoming meetings;

***

2. concerning Recommendation 1866 (2009) – “The situation of human rights defenders in Council of Europe member states”

a. decided to bring it to the attention of their governments;

      b. agreed to communicate it to the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH), for information and possible comments by 15 September 2009;
      c. in the light of possible comments, invited their Rapporteur Group on Human Rights (GR-H) to prepare a draft reply for adoption at one of their forthcoming meetings;

***

3. concerning Recommendation 1867 (2009) – “Honouring of obligations and commitments by Serbia”

a. decided to bring it to the attention of their governments;

      b. in the light of possible comments, invited their Rapporteur Group on Democracy (GR-DEM) to prepare a draft reply for adoption at one of their forthcoming meetings;

***

4. concerning Recommendation 1868 (2009) – “Action to combat gender-based human rights violations, including abduction of women and girls”

a. decided to bring it to the attention of their governments;

      b. agreed to communicate it to the Steering committee for Equality between Women and Men (CDEG), to the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH), to the Ad hoc Committee on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence and to the Executive Council of the North South Centre, for information and possible comments by 15 September 2009;
      c. in the light of possible comments, invited their Thematic Co-ordinator on Equality between Women and Men (TC-EG), in co-operation with their Rapporteur Group on Human Rights
      (GR-H), to prepare a draft reply for adoption at one of their forthcoming meetings;

***

5. concerning Recommendation 1869 (2009) – “The humanitarian consequences of the war between Georgia and Russia: follow-up given to Resolution 1648 (2009)”

a. decided to bring it to the attention of their governments;

      b. agreed to examine this text in the framework of item 2.1 of their agenda “The Council of Europe and the conflict in Georgia”;

*
* *

6. took note of the following resolutions:

Resolution 1659 (2009) – The protection of human rights in emergency situations

Resolution 1660 (2009) – The situation of human rights defenders in Council of Europe member states

Resolution 1661 (2009) – Honouring of obligations and commitments by Serbia

Resolution 1662 (2009) – Action to combat gender-based human rights violations, including abduction of women and girls

Resolution 1663 (2009) – Women in prison

Resolution 1664 (2009) – The humanitarian consequences of the war between Georgia and Russia: follow-up given to Resolution 1648 (2009)

Resolution 1665 (2009) – The election process for the Secretary General of the Council of Europe

Resolution 1666 (2009) – The functioning of democratic institutions in Moldova

Resolution 1667 (2009) – Growing food and fuel

*
* *

7. adopted the following reply to the texts adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly at the 2nd part of the 2009 Session (Strasbourg, 27-30 April 2009):

“The Committee of Ministers took note of Recommendations 1865 to 1869 (2009) and Resolutions 1659 to 1667 (2009) adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly at its 2nd part of the 2009 Session (Strasbourg, 27-30 April 2009).

The Committee of Ministers brought Recommendations 1865 to 1869 (2009) to the attention of the governments of member states and entrusted them to the competent organs and/or committees of experts for information or comments and/or to Rapporteur Groups/Thematic Co-ordinators with a view to preparing draft replies for adoption at an early date, as appropriate.”

Item 3.2a

Written Questions by members of the Parliamentary Assembly to the Committee of Ministers

a. Written Question No. 555 by Mr Elzinga: “Discrimination against sexual orientation”
(CM/Del/Dec(2009)1039/3.1b, CM/AS(2009)Quest555 prov)

Decision

The Deputies adopted the reply to Written Question No. 555 by Mr Elzinga: “Discrimination against sexual orientation”, as it appears at Appendix 4 to the present volume of Decisions.2

Item 3.2b

Written Questions by members of the Parliamentary Assembly to the Committee of Ministers

b. Written Question No. 565 by Mr Lindblad: “The situation for a political prisoner in Azerbaijan”
(CM/AS(2009)Quest565)

Decision

The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at their 1058th meeting (27 May 2009) in the light of information to be provided by the Secretariat.

Item H46-1

Cases of unfair proceedings requiring reopening of domestic proceedings –
28490/95 Hulki Güneş, judgment of 19/06/03, final on 19/09/03
72000/01 Göçmen, judgment of 17/10/2006, final on 17/01/2007
46661/99 Söylemez, judgment of 21/09/2006, final on 21/12/2006
(CM/Del/Dec(2009)1056, CM/Inf/DH(2009)5 rev9)

Decision

The Deputies decided to resume consideration of the measures taken towards the execution of the Court’s judgments at their 1058th (27 May 2009) and 1059th (DH) (2-4 and 5 (morning) June 2009) meetings.

Item 4.1b,c

European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI)

b. Annual report on ECRI’s activities covering the period from 1 January to 31 December 2008
c. Abridged report of the 48th plenary meeting (Strasbourg, 31 March-2 April 2009)
(CM(2009)66, CM(2009)66 add1 (confidential), CM(2009)66 add2 (confidential), CM(2009)66 add3 (confidential), CM(2009)66 add4)

Decisions

The Deputies

1. transmitted ECRI’s country-by-country reports on Belgium, Germany and Slovakia to the governments in question;

2. took note of ECRI’s annual report for 2008, as it appears in document CM(2009)66 add4;

3. took note of the abridged report of ECRI’s 48th meeting, as it appears in document CM(2009)66, as a whole.

Item 6.1

European Health Committee (CDSP) –
Draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2009)… of the Committee of Ministers to member states on monitoring the protection of human rights and dignity of persons with a mental disorder
(CM(2009)47, CM(2009)47 add)

Decisions

The Deputies

1. adopted Recommendation CM/Rec(2009)3 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on monitoring the protection of human rights and dignity of persons with a mental disorder, as it appears at Appendix 5 to the present volume of Decisions;

2. took note of the relevant Explanatory Memorandum, as it appears in document CM(2009)47 add.

Item 6.2a,b

European Pharmacopoeia (EDQM)

a. European Committee on Blood Transfusion (CD-P-TS) –
Abridged report of the 4th meeting (Strasbourg, 6-7 November 2008)
b. European Committee on Organ Transplantation (CD-P-TO) –
Abridged report of the 4th meeting (Ljubljana, 16-17 October 2008)
(CM(2009)48, CM(2009)49)

Decisions

The Deputies, in their composition restricted to representatives of the States Parties to the Convention on the Elaboration of a European Pharmacopoeia,3

1. took note of the abridged report of the 4th meeting of the European Committee on Blood Transfusion (CD-P-TS) (Strasbourg, 6-7 November 2008), as it appears in document CM(2009)48;

2. took note of the abridged report of the 4th meeting of the European Committee on Organ Transplantation (CD-P-TO) (Ljubljana, 16-17 October 2008), as it appears in document CM(2009)49.

Item 6.3

“Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance” –
Recommendation 244 (2008) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe
(Congress Rec_244 (2008) and CM/Cong(2009)Rec244 prov)

Decision

The Deputies adopted the reply to Recommendation 244 (2008) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe on “Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance”, as it appears at Appendix 6 to the present volume of Decisions.4

Item 6.4

“The state of democracy in Europe – Specific challenges facing European democracies: the case of diversity and migration” – Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1839 (2008); and
“The state of democracy in Europe – Measures to improve the democratic participation of migrants” – Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1840 (2008)
(REC_1839 (2008), REC_1840 (2008) and CM/AS(2009)Rec1839-1840 prov)

Decision

The Deputies adopted the joint reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1839 (2008) on “The state of democracy in Europe – Specific challenges facing European democracies: the case of diversity and migration” and Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1840 (2008) on “The state of democracy in Europe – Measures to improve the democratic participation of migrants”, as it appears at Appendix 7 to the present volume of Decisions.5

Item 6.5

“Activities of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)” –
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1842 (2008)
(REC_1842 (2008) and CM/AS(2009)Rec1842 prov)

Decision

The Deputies adopted the reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1842 (2008) on “Activities of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)”, as it appears at Appendix 8 to the present volume of Decisions.6

Item 6.6

“Migration and mobility in the Eurasian region – Prospects for the future” –
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1852 (2008)
(REC_1852 (2008) and CM/AS(2009)Rec1852 prov)

Decision

The Deputies adopted the reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1852 (2008) on “Migration and mobility in the Eurasian region – Prospects for the future”, as it appears at Appendix 9 to the present volume of Decisions.7

Item 10.1

Ad hoc Committee on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (CAHVIO) – Revised terms of reference
(GR-J(2009)5)

Decision

The Deputies approved the revised terms of reference of the Ad hoc Committee on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (CAHVIO), as they appear at Appendix 10 to the present volume of Decisions, and agreed that they would apply starting from the first meeting of the Ad hoc Committee.

Appendix 1
(Item 1.1)

1057 Meeting of the Ministers' Deputies
(Strasbourg, 20 (10 a.m.) May 2009)


Agenda

1. General questions

1.1 Adoption of the agenda

        (CM/Del/OJ(2009)1057)

1.2 Preparation of forthcoming meetings

        (CM/Notes/1057/1.2 of 19.5.2009)

1.3 Communication from the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General

        (SG/Com(2009)1057)

1.4 Report of the Bureau

        (CM/Bur/Del(2009)16)

1.5 119th Session of the Committee of Ministers (Madrid, 12 May 2009) – Follow-up

        (CM(2009)PV prov, CM(2009)PV add1, CM(2009)PV add2, CM/Inf(2009)22, CM/Inf(2009)22 add1 and CM/Inf(2009)22 add2, CM(2009)50 final)

(CM/Notes/1057/1.5 of 18.5.2009)

2. Democracy and political questions

2.1 The Council of Europe and the conflict in Georgia

        (CM(2008)150 rev, CM(2008)162, SG/Inf(2008)19, DD(2008)631, SG/Inf(2009)5, SG/Inf(2009)7, CM(2009)PV prov, CM(2009)PV add1 and CM(2009)PV add2)
        (CM/Notes/1057/2.1 rev of 19.5.2009)

2.1bis Current political questions

2.2 Situation in Cyprus

2.3 Co-operation between the Council of Europe and the Task Force for International Co-operation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research (ITF) –
Draft Memorandum of Understanding

(Item prepared by the GR-EXT on 5.5.2009)

        (CM(2009)79 of 18.5.2009 and GR-EXT(2009)CB3)
        (CM/Notes/1057/2.3 of 15.5.2009)

3. Parliamentary Assembly

3.1 2nd Part of the 2009 Session of the Parliamentary Assembly (Strasbourg, 27-30 April 2009) –
Texts adopted

        (2009 Session (Provisional compendium of texts adopted))
        (CM/Notes/1057/3.1 of 6.5.2009)

3.2 Written Questions by members of the Parliamentary Assembly to the Committee of Ministers

a. Written Question No. 555 by Mr Elzinga: “Discrimination against sexual orientation”

        (CM/Del/Dec(2008)1039/3.1b and CM/AS(2009)Quest555 prov)
        (CM/Notes/1057/3.2a of 28.4.2009)

b. Written Question No. 565 by Mr Lindblad: “The situation for a political prisoner in Azerbaijan”

        (CM/AS(2009)Quest565)
        (CM/Notes/1057/3.2b of 28.4.2009)

4. Human rights

H46-1 Cases of unfair proceedings requiring reopening of domestic proceedings –
28490/95 Hulki Güneş, judgment of 19/06/03, final on 19/09/03
72000/01 Göçmen, judgment of 17/10/2006, final on 17/01/2007
46661/99 Söylemez, judgment of 21/09/2006, final on 21/12/2006

        (CM/Del/Dec(2009)1056/H46-1 and CM/Inf/DH(2009)5 rev9)
        (CM/Notes/1057/H46-1 of 7.5.2009)

4.1 European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI)

a. Exchange of views with the Chair of ECRI

b. Annual report on ECRI’s activities covering the period from 1 January to 31 December 2008


        (CM(2009)66 add1 (Confidential), CM(2009)66 add2 (Confidential), CM(2009)66 add3 (Confidential) and CM(2009)66 add4)

c. Abridged report of ECRI’s 48th plenary meeting (Strasbourg, 31 March – 2 April 2009)

        (CM(2009)66)

        (CM/Notes/1057/4.1 of 7.5.2009)

6. Social cohesion

6.1 European Health Committee (CDSP) –

      Draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2009)… of the Committee of Ministers to member states on monitoring the protection of human rights and dignity of persons with a mental disorder
      (Item prepared by the GR-SOC on 4.5.2009)

        (CM(2009)47, CM(2009)47 add and DD(2009)245)
        (CM/Notes/1057/6.1 of 7.5.2009)

6.2 European Pharmacopoeia (EDQM)

      a. European Committee on Blood Transfusion (CD-P-TS) –
      Abridged report of the 4th meeting (Strasbourg, 6-7 November 2008)

        (CM(2009)48)

      b. European Committee on Organ Transplantation (CD-P-TO) –
      Abridged report of the 4th meeting (Ljubljana, 16-17 October 2008)

        (CM(2009)49)

      (Item prepared by the GR-SOC on 4.5.2009)

        (CM/Notes/1057/6.2 of 7.5.2009)

6.3 “Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance” –

      Recommendation 244 (2008) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe

(Item prepared by the GR-SOC on 4.5.2009)

(Congress Rec_244 (2008) and CM/Cong(2009)Rec244 prov)
(CM/Notes/1057/6.3 of 7.5.2009)

6.4 “The state of democracy in Europe – Specific challenges facing European democracies: the case of diversity and migration” –
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1839 (2008); and


“The state of democracy in Europe – Measures to improve the democratic participation of migrants” – Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1840 (2008)

(Item prepared by the GR-SOC on 4.5.2009)

        (REC_1839 (2008), REC_1840 (2008) and CM/AS(2009)Rec1839-1840 prov)
        (CM/Notes/1057/6.4 of 7.5.2009)

6.5 “Activities of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)” –

      Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1842 (2008)
      (Item prepared by the GR-SOC on 4.5.2009)

(REC_1842 (2008) and CM/AS(2009)Rec1842 prov)
(CM/Notes/1057/6.5 of 7.5.2009)

6.6 “Migration and mobility in the Eurasian region – Prospects for the future” –
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1852 (2008)
(Item prepared by the GR-SOC on 4.5.2009)

(REC_1852 (2008) and CM/AS(2009)Rec1852 prov)
(CM/Notes/1057/6.6 of 7.5.2009)

10. Legal questions

10.1 Ad hoc Committee on preventing and combating violence against women and
domestic violence (CAHVIO) – Revised terms of reference
(Item prepared by the GR-J on 21.4.2009)

        (GR-J(2009)5)
        (CM/Notes/1057/10.1 of 28.4.2009)

13. Any other business

Appendix 2
(Item 1.2)

1060 Meeting of the Ministers' Deputies
(Strasbourg, 10 (10 a.m.) June 2009)

Draft Agenda

In application of the rules for the dispatch of reference documents and Notes on the Agenda, the deadlines are:
CM: 13 May 2009
Notes: 29 May 2009

1. General questions

1.1 Adoption of the agenda

(CM/Del/OJ(2009)1060)

1.2 Preparation of forthcoming meetings

1.3 Communication from the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General

        (SG/Com(2009)1060)

1.4 Report of the Bureau

1.5 Report on the activities and functioning of Council of Europe information offices (2007-2009)
(Item to be prepared by the TC-INF on 26.5.2009)

        (CM(2009)74)
        (CM/Notes/1060/1.5 of …)

1.6 Conferences of Specialised Ministers

        (CM/Inf(2009)27)
        (CM/Notes/1060/1.6 of …)

1.7 Road-map for the implementation of the Council of Europe Communication Strategy –
Progress as at 31 December 2008
(Item to be prepared by the TC-INF on 26.5.2009)

        (CM/Notes/1060/1.7 of …)

2. Democracy and political questions

2.1 The Council of Europe and the conflict in Georgia

2.1bis Current political questions

a. Activities for the development and consolidation of democratic stability
(Item to be prepared by the GR-DEM on 28.5.2009)

        (CM/Notes/1060/2.1bis of …)

      b. Other questions

2.2 Situation in Cyprus

3. Parliamentary Assembly

3.1 Parliamentary Assembly

a. Communication of the Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly on the Standing Committee (Ljubljana, 29 May 2009), on the 3rd part of the 2009 Session (Strasbourg,
22-26 June 2009) and other Assembly activities

        (SG/AS(2009)..)

b. Standing Committee (Ljubljana, 29 May 2009) – Adopted texts

        (Session 2009 (Recueil provisoire des textes adoptés))
        (CM/Notes/1060/3.1b of …)

4. Human rights

H46-1 Cases of unfair proceedings requiring reopening of domestic proceedings –
28490/95 Hulki Güneş, judgment of 19/06/03, final on 19/09/03
72000/01 Göçmen, judgment of 17/10/2006, final on 17/01/2007
46661/99 Söylemez, judgment of 21/09/2006, final on 21/12/2006

        (CM/Del/Dec(2009)1058/H46-1 and CM/Inf/DH(2009)5 rev..)
        (CM/Notes/1060/H46-1 of …)

4.1 European Social Charter

    a. Collective Complaint No. 41/2007 by the Mental Disability Advocacy Centre (MDAC) against Bulgaria

        (Report from the European Committee of Social Rights to the Committee of Ministers (Confidential))
        (CM/Notes/1060/4.1a of …)

b. Collective Complaint No. 45/2007 by the International Centre for the Legal Protection of Human Rights (INTERIGHTS) against Croatia

        (Report from the European Committee of Social Rights to the Committee of Ministers (Confidential))
        (CM/Notes/1060/4.1b of …)

c. Collective Complaint No. 46/2007 by the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) against Bulgaria

        (Report from the European Committee of Social Rights to the Committee of Ministers (Confidential))
        (CM/Notes/1060/4.1c of …)

d. Collective Complaint No. 48/2008 by the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) against Bulgaria

        (Report from the European Committee of Social Rights to the Committee of Ministers (Confidential))
        (CM/Notes/1060/4.1d of …)

6. Social cohesion

6.1 European Roma and Travellers’ Forum –

      Summary report by the Internal Auditor of the Council of Europe: Follow-up to the audit of the European Roma and Travellers’ Forum (ERTF) 2007
      (Item to be prepared by the GR-SOC on 26.5.2009)

        (CM(2009)73)
        (CM/Notes/1060/6.1 of …)

6.2 Committee of Experts on Social Security (CS-SS)

a. Abridged report of the 4th meeting (Strasbourg, 24-26 March 2009)

b. Draft Resolutions ResCSS(2009)… on the application of the European Code of Social Security

      (Item to be prepared by the GR-SOC on 26.5.2009)

        (CM(2009)72)
        (CM/Notes/1060/6.2 of …)

6.3 “Access to rights for people with disabilities and their full and active participation in society” –
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1854 (2009)
(Item to be prepared by the GR-SOC on 26.5.2009)

        (REC_1854 (2009) and CM/AS(2009)Rec1854 prov)
        (CM/Notes/1060/6.3 of …)

6.4 European Committee on Migration (CDMG) –
Draft terms of reference of the Ad hoc Advisory Group on migrants injured at sea or crossing borders (MG-S-VT)
(Item to be prepared by the GR-SOC on 26.5.2009)

        (CM(2009)38 and CM(2009)38 corr)
        (CM/Notes/1060/6.4 of …)

11. Administration and logistics

11.1 Pension Reserve Fund –
1st report for 2009 of the Management Board to the Committee of Ministers
(Item to be prepared by the GR-PBA on 28.5.2009)

        (CM(2009)69)
        (CM/Notes/1060/11.1 of …)

11.2 Judges’ conditions of service [and the Commissioner for Human Rights] –
Draft resolution to replace Resolution Res(2004)50 of 15 December 2004 on the status and conditions of service of judges of the European Court of Human Rights
(Item to be prepared by the GR-PBA on 28.5.2009)

        (CM(2009)40 rev)
        (CM/Notes/1060/11.2 of …)

13. Any other business

Appendix 3
(Item 1.2)

1061 Meeting of the Ministers' Deputies
(Strasbourg, 17 (10 a.m.) June 2009)

Draft Agenda

In application of the rules for the dispatch of reference documents and Notes on the Agenda, the deadlines are:
CM: 20 May 2009
Notes: 5 June 2009

1. General questions

1.1 Adoption of the agenda

        (CM/Del/OJ(2009)1061)

1.2 Preparation of forthcoming meetings

        (CM/Notes/1061/1.2 of …)

1.3 Communication from the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General

        (SG/Com(2009)1061)

1.4 Report of the Bureau

        (CM/Bur/Del(2009)…)

2. Democracy and political questions

2.1 The Council of Europe and the conflict in Georgia

2.1bis Current political questions

2.2 Situation in Cyprus


4. Human rights

H46-1 Cases of unfair proceedings requiring reopening of domestic proceedings –
28490/95 Hulki Güneş, judgment of 19/06/03, final on 19/09/03
72000/01 Göçmen, judgment of 17/10/2006, final on 17/01/2007
46661/99 Söylemez, judgment of 21/09/2006, final on 21/12/2006

        (CM/Del/Dec(2009)1060/H46-1 and CM/Inf/DH(2009)5 rev..)
        (CM/Notes/1061/H46-1 of …)

4.1 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights –
Report on his visit to Belgium (15-19 December 2008)

        (CommDH(2009)…)

6. Social cohesion

6.1 Council of Europe Development Bank –
Report of the Governor for the financial year 2008

        (CM(2009)80)
        (CM/Notes/1061/6.1 of 18.5.2009)

10. Legal questions

10.1 Conference on the protection of children in European justice systems organised by the Council of the Europe in co-operation with the Ministry of Justice of the Kingdom of Spain
(Toledo, 12-13 March 2009) – Conclusions
(Item to be prepared by the GR-J on 9.6.2009)

        (CM(2009)83)
        (CM/Notes/1061/10.1 of …)

10.2 European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages –
First report of the Committee of Experts in respect of Ukraine
(Item to be prepared by the GR-J on 9.6.2009)

        (CM(2009)43)
        (CM/Notes/1061/10.2 of …)

10.3 Consultative Council of European Prosecutors (CCPE) –
Opinion no. 3 on “The role of the public prosecution services outside the criminal field”
(Item to be prepared by the GR-J on 9.6.2009)

        (CM(2009)24)
        (CM/Notes/1061/10.3 of …)

10.4 Evaluation of the implementation of Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)14 on the legal status of non- governmental organisations in Europe
(Item to be prepared by the GR-J on 9.6.2009)

        (CM/Notes/1061/10.4 of …)

11. Administration and logistics

11.1 Partial Agreement on the European Support Fund for the co-production and distribution of creative cinematographic and audio-visual works “Eurimages” –
New method for calculating member states’ contributions: presentation and technical description
(Item to be prepared by the GR-PBA on 16.6.2009)

        (CM(2009)61 and CM(2009)61 add)
        (CM/Notes/1061/11.1 of …)

13. Any other business

Appendix 4
(Item 3.2a)

Reply to Written Question No. 555 by Mr Elzinga: “Discrimination against sexual orientation”

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 May 2009
at the 1057th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

1. In reply to the question from the Honourable Parliamentarian, the Committee of Ministers would point out that it remains resolutely attached to the principle of equal rights for all human beings. It considers any contemptuous or intolerant attitude towards homosexuals to be incompatible with the message of tolerance and non-discrimination promoted by the Council of Europe.

2. It would also point out that all member states must respect the European Convention on Human Rights when drafting and implementing their national legislation in the light, in particular, of the Court's case law. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed on several occasions that any discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation is contrary to the Convention.8 Furthermore, Protocol No. 12 to the Convention prohibits all discrimination based on sexual orientation (as specified in the explanatory report).

3. Monaco has informed the Committee of Ministers that the Monegasque authorities are aware of the importance of complying with the Convention and, in particular, with the principle of non-discrimination. The Committee of Ministers is therefore confident that the law currently being drafted to combat domestic violence will be fully in keeping with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

4. The Committee of Ministers would also draw attention to the decisions it took at its 1031st meeting (2 July 2008) to strengthen Council of Europe action to protect the rights of LGBT persons.9 The Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) has, in particular, been instructed to prepare a recommendation on measures to combat discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, to ensure respect for the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons and to promote tolerance towards them.

Appendix 5
(Item 6.1)

Recommendation CM/Rec(2009)3
of the Committee of Ministers to member states
on monitoring the protection of human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 May 2009
at the 1057th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15.b of the Statute of the Council of Europe,

Considering that common action at European level will promote better protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder;

Having regard, in particular:

− to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ETS No. 5, 4 November 1950) and to its application by the organs established under that Convention;

− to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine (“Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine”) (ETS No. 164, 4 April 1997);

− to its Recommendation Rec(2004)10 to member states concerning the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder;

− to its Recommendation Rec(2006)2 to member states on the European Prison Rules;

− to its Recommendation No. R (98) 7 to member states concerning the ethical and organisational aspects of health care in prison;

− to Recommendation 1235 (1994) of the Parliamentary Assembly on psychiatry and human rights;

Having further regard:

− to the work of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT);

− to the work of the World Health Organisation (WHO), in particular the Mental Health Action Plan for Europe “Facing the Challenges, Building Solutions”, and to the corresponding Mental Health Declaration for Europe endorsed at the WHO European Ministerial Conference on Mental Health, held in Helsinki in January 2005;

− to the work of the European Union, in particular the Green Paper “Improving the mental health of the population: Towards a strategy on mental health for the European Union” and the European Pact for Mental Health and Well-being, adopted at the European Union High-Level Conference, held in Brussels in 2008;

Considering that the development and implementation of member states’ national strategies for mental health should:

− promote better understanding of mental health;

− provide more accessible and appropriate services based on individual needs;

− work towards the reduction of the stigma of, and discrimination against, people with mental disorder; and

− ensure better protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder;

Considering that national strategies should provide adequate resources to support legal processes that underpin the protection of human rights and dignity, to develop services that are community based and to improve the care and treatment provided within health and social care;

Recalling that the development of national strategies should move mental health care and treatment from the margins of health policy and planning and treat them as essential elements in the development of socially cohesive societies;

Recalling that developments in the role of medical and other relevant non-medical professionals in the care and treatment of people with mental disorder will require not only regulatory frameworks, but also the need for further appropriate training and supervision;

Bearing in mind that all those involved in the care of people with mental disorder have a responsibility to ensure the protection of their human rights and dignity;

Bearing in mind that it is therefore necessary to work in partnership with, and provide information and support to, persons with mental disorder and those that support them, as well as the organisations that represent them,

Recommends that the governments of member states use the checklist that forms the appendix to this recommendation as the basis for the development of monitoring tools to assist in determining their level of compliance with Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states in order to protect the dignity and human rights of persons with mental disorder and ensure appropriate care for them.

Appendix to Recommendation CM/Rec(2009)3

Principle 1 – Non-discrimination

Primary derivation

Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder: Article 3 and its explanatory memorandum, paragraphs 39-45.

Meaning

Non-discrimination in this context means the avoidance of unfair discrimination against people with a history of mental disorder, a current mental disorder, or who have undergone psychiatric treatment or received a diagnosis of mental disorder. This discrimination can occur in many domains of life, such as health care, social care, housing or employment. It can be both direct and sanctioned officially or indirect, the latter being more difficult to tackle. Non-discrimination may include positive action or “reasonable adjustments” to help people to participate in society as full citizens.

Examples of measures

There is no established single line of intervention against discrimination that has a strong evidence base. However, states may find some of the following measures helpful:

i. the development of legal instruments that make it unlawful to discriminate either against people with disabilities or differences, either generally or specifically against people with a psychiatric disability, in various domains of life, such as employment;

ii. administrative measures that encourage the employment of people with such disabilities (for example quotas, workplace adjustments) coupled with services that enable access to employment, such as supported employment;

iii. anti-stigma campaigns via a variety of mechanisms (for example through mass media advertising or non-governmental organisation (NGO) publicity);

iv. anti-stigma training for key groups of workers such as the police or teachers.

Questions/Indicators

General question

Supplementary indicators

Is discrimination prohibited by law?

Is discrimination against people with mental disorders specifically prohibited?

Is discrimination in society monitored?
Are relevant data and empirical evidence available?

Where and how is it monitored?
Is civil society (NGOs) involved in this process?

Q1.1

Q1.1.a

Q1.1.b

Q1.1c

Is there an anti-discrimination campaign?

What mechanisms are used to campaign and in what settings?

What resources are allocated?

Is impact monitored, how and with what result?

Q1.2

Q1.2.a

Q.1.2.b

Q.1.2.c

Do public agencies encourage the employment of people with mental disorders?

Are there any quotas and are they monitored?

Are there effective measures to promote employment, such as rehabilitation programmes and supported employment schemes?

Is discrimination in the workplace monitored?

Q1.3

Q.1.3.a

Q.1.3.b

Q.1.3.c

Is there equitable access for people with mental disorder to public services, including housing, in all parts of the country?

Is there equitable access to health care?
Is there equitable access to care for people with mental disorder detained in prison or the penal system?

Are standards on an equal footing for both mental and physical health-care provision?

Is there equitable access to welfare benefits?

Q1.4

Q.1.4.a

Q.1.4.b

Q1.4.c

What percentage of people with mental disorders receive treatment?

     

Q1.5

     

Principle 2 – Civil and political rights

Primary derivation

Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder: Articles 4 and 13 and its explanatory memorandum, paragraphs 46-49.

Meaning

This principle goes hand-in-hand with the principle of non-discrimination. People with mental disorders must be allowed, wherever possible and practicable, to exercise their civil and political rights. Examples of such rights might include the right to be free from inhuman and degrading treatment, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to vote and the right to hold a public office, if capable. Confidentiality of medical records is a key part of private life in such circumstances.

Examples of measures

States may find the following types of policy interventions useful:

i. legal measures to uphold the rights of the group in question;

ii. administrative measures to uphold rights, often in support of existing legal measures;

iii. the creation of monitoring agencies (for example, a mental health/welfare commission) or use of generic monitoring agencies, for example to undertake visits to institutions;

iv. training of staff in upholding rights;

v. creation of advocacy schemes to support the exercise of rights, whether in the state sector, in NGOs or informal or user-led schemes;

vi. more general measures to encourage participation via advocacy and information, user groups, or community activities.

Questions/Indicators

General question

Supplementary indicators

Are people with mental disorder allowed to vote?

Are people in any type of mental health institution entitled to vote?

Are there other rights that are compromised due to someone’s mental health status?

Q2.1

Q2.1.a

Q2.1.b

Are people with mental disorder allowed to hold public office?

   

Q.2.2

   

Are people with mental disorder allowed to start a family?

Are there laws or practices on sterilisation/castration that might undermine this right?

 

Q2.3

Q2.3.a

 

Is privacy respected both in institutions and in the community?

Are people allowed private mail, meetings or telephone conversations?

 

Q2.4

Q2.4.a

 

Is there an inspection agency that is able to ensure rights are upheld?

How often does it visit the institutions or people concerned?

Are its reports in the public domain?

Q2.5

Q2.5.a

Q2.5.b

Is information provided to patients on their rights in an appropriate way?

Is there a clear authority patients can go to in order to appeal against or challenge violations of their rights?

 

Q2.6

Q2.6.a

 

What is the extent of advocacy schemes is there a legal and institutional framework for advocacy?

Are advocates independent?

Can they meet with patients in private?

Q2.7

Q2.7.a

Q2.7.b

How is the confidentiality of all mental health patient records protected?

Is access to these records regulated?

Are patients, advocates or those close to patients able to access records when appropriate?

Q2.8

Q2.8.a

Q2.8.b

Are the rights of people with mental disorder from minority groups protected?

Are people allowed to practice their religion?

Are they allowed to speak in their mother tongue and are they given access to translation and/or interpretation, if necessary?

Q2.9

Q2.9.a

Q2.9.b

What choice is offered to people with mental disorder on such issues as where they live or work?

   

Q2.10

   

Principle 3 – The promotion of physical and mental health

Primary derivation

Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder: Article 5 and 10 and its explanatory memorandum, paragraphs 50 and 69-79.

Meaning

There are two separate but related aspects to the principle of health promotion:

i. aiming to promote the mental health of the whole population and of whole communities within it (namely, public mental health), including people who are in good mental health, those who are vulnerable and those with mental disorder; this is supported by general public health principles;

ii. attending to the needs of people with mental disorder regarding care for their general physical and mental health, as this is often compromised by poor access to health care, diagnostic “overshadowing”, discrimination and systemic inequalities.

Examples of measures

There is a considerable range of relevant policy interventions to promote mental health and to promote the physical health of people with mental disorder. States may wish to consider the following:

i. some countries have developed public health or mental health improvement programmes covering information, resilience building, community development and other interventions to improve the population’s mental health. Some of these address health holistically and some specifically address mental health. Many are setting-specific (for example, mental health in schools), and financed by volunteer-led or nationally funded programmes;

ii. in terms of physical health for people with mental disorder, these programmes can also range from health promotion campaigns (for example, through exercise or diet) through to improving access to health care, either via mainstream care, by providing general medical services within mental health institutions or through the use of screening programmes and health checks.

Questions/Indicators

General question

Supplementary indicators

What national, regional or local programmes exist to promote mental health?

What resources are allocated to these programmes?

Are people with mental health problems offered any help to improve their general mental and physical health?

Are there programmes for preventing completed suicide and suicide attempts?

Q3.1

Q3.1.a

Q3.1.b

Q3.1.c

What is known about the physical health status of people with mental disorder in all settings (health, social care, community)?

Do they have any support or services to help treat physical health problems?

Is there a system to monitor the mortality of people with mental disorder by major disease groups?
If so, what are the mortality rates by major disease groups?

 

Q3.2

Q3.2.a

Q3.2.b

 

Is the mental health and well-being of the general population monitored?

If so, how is it changing over time?

How do these figures break down by region, gender, age, etc.?

 

Q3.3

Q3.3.a

Q3.3.b

 

Principle 4 – The protection of vulnerable persons

Primary derivation

Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder: Articles 7 and 14 and its explanatory memorandum, paragraphs 55-57.

Meaning

People with mental disorders may be vulnerable to physical or sexual abuse, neglect or economic abuse for a variety of reasons, whether due to cognitive impairment or other reasons detailed in the explanatory memorandum to Recommendation Rec(2004)10. Policy measures and staff awareness are both necessary to protect vulnerable individuals from abuse or neglect.

Examples of measures

Many countries have legislation to protect vulnerable people or people lacking mental capacity from abuse, with varying definitions relating to capacity or vulnerability. States may wish to consider adopting the following additional mechanisms to ensure satisfactory protection:

i. creating administrative systems within health or social care agencies or municipalities in order to identify vulnerable people and protect them;

ii. creating an agency to oversee vulnerable people’s affairs;

iii. using NGOs or advocates to provide independent support for vulnerable people;

iv. using criminal justice agencies to pursue abusive individuals;

v. training mental health staff and other professionals to look for warning signs and seek advice;

vi. using judicial authorities to appoint attorneys/guardians or similar to look after the best interests of vulnerable people.

These protective mechanisms should also address the participation of persons with mental disorder in biomedical research.

Questions/Indicators

General question

Supplementary indicators

Is there legislation to protect vulnerable people?

What resources are deployed to implement this legislation?

What is the level of prosecutions for abuse, neglect or fraud in relation to vulnerable persons?

Is an agency charged with overseeing the legislation?

Do the regulations cover biomedical research?

Q4.1

Q4.1.a

Q4.1.b

Q4.1.c

Q4.1.d

Is clear information on capacity issues available to all concerned?

Are research staff informed about vulnerability issues?

Is there a clear distinction between the presence of mental disorder and capacity/incapacity?

   

Q4.2

Q4.2.a

Q4.2.b

   

Are vulnerable individuals assigned guardians, advocates or supporters?

What measures are taken to ensure the quality of such guardians?

     

Q4.3

Q4.3.a

     

Are there measures in place to report and investigate suspected physical or sexual abuse?

       

Q4.4

       

Are treatments and care settings culturally appropriate and suitable for the needs of minority groups?

       

Q4.5

       

Principle 5 – The quality of living conditions, services and treatment

Primary derivation

Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder: Articles 9-12, 27, 28, 36, 37 are of general relevance to service provision and its explanatory memorandum, paragraphs 63-98.

Meaning

Quality in this context refers to a range of issues covering:

i. basic standards of accommodation, treatment and staff behaviour that guarantee the basic right to human dignity;

ii. whether accommodation is appropriate, services and treatment are therapeutic;

iii. whether they conform with accepted international standards;

iv. whether they are satisfactory, first of all to the person concerned, and to those close to the person, staff and advocates, taking into account any relevant international and national norms for health care, housing etc.;

v. whether services or treatment are evidence-based and take account of various types of evidence and various relevant disciplines (for example, medicine, social science, management science, psychology).

These are complex issues that will vary from one state to another according to the location and nature of the care system. In some ways it is harder to monitor the quality of care for patients in the community than in institutions. However, certain general principles can be applied.

In order to achieve high quality it is essential that services, however they are organised, have well-defined governance administrative arrangements so that it is clear who holds ultimate responsibility for quality, and for dealing with complaints or incidents.

Examples of measures

Quality assurance in some form or another tends to be the fundamental basis of policy for many member states, based on a wider evidence base that applies across health and social care and even public- and private-sector management generally. Such measures may include:

i. the setting of quality standards nationally, regionally and locally;

ii. clinical governance, in other words the monitoring and supervision of clinical practice to ensure that it meets quality standards and is in accordance with the best available evidence;

iii. the creation of regulatory agencies to deal with poor-quality facilities, staff or practices;

iv. the encouragement of consumer involvement, NGOs and the creation of incentives to improve quality;

v. the establishment of mechanisms to encourage or enforce evidence-based care and treatment.

Questions/Indicators

General question

Supplementary indicators

Are there national, regional or local standards concerning living conditions and treatment?

How are these standards monitored? Do they cover all the main aspects of living conditions and treatment?

What proportion of services/facilities meet these standards?

Do the standards meet or exceed the minimum level as set out by the CPT (the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment)?

Q5.1

Q5.1.a

Q5.1.b

Q5.1.c

Is there a registration or other regulatory framework for service providers?

Are there mechanisms for complaints to be received from interested parties?

Is the regulator independent and can he or she suspend registration?

Is there a regulatory system for staff as a whole or for relevant staff groups that covers eligibility to practice?

Q5.2

Q5.2.a

Q5.2.b

Q5.2.c

Is there a national service plan/framework to develop services?

What funding is allocated for strategic development?

Who is responsible for delivery over what time scale?

Does the plan outline the contribution of general services (for example, health, social care, housing)?

Q5.3

Q5.3.a

Q5.3.b

Q5.3.c

Do plans or standards cover the criminal justice and penal system?

     

Q5.4

     

Is there a system nationally, locally or regionally, to monitor the quality of clinical practice (clinical governance)?

Is there a source of guidance/direction on evidence-based treatment that can inform practice and clinical governance or supervision?

   

Q5.5

Q5.5.a

   

Is the governance of service providers clear and understood?

Is information available on governance mechanisms for patients and those close to them?

   

Q5.6

Q5.6.a

   

Is there a system of individual care planning?

Is each patient’s care regularly reviewed?

Are plans explained or disclosed to patients?

 

Q5.7

Q5.7.a

Q5.7.b

 

Is basic information collected on the need for services?

Are there data on epidemiology, levels of need, etc., to support planning?

   

Q5.8

Q5.8.a

   

Are there measures to monitor changes over time in a range of indicators reflecting the quality of mental health services?

Are there measures to monitor re-admission rates in psychiatric in-patient facilities over time?

   

Q5.9

Q5.9.a

   

Are there specific mechanisms for ensuring all patients give informed consent, where they are able to do so?

Is adequate information on services and treatments given to patients and advocates?

   

Q5.10

Q5.10.a

   

Are there suitable arrangements for workforce development to support quality in services?

Is the supply of workers in each discipline adequate?

   

Q5.11

Q5.11.a

   

Is the availability of effective therapeutic and rehabilitative care adequate?

     

Q5.12

     

Are there mechanisms allowing for the participation of patients and those close to them in programme planning, health service delivery and evaluation?

     

Q5.13

     

Principle 6 – Least restrictive alternative

Primary derivation

Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder: Articles 3 and 8 and its explanatory memorandum, paragraphs 39-45 and 58-62.

Meaning

People with mental disorder should be cared for in the way and in the setting that least restricts their liberty and ability to live a normal life and to participate in the life of the community. This principle must be continuously balanced against the need to provide appropriate treatment (subject to consent provisions) and the protection of their health and safety and the safety of others.

Examples of measures

The key to being able to realise this principle is the provision of a range of services that allows patients to receive care in the setting and manner that is least restrictive for them. Many member states have developed such a range of services in different ways, and there is a large body of literature on this. Deinstitutionalisation is a large part of this agenda, but it has been recognised that:

i. institutions can vary in their level of restriction, and this principle should apply to institutions as well as other services;

ii. community services can be as restrictive as institutions if they are poorly designed.

Questions/Indicators

General question

Supplementary indicators

Are people with mental disorder allowed to refuse treatment (except where due process has determined involuntary treatment)?

In cases of involuntary placement, are people allowed to refuse treatment?

What mechanisms exist to monitor the use of seclusion and/or restraint?

 

Q6.1

Q6.1.a

Q6.1.b

 

Do clinical practice guidelines on seclusion and restraint exist?

How are these guidelines monitored?
Do they include an obligation to register and report every instance of seclusion and restraint?

Is there an independent review of any decision to apply seclusion or restraint?

What actions exist to progressively reduce the need to apply restraint or seclusion?

Q6.2

Q6.2.a

Q6.2.b

Q6.2.c

Does a range of facilities for care including non-institutional care exist?

If not, are there plans in place to develop such a range of facilities?

Are home or community treatment options available or planned?

Is adequate aftercare provided to support life in the community after discharge?

Q6.3

Q6.3.a

Q6.3.b

Q6.3.c

Is primary health care equipped to help people with mental disorders?

     

Q6.4

     

Is there any choice of treatment options?

Are there alternatives to medication?

   

Q6.5

Q6.5.a

   

Where care is institutional what measures are in place to minimise restrictions on normal life?

Are there arrangements for day activities, community involvement, etc.?

Are there visiting arrangements?

Can patients communicate with society at large by phone, mail, etc.?

Q6.6

Q6.6.a

Q6.6.b

Q6.6.c

Are patients in mental health facilities individually informed of their rights and of the house rules in writing or in another form they can understand?

Are the house rules of mental health facilities subject to independent scrutiny?

   

Q6.7

Q6.7.a

   

Is there a system to monitor the rates per 100 000 population of the use of the occurrence of both involuntary placement and treatment?

     

Q6.8

     

Principle 7 – The quality of the legal framework for mental health and its implementation and monitoring

Primary derivation

Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder: Chapter III, and its explanatory memorandum, paragraphs 119-224.

Meaning

Good quality legislation and monitoring methods are indispensable in order to ensure that people’s rights are protected when they are involuntarily placed in relevant institutions and/or involuntarily treated because of their mental disorder. This is dealt with in great detail in Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder.

Examples of measures

Many countries have mental health legislation, but some use wider legislation (for example, on mental capacity) to regulate mental health-related involuntary placement and involuntary treatment. These laws are well documented. Many countries also have public reports from monitoring agencies on a regular basis.

Questions/Indicators

General question

Supplementary indicators

Is there a comprehensive legal framework (whether separate or as part of wider legislation) that protects the rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder?

Does it comply with the principles set out in Recommendation Rec(2004)10?

Is there an appropriate scrutiny of records documenting involuntary placement and involuntary treatment?

 

Q7.1

Q7.1.a

Q7.1.b

 

Is there a national monitoring agency that ensures compliance with the legislation?

Does it report regularly?

Are those reports published?

Are there links with other quality assurance mechanisms, for example, registration arrangements?

Q7.2

Q7.2.a

Q7.2.b

Q7.2.c

Does an independent agency monitor deaths and serious incidents amongst detained patients?

Are such reports published?

   

Q7.3

Q7.3.a

   

Is there clear guidance and training for staff on the legislation?

Are there training programmes for the police on relevant aspects of the mental health legislation and on dealing with people with mental disorder?

   

Q7.4

Q7.4.a

   

Does the legislation include appeals procedures?

Are appeals heard by independent and appropriately qualified individuals?

Is there a clear complaints procedure?

 

Q7.5

Q7.5.a

Q7.5.b

 

Is information on the law available to patients and families?

Do patients and those close to them have access to independent advocacy?

   

Q7.6

Q7.6.a

   

Is there an appropriate legal framework for dealing with offenders with mental disorder?

Can mental health care be accessed by those detained in criminal justice or penal settings?

Is there independent scrutiny of the therapeutic environment in forensic establishments?

 

Q7.7

Q7.7.a

Q7.7.b

 

Is there a clear definition of what constitutes voluntary hospitalisation?

Who determines whether it is voluntary and are there arrangements for guaranteeing the rights of hospitalised adults without legal capacity?

   

Q7.8

Q7.8.a

   

Are there clear admission procedures for both voluntary and involuntary patients?

At what stage is the patient’s mental state assessed?

   

Q7.9

Q7.9.a

   

Are patients encouraged to express their views about future treatment when well enough to do so?

     

Q7.10

     

Are there suitable arrangements for dealing with the detention of children?

Are there arrangements for involving parents, guardians or carers in the decision to detain a child?

   

Q7.11

Q.11.a

   

Principle 8 – Taking account of the rights and needs of those close to people with mental disorder

Primary derivation

Recommendation Rec(2004)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning the protection of human rights and dignity of person with mental disorder: Article 15 and its explanatory memorandum, paragraphs 95, 103 and 112-114.

Meaning

In Europe, persons with a mental disorder are mainly taken care of by their families and people close to them. Yet the physical and mental health of these informal carers can be under threat as a result of mental disorder within the family. Some mental disorders should be seen in the context of the family (biological, psychological and social). There is a need to pay attention to the rights and needs of non-professional carers and those who are dependent on persons with mental disorder, particularly children.

Examples of measures

Policy interventions to support those close to the patient, and especially carers, are relatively poorly developed internationally, but examples may include:

i. rights for carers set out as part of legal instruments concerning mental health generally, for example, the right to be involved in the process of taking persons with mental disorder into care and involuntary placement in institutions;

ii. the provision of support services for carers and those close to the patient, such as a carer’s assessment, counselling, respite care, etc.;

iii. the development of mutual support groups and information tailored to the person’s needs, often led by NGOs.

Questions/Indicators

General question

Supplementary indicators

Is there a mechanism for assessing the needs of those close to the patient?

Are there any services to support carers and others close to the patient?

Are there plans to develop such services in the future?

What resources are devoted to public and/or NGO services and support for carers and those close to the patient?

Q8.1

Q8.1.a

Q.8.1.b

Q8.1.c

Are there mechanisms for seeking the views of those close to the patient as part of formal and informal care processes?

Are there self-help groups and other social networks for carers?

   

Q8.2

Q8.2.a

   

Are there mechanisms for assessing the needs of dependants, particularly children?

     

Q8.3

     

Appendix 6
(Item 6.3)

Reply to Recommendation 244 (2008)
of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe
on “Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance”

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 May 2009
at the 1057th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

1. The Committee of Ministers has examined with interest Congress Recommendation 244 (2008) “Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance.” It has brought it to the attention of the governments of member states and to the European Committee on Local and Regional Democracy (CDLR), the European Committee for Social cohesion (CDCS), the Steering Committee for Education (CDED), the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ), the European Steering Committee for Youth (CDEJ) and the Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB) for information and possible comments, as well as to the European Commission.

2. The Committee of Ministers welcomes the attention given by the Congress to the importance of promoting responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance, and the trend to do so in member states through diverse initiatives. It shares the view of the Congress that efforts remain to be made in this area, both with regard to awareness raising as to how consumer habits can impact people and ecosystems – both on the local and global scale – and with regard to developing positive, realistic options allowing for a change of behaviour where desired. Responsibility falls on all stakeholders in society, and the Committee of Minsters recognises in particular the important role of local and regional authorities in this respect.

3. The High-Level Task Force report on Social Cohesion in the 21st century, recommended that the Council of Europe get involved in “building a Europe of responsibilities that are both shared and social” by undertaking activities to increase “the sense of social responsibility” in a globalising world, including that of citizens, “especially in their employment, consumption and investment patterns and lifestyles”. The report also calls on the Council of Europe to build confidence in the future, encouraging the development of a shared vision of values, rights and responsibilities and of a transversal approach to framing policies, and to monitoring their impact on social cohesion.

4. With reference to paragraph 6.a., the Committee of Ministers has recently established an ad hoc advisory group on “a Europe of shared social responsibilities: citizens’ and public authorities’ roles in promoting a cohesive and sustainable society” (CS-S-RSP). One of the challenges to be taken into account by the group is the need to encourage restraint in terms of consumption so as to preserve human rights and resources for future generations. The Congress is invited to send a representative to the Group’s meetings.

5. With reference to paragraphs 6.b. and c., the Committee of Ministers shares the view of the Congress with regard to the value of raising awareness of children and young people to the concept of responsible consumption, so that, as tomorrow’s citizens, their decisions as consumers can be as informed and responsible as possible. It has taken note of the potential role of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED) and the European Committee for Youth (CDEJ) in developing tools to this end as outlined in the comments appended. It also considers that this aspect might be brought to the attention of the Schools for Health in Europe Network (SHE). This Network, previously known as the European Network of Health Promoting Schools (ENHPS), supported jointly by the Council of Europe, European Commission and the WHO, is a model framework for spreading important educational messages to young people with regard to health promotion and prevention.

6. The Committee of Ministers would also draw the Congress’ attention to Resolution CM/Res(2008)23 in which a number of priorities and action on the youth policy of the Council of Europe are outlined. These include promoting awareness education and action among young people on environment and sustainable development and encouraging young people to promote global solidarity and co-operation.

7. With reference to paragraph 6.d., the Committee of Ministers would refer to the comments of the Governing Board of the Council of Europe Development Bank below.

8. Finally, the Committee of Ministers would draw attention to the comments of the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ) and in particular to Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)8 on legal solutions to debt problems.

Appendix to the reply

Comments on Congress Recommendation 244 (2008) by the bodies consulted

Comments of the European Committee for Social Cohesion (CDCS)

The CDCS welcomes Congress Recommendation 244 (2008) on “Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance” and approved its contents, which contribute to promoting social and shared responsibility as recommended by the Social Cohesion Strategy and the report of the High-Level Task Force on Social Cohesion.

In a globalised world, characterised by the interdependence between people and generations, a responsible and share responsibility appears to be necessary to a society of law which ensures the well-being of all, at present and in the long term.

Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance are the two fundamental ways of expression within the reach of each citizen, allowing everyone to express the sharing of his/her social responsibility with other stakeholders of the society (public authorities, enterprises, etc.) with a motivating effect for other actors, particularly enterprises following this approach.

The CDCS approved the different proposed measures aiming to facilitate and encourage citizens’ commitment to responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance at a local level, alongside local and regional authorities. It considers that social and shared responsibility is firstly built at a local level and includes the core elements for strengthening social cohesion. It also agrees with the recommendations relating to measures to be taken at other levels in order to create the conditions for a full expression of citizens’ will to commit themselves to this approach, as well as those in the educational area (particularly for young people) and in the awareness-raising one, by stressing the role and responsibility of media.

The CDCS gives particular importance to the consideration of social clauses in the terms of the loan contracts of the Council of Europe Development Bank, as suggested by the Congress.

The Committee welcomes the Congress’ will for further dialogue among public authorities, citizens and other socio-economic players, particularly in the context of the Council of Europe’s European Platform for Dialogue on Ethical and Solidarity-based initiatives, taking into account its crucial role as spaces of genuine co-operation for conceiving and proposing new complementarities and articulations between publics authorities, citizens and other stakeholders in the society.

Comments of the Bureau of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED)

The Bureau of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED):

After taking note with great interest of Recommendation 244 (2008) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe on “Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance”;

Aware of the consumption patterns portrayed in the media through advertising and of the role played by children as direct or indirect consumers and of schools as the main place where children acquire the competences required to take a critical look at advertisements (learning to decode the language used, and to distinguish between values and products) and to take a responsible attitude to consumption (learning to read labels, trace the origin of products and find out about the conditions in which goods are produced, etc);

Welcomes the recommendation set out in paragraph 6.b on developing guidelines on children’s and young people’s education in responsible consumption;

Believes that the CDED could develop such guidelines in the context of a specific project concerning either the media or sustainable development education, or as part of its “Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights” project. It could also focus one of the forthcoming European training modules, which are part of its programme for the training of education professionals “Pestalozzi”, on the competences which teachers must develop with a view to teaching children to take a responsible attitude to consumption and on exchanging good practices and teaching tools used in member states.

Comments of the European Steering Committee for Youth (CDEJ)

The CDEJ welcomes the Congress Recommendation 244 on “Responsible consumption and solidarity-based finance”. It shares the spirit of this recommendation, even though consumption and finance questions are not part of the CDEJ competence. The CDEJ is concerned with another aspect of these issues, notably “the cause of social cohesion and equity and the avoidance of courses ending in exclusion and aggravation of inequalities”.

To start with, in order to become a consumer (and, even better, a responsible consumer), young people need to have a job and access to a proper relevant education in order to get a job. Both issues are very problematic in all member states of the Council of Europe, with an ever increasing number of young people not finding their first job or being precariously paid. The recent statistics show that more and more young working people cannot afford their own accommodation and are obliged to live with their parents until over 30 years old.

The 8th Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Youth (Kyiv, Ukraine, 10-11 October 2008) has adopted a Declaration on “The future of the Council of Europe youth policy: AGENDA 2020”, in which the Ministers responsible for Youth from 49 States Party to the European Cultural Convention of the Council of Europe agreed that the following issues should be regarded as priorities for the Council of Europe youth policy and action, alongside human rights and intercultural dialogue:

- supporting the integration of excluded young people;
- ensuring young people’s access to education, training and the working life, particularly through the promotion and recognition of non-formal education/learning;
- supporting young people’s transition from education to the labour market, for example by strengthening possibilities to reconcile private and working life;
- supporting young people’s autonomy and well-being as well as their access to decent living conditions;
- ensuring young people’s equal access to cultural, sporting and creative activities;
- encouraging intergenerational dialogue and solidarity.

As regards the Congress’ recommendation to the Committee of Ministers to undertake an appraisal of the concept of human rights which takes into account citizen responsibility and to invite “the Steering Committee for Youth (CDEJ) to promote the concept of responsible consumption actively and to help young people think about it by producing teaching material”, the CDEJ would be ready to discuss this issue to see how to take it into consideration in its work programme.

Comments by the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ)

The Bureau of the CDCJ took note of the recommendation of the Congress. It welcomed the recommendation and, given the close links which exist with activities of the CDCJ in this field, decided to make the following observations.

The Bureau of the CDCJ wishes to recall and to draw the attention of the Congress and of the members states to the Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers CM/Rec(2007)8 on legal solutions to debt problems and its explanatory memorandum (Appendix II) which were adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 June 2007 at the 999bis meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies. This recommendation is a direct follow-up to Resolution No. 1 on seeking legal solutions to debt problems in a credit society which was adopted by the European Ministers of Justice at their 26th Conference (Helsinki, 2005).

Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)8 on legal solutions to debt problems is the first international legal instrument on this subject. It indicates three principal and complementary ways through which debt problems can and should be dealt with:

§ prevention of over-indebtedness;
§ alleviation of the effects of the recovery of debts;
§ rehabilitation of over-indebted individuals and families.

The recommendation aims at identifying possible legal and political measures that can be applied by the states in order to:

§ prevent over-indebtedness of individuals and families;
§ adjust the recovery of debts from the over-indebted in a manner that avoids their social and financial exclusion;
§ facilitate rehabilitation of the over-indebted with due regard to their human dignity.

It suggests user-friendly methods and extra-judicial settlement mechanisms of dealing with debt problems such as counselling and mediation or financial literacy.

It also considers the benefits of co-operation between competent bodies at international, national, regional and local level to deal with this problem.

The CDCJ is convinced that Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)8, which sets out minimum legal standards for dealing with debt problems, forms a sound basis for member states wishing to make national legal reforms in this area.

In the context of the current worldwide financial crisis, tackling the issue of consumers’ debt problems is becoming urgent. In many member states, the use of credit has increased over the past few decades which can lead to serious financial difficulties for individuals and families.

Against this background, a strong need is felt to promote important standards such as Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)8. Recommendation 244 (2008) of the Congress goes along the same lines and is complementary to CM/Rec(2007)8.

Comments from the Governing Board of the Council of Europe Development Bank

At its 190th meeting on 28 November 2008, the Governing Board examined the above recommendation and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers the comments as follows:

“The Governing Board examined Recommendation 244 (2008) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, recommending the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to invite: “the Council of Europe Development Bank to insert social clauses in the terms of their loan contracts”.

The Governing Board recalls that the Council of Europe Development Bank is the sole international financial institution with a statutory social mandate. In particular Article XIII, section c. of the Articles of Agreement stipulates that: “c. Applications for loans or guarantees shall be submitted to the Administrative Council after receipt of the Secretary General’s opinion as to the admissibility based on the project’s conformity with the political and social aims of the Council of Europe”.

Projects financed by the Bank also have to respect the European Convention on Human Rights as well as the European Social Charter. More specifically, the CEB Loan Regulations (Article 3.3, section g) state that the Bank may demand early reimbursement of disbursed loans: “.. (iii) where the implementation of the project financed by the Bank leads to a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Social Charter”.

Appendix 7
(Item 6.4)

Reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1839 (2008)
on “The state of democracy in Europe – Specific challenges facing European democracies: the case of diversity and migration” and
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1840 (2008)
on “The state of democracy in Europe – Measures to improve the democratic participation of migrants”

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 May 2009
at the 1057th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

1. The Committee of Ministers has given close attention to Recommendation 1839 (2008) on “The state of democracy in Europe – Specific challenges facing European democracies: the case of diversity and migration” as supplemented by Resolution 1617 (2008) and Recommendation 1840 (2008) on “The state of democracy in Europe – Measures to improve the democratic participation of migrants” as supplemented by its Resolution 1617 (2008). It has brought both recommendations to the attention of the governments of member states and has forwarded them to a number of intergovernmental bodies10.

2. Promoting democracy and active citizen participation in democratic processes is a core objective of the Council of Europe. The common values which it strives to promote – democracy, human rights, the rule of law, pluralism, tolerance, non-discrimination and mutual respect – are also the cornerstones of a political culture valuing diversity. In this respect, the Committee of Ministers would recall the relevance of the Council of Europe's White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue, launched at their 118th Session, which provides, inter alia, orientations for the promotion of democratic citizenship and participation.

3. The Committee of Ministers recalls that a prime objective of the Council of Europe in the field of migration is to promote and facilitate the integration of migrants, while respecting and preserving the diversity of the societies in which they live. It considers that integration is the key facilitator to democratic participation. It is not simply to provide equal access to rights and services for legally resident migrants, but also to ensure that migrants become fully-fledged, active, valued and contributing members of societies they live in. This belief also resonates with the view of the Ministers of the Council of Europe member states responsible for Migration who, in the Final Declaration of their 8th Conference (Kyiv, 4-5 September 2008), agreed that the Council of Europe should “reinforce social cohesion and the integration of migrants by developing policies to improve the interaction between migrants and receiving societies and the participation of migrants and persons of immigrant background in civil society, including, where appropriate, local and national political life”. This conclusion of the 8th Ministerial Conference is currently being implemented through the activities of the European Committee on Migration (CDMG) in the context of the project “Empowerment of migrants and strengthening social cohesion”.

4. Regarding the harmonisation of systems for collecting and processing data on migrants – the importance of which was also highlighted in the Final Declaration of the 8th Ministerial Conference – the Committee of Ministers considers that this issue should be addressed in a broader context of improving
co-ordination and interaction between different agencies working in the migration field nationally and internationally. It has taken note of the readiness of the CDMG to assist member states in improving the interaction between relevant services and changing the modes of international information exchange, should such a request be made by an interested member state.

5. The Committee of Ministers acknowledges the value for long-term legal residents to be registered. It also considers that public authorities should encourage active participation in public life at local level by all those legally resident in their jurisdiction, including possibly the right to vote in local and regional elections on the basis of principles provided for by the Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level. It would recall11 that the idea of granting active and passive electoral rights in local elections to all legal residents is in accordance with the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters.12 However, the Committee of Ministers does not consider it opportune at present to prepare common guidelines or pursue harmonisation of such procedures in the 47 member states. It would nevertheless point out that the European Committee on Local and Regional Democracy (the CDLR) has as a standard practice to regularly review the state of implementation of the above convention. Furthermore, for the next Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for local and regional democracy (Utrecht, 16-17 November 2009) a report on developments on citizen participation in member states, covering also the integration of foreigners in local life, is to be prepared.

6. The Committee of Ministers would also inform the Assembly that under the responsibility of the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ), work is also currently being carried out with a view to promoting and contributing to the reinforcement of the existing instruments of the Council of Europe in the field of nationality, in particular the European Convention on Nationality (ETS No. 166). A visibility tool is being prepared which will in clear terms underline the importance of acceding to the Council of Europe nationality conventions and which will give at least 10 good reasons to do so to member states which have not yet signed nor ratified the conventions. The leaflet, once published, should be disseminated to ministers, high officials and parliamentarians. The CDCJ also regularly takes stock of the signatures and ratifications of the Council of Europe nationality conventions. The Committee of Ministers welcomes the recent signatures and ratifications in this respect.13

7. The Committee of Ministers shares the view of the Parliamentary Assembly that a gender-based perspective is relevant when addressing the participation of migrants and persons of immigrant background. This view will be reflected in activities to be focused on migrant women in 2009-2012, which will include a report on women and elderly migrants as agents of integration. It notes that the evaluation of the democratic participation of migrant women and men of different origins when monitoring the implementation of Recommendation Rec(2003)3 to member states on balanced participation of women and men in political and public decision making could contribute to these activities. The recommendation encourages “greater involvement of ethnic and cultural minorities, and especially women from these minorities, in decision making at all levels”.

8. The Committee of Ministers has taken note with interest of the recommendation of the Assembly outlined in paragraph 3.6 of Recommendation 1839 (2008). It draws attention to Recommendation CM/Rec(2009)2 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the evaluation, auditing and monitoring of participation and participation policies at local and regional level, adopted on 11 March 2009, which is also relevant in this respect. Furthermore, the Committee of Ministers recognises the importance of effective participation of migrants through dedicated organisations and acknowledges the work carried out by the Conference of INGOs in drafting the Code of Good Practice for Civil Participation.

9. With reference to paragraph 4.2 of Recommendation 1840 (2008), the Committee of Ministers informs the Assembly that the Steering Committee of Human Rights (CDDH) has taken note of Recommendation 1840 (2008), and in particular the suggestion to examine restrictions on the political and other fundamental rights of migrants, and will bear it in mind when examining possible future activities of the committee. It recalls, in this respect, that the specific rights of association and assembly are guaranteed not only by the European Convention on Human Rights, but also by other instruments, including the revised European Social Charter and the Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level.

10. The Committee of Ministers also signals, particularly with regard to paragraph 4.7 of Recommendation 1840 (2008), that the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) regularly recommends that governments take measures in favour of the integration of migrants. ECRI considers that the participation of migrants in democratic life and society is an essential element of the fight against racism and racial discrimination towards this group and conversely that racism and racial discrimination are obstacles to the democratic participation of migrants. It therefore recommends, in particular through its country-by-country reports, that governments take measures to remove such obstacles.14 The Committee of Ministers encourages member states to give due consideration to its recommendations.

11. Finally, with particular reference to paragraph 4 of Recommendation 1839 (2008), the Committee of Ministers would inform the Assembly that it has brought the recommendation to the attention of the Advisory Board of the Forum for the Future of Democracy.

Appendix 8
(Item 6.5)

Reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1842 (2008)
on “Activities of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)”

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 May 2009
at the 1057th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

1. The Committee of Ministers has taken note with interest of the Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1842 (2008), together with Resolution 1623 (2008) on the “Activities of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)”. It has transmitted both texts to governments as well as to relevant intergovernmental committees. The comments received from committees have been reflected in this reply.

2. The Committee of Ministers is highly appreciative of the work carried out the ICRC, and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement as a whole. The ICRC’s mandate under the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional protocols of 1977 and 2005 makes it an important and uncontested international actor in the field of humanitarian law, and in promoting the fundamental principles of the Council of Europe – respect for human rights and dignity of the individual. The Committee of Ministers considers it appropriate to support the work of the ICRC and encourage co-operation between the two bodies on matters of common concern.

3. In response to paragraph 2.1, the Committee of Ministers would like to recall the synergy which already exists between the activities of the ICRC and those of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT). Furthermore, the Committee of Ministers encourages the relevant bodies of the Council of Europe, where feasible, to support the ICRC in its work on monitoring of detention conditions.

4. Referring to paragraph 2.2, the Committee of Ministers also urges member states to co-operate fully with the ICRC where necessary in promoting humanitarian assistance for persons affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. It recognises that the Red Cross’s work is also highly relevant to the Organisation’s activities in the field of migration and points out that to enhance co-operation, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies was granted observer status with the European Committee for Migration (CDMG) in 2008. The CDMG has also proposed to involve it, as appropriate, in its forthcoming activities.

5. The question of missing persons, raised by the Assembly in paragraph 2.3, is undeniably an issue which needs continued attention on both the national and the international level and the Committee of Ministers supports the ICRC’s primary role in this respect. It would draw particular attention to the ICRC’s “Principles for Legislating the Situation of Persons Missing as a Result of Armed Conflict or Internal Violence”, a tool to assist states and their national authoritative bodies with the adoption of legislation that will address, prevent and resolve cases of missing persons and which has been brought to the attention of the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law (CAHDI) by the ICRC.

6. The Committee of Ministers, cognisant of the importance of advancing on various issues related to missing persons, encourages the ICRC, together with other international and regional organisations, to further develop co-operation within their respective mandates whilst ensuring synergies and avoiding duplication. In this respect, the Committee of Ministers informs the Assembly that, under the responsibility of the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ) a draft recommendation on missing persons and presumption of death is currently being prepared. It welcomes the fact that this contribution of the Council of Europe, together with recent measures taken in this field by the ICRC and the International Commission on Missing Persons, has been reflected in recent work of the United Nations in this field.15

7. With regard to paragraph 2.4, the Committee of Ministers informs the Assembly that the member states and observers to the CAHDI regularly report on national events aimed at the promotion and dissemination of international humanitarian law and hold exchanges of views on the promotion of the relevant international instruments, such as the Third Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions and the Second Protocol to the Hague Convention of 1954 on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. The ICRC contributes actively as an observer to the work of the CAHDI, attending its meetings regularly to inform the committee about the ICRC's on-going projects and initiatives. An exchange of views was also held with the President of the ICRC in 2004.

8. The Committee of Ministers has also taken note with satisfaction of events in recent months which have taken place in co-operation with the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, such as a Conference-debate organised by the ICRC on the theme of juveniles in custody in co-operation with the Council of Europe on 24 November 2008 and the joint Council of Europe/French Red Cross seminar on migration which took place in Strasbourg on 19 and 20 February 2009. It would encourage further focused co-operation of such kind.

9. Finally, the Committee of Ministers has taken note of the Assembly’s suggestion for the CDED to support the efforts of the ICRC to include knowledge about international humanitarian law in school curricula. It would point out that humanitarian law is considered as one of the dimensions of the CDED programme on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights (EDC/HRE). In this context, ICRC representatives are invited to all the major conferences on the EDC/HRE programme and inter-institutional meetings, facilitating access to the Council of Europe networks. Co-operation with ICRC is also envisaged for EDC/HRE activities 2010-2014. 

Appendix 9
(Item 6.6)

Reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1852 (2008)
on “Migration and mobility in the Eurasian region – Prospects for the future”

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 May 2009
at the 1057th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

1. The Committee of Ministers has examined with interest Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1852 (2008) “Migration and mobility in the Eurasian region – Prospects for the future”. It has transmitted the recommendation and the Resolution 1639 (2008) to member states and to the European Committee on Migration (CDMG). The Committee of Ministers welcomes the thorough consideration that the Parliamentary Assembly has given to the particular challenges faced by, if not exclusively, countries in the Eurasian region. It would encourage member states, where appropriate, to bear in mind Recommendation 1852 (2008) in the framework of their national migration policies.

2. The Council of Europe continues to take a co-ordinated approach to migration management. It focuses on both the development of policies on migration and on the integration of migrants that are founded on the principles of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, with a view to ensuring orderly migration, social cohesion and the respect of the individual. The Committee of Ministers would also draw the Assembly’s attention to the Final Declaration and in particular the Action Plan adopted at the 8th Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Migration Affairs (Kyiv, 4-5 September 2008) which will be used as a basis for the activities in the field of migration for the coming years.

3. The Committee of Ministers highlights the fact that promoting and protecting the human rights of migrants and facilitating integration remains an ongoing challenge for the governments of all member states. With regard to the specific recommendations by the Assembly, it would refer to the CDMG comments appended to the present reply. These outline the relevant current and projected activities of the Council of Europe in the field of migration and which respond concretely to the suggestions of the Assembly.

4. The Committee of Ministers would also refer to its replies to Assembly Recommendations 1755 (2007) on “Human rights of irregular migrants”, 1782 (2007) on “The situation of migrant workers in temporary employment agencies (TEAs)” and 1807 (2007) on “Regularisation programmes for irregular migrants”, of which a number of elements are relevant to the present recommendation.

5. With reference to paragraph 2.3, the Committee of Ministers would also draw particular attention to the relevance of its Recommendation Rec(2006)6 on internally displaced persons.

6. Finally, the Committee of Ministers would invite those member states that have not already done so, to consider signing and ratifying the relevant Council of Europe instruments likely to improve the situation of migrants including Protocol No. 12 to the European Convention on Human Rights, the revised European Social Charter, the European Convention on the Legal Status of Migrant Workers and the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings as well as the UN International Convention on the Protection of the rights of all migrant workers.

Appendix to the reply

Opinion by the Bureau of the European Committee on Migration (CDMG)

1. The CDMG welcomes the interest of the Parliamentary Assembly to the issue of migration and mobility in the Eurasian region and fully shares the view that regional and bilateral co-operation in Eastern Europe should be strengthened.

2. Migration has recently grown into an important and highly debated issue for Eastern European countries, most of which are simultaneously countries of origin, transit and destination. An important phenomenon is also the regional cross-border migration which involves many people engaged in seasonal work or small trade. It has been repeatedly noted that many Eastern European countries were not always prepared for the challenges of migration. They often lacked coherent and well-developed migration management and integration policies as well as an effectively working information exchange mechanism (between different agencies within these countries and with other states).

3. The 8th Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Migration Affairs that took place in Kyiv (Ukraine) on 4 and 5 September 2008 drew attention to the migration challenges faced by Eastern European countries and to the specific nature of migration flows in that region. The CDMG also took into account the priorities of the countries of region in the course of preparing its projects for 2009-2012 and identified by them in the course of a series of meetings in the region. Many activities that will be implemented as parts of these projects will directly address the challenges faced by Eastern European countries.

4. In particular, the CDMG considers that providing assistance to these countries in developing and implementing effective migration policies capable of addressing the new emerging migration challenges is among its most important tasks. Moreover, this task reflects the decision of the 8th Ministerial Conference to devise an integrated approach to migration, development and social cohesion and assist member states in its implementation.

5. Indeed, the CDMG intends to undertake various activities to accomplish this in 2009-2012. Among these are the work aimed at strengthening the role of employment services in the management of short-term migration and the protection of migrants’ rights, activities dedicated to enhancing contribution of migrants to the development of their countries of origin and facilitating the return of those migrants who decided to do so, and development of mechanism to facilitate regular exchange of information both within and between the countries of Eastern Europe.

6. As a part of the Council of Europe Social Cohesion Programme for Ukraine (2008-2011), the CDMG will provide assistance to the Ukrainian authorities in developing an integrated approach to migration management and translating it into practical policy instruments (including measures to protect the rights of migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers, to establish an effective system to combat irregular migration, to design a comprehensive integration policy and to offer a viable reintegration mechanisms to returning migrants).

7. The CDMG also regards very seriously the issue of integration of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and intends to address in it in the framework of the implementation of the project “Protecting the human rights and dignity of vulnerable migrants”. In the context of post-conflict settlement in Georgia, the CDMG believes that it is important to offer assistance to the authorities of Georgia in their efforts to facilitate local integration of people who fled the zone of conflicts in South Ossetia and Abkhazia and is prepared to provide such assistance.

8. Finally, the CDMG will continue to promote the implementation of the European Convention on the Legal Status of Migrant Workers (ETS No. 93), which now has 11 signatures with Moldova and Ukraine recently joining the Convention. The CDMG regards the convention an important international legal tool to protect the rights of migrant workers and intends to encourage its use by the member states. In particular, it is hoped that the Consultative Committee will be able to resume its work in 2009.

Appendix 10
(Item 10.1)

Revised terms of reference of the Ad hoc Committee on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence

1.

Name of Committee:

Ad hoc Committee on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence

2.

Type of Committee:

Ad hoc Committee

3.

Source of terms of reference:

Committee of Ministers

4.

Terms of reference:

 

Having regard to:

-

the Declaration and Action Plan adopted by the Third Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe (Warsaw, 16-17 May 2005), in particular concerning the issue related to the security of citizens;

-

the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Additional Protocols;

-

Resolution Res(2005)47 on committees and subordinate bodies, their terms of reference and working methods;

-

Recommendation Rec(2002)5 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the protection of women against violence;

-

the final activity report of the Council of Europe Task Force to Combat Violence against Women, including Domestic Violence (EG-TFV);

-

the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS No. 197);

-

the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (CETS No. 201);

-

the Committee of Ministers’ reply of 15 October 2008 to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1847 (2008) on “Combating violence against women: towards a Council of Europe convention”.

 

Under the authority of the Committee of Ministers, and in relation with the implementation of Projects 2008/DG-HL/1432 “Monitoring the operation of conventions on co-operation in the criminal field”, 2008/DG-HL/1413 “Protection of women against violence, including domestic violence” and 2008/DG-HL/1414 “Achieving gender equality between women and men in all spheres of society” of the Programme of Activities, and bearing in mind the criteria developed in document CM(2006)101 final “Establishing criteria for projects”, the Committee is instructed:

-

to prepare one or more legally binding instrument(s), as appropriate,16 to prevent and combat:

- domestic violence including specific forms of violence against women;
- other forms of violence against women;

to protect and support the victims of such violence and prosecute the perpetrators.

 

When preparing this or these instrument(s), the Committee shall:

-

have regard to the definition of violence against women and the examples of domestic violence given in Recommendation Rec(2002)5, bearing in mind that the latter notion is not limited to violence against women;17

-

design a comprehensive framework for the protection and assistance of victims and witnesses, including child victims and witnesses, paying particular attention to gender equality aspects, as well as on the effective prevention, intervention, investigation, prosecution and, where appropriate, international co-operation;

-

define a monitoring mechanism to ensure compliance of States Parties with the provisions of the instrument(s);

-

take into account the relevant standards of the Council of Europe in the fields of human rights, gender equality, criminal law and judicial co-operation, in particular on the basis of existing legal instruments dealing with various forms of violence which are related to it;

-

take into account the existing universal and regional international legal instruments relevant to such violence, in particular the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW – 1979).

The Committee shall present, by 30 June 2009, an interim report on its position on the subjects and contents of the proposed instrument(s), its working methods and the time table for its work, in order to allow the Committee of Ministers to take a decision, where necessary, on these matters.

5.

Composition of the Committee:

5.A

Members

i.

The governments of all member states are entitled to appoint members. The Council of Europe's budget will bear travelling and subsistence expenses for one expert per member state (two in the case of a state whose representative has been elected (co-)chairperson). The Committee should be composed with due consideration to the respect of the principle of gender-balanced representation. The governments of member states are invited to consider the possibility of appointing two experts each, so as to enable legal and human rights/gender equality expertise (experts from national authorities competent in particular for criminal justice and gender equality aspects) to be represented.

ii.

Qualifications of persons serving on the Committee: senior national officials with an extensive knowledge or expertise in the human rights and gender equality field and/or in the criminal law and procedure area. When appointing their representatives, governments are invited to bear in mind that an equal proportion between members with expertise in human rights and gender equality and with expertise in criminal and prosecution matters is needed.

5.B

Participants

i.

Three representatives of the Steering Committee for Equality between Women and Men (CDEG) and three representatives of the European Committee on Crime Problems (CDPC), without the right to vote but with defrayal of expenses at the charge of the budget envelopes allocated to these committees.

ii.

One representative of each of the following committees, without the right to vote but with defrayal of expenses at the charge of the budget envelopes allocated to these committees:

- Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH);
- European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ);
- European Committee on Migration (CDMG);
- Governmental Committee of the European Social Charter.

iii.

The Parliamentary Assembly, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, the Commissioner for Human Rights and the Conference of INGOs enjoying participatory status with the Council of Europe may send (a) representative(s) to meetings of the Committee, without the right to vote but with defrayal of expenses at the charge of their respective Votes of the Ordinary Budget.

5.C

Other participants

i.

The European Commission and the Council of the European Union may send (a) representative(s), without the right to vote or defrayal of expenses, to meetings of the Committee.

ii.

The states with observer status with the Council of Europe (Canada, Holy See, Japan, Mexico, United States of America) may send (a) representative(s), without the right to vote or defrayal of expenses, to meetings of the Committee.

iii.

The following international organisations may send (a) representative(s), without the right to vote or defrayal of expenses, to meetings of the Committee:

- United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM);
- United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (UNDAW;
- United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF);
- Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR);
- United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR);
- Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE);
- Interpol;
- Europol;
- Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS);
- European Women's Lobby;
- Amnesty International;
- Women against Violence Europe (WAVE).

6.

Secretariat:

 

The Committee should be assisted by a Secretariat composed of staff of the Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs (DGHL).

7.

Working methods and structures:

 

To ensure adequate representation of the required fields of expertise in the chairmanship, the Committee may be presided by two chairpersons as co-chairs.

Three scientific experts may be appointed by the Secretary General to assist the Committee’s work.

In the framework of its terms of reference, the Committee may set up working parties and have recourse to consultant experts. It shall have the possibility to have whatever contacts and consultations with governmental and non-governmental organisations or professionals and others that it deems necessary for the implementation of its terms of reference, in particular through hearings or written consultation

Other steering committees may be consulted at an appropriate stage of the drafting work.

8.

Duration:

 

These terms of reference expire on 31 December 2010.

+ There were no decisions under this item

2 See also document CM/AS(2009)Quest555 final.

3 States concerned: Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, Turkey and United Kingdom.

4 See also document CM/Cong(2009)Rec244 final.

5 See also document CM/AS(2009)Rec1839-1840 final.

6 See also document CM/AS(2009)Rec1842 final.

7 See also document CM/AS(2009)Rec1852 final.

8 See, for example, the Karner v. Austria, judgment of 24 July 2003, the B.B. v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 10 February 2004 and the Baczkowski and others v. Poland, judgment of 3 May 2007.

9 Decisions adopted by the Ministers' Deputies on 2 July 2008, 1031st meeting, items 4.3 a, b and c, CM/Del/Dec(2008)1031, 4 July 2008.

10 Recommendation 1839: European Committee on Migration (CDMG), European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ), Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH), Steering Committee for Equality between Women and Men (CDEG), European Committee on Local and Regional Democracy (CDLR) for information and possible comments and to the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) and to the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) for information.
Recommendation 1840: European Committee on Migration (CDMG), European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ), Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH), Steering Committee for Equality between Women and Men (CDEG), European Committee on Local and Regional Democracy (CDLR) for information and possible comments and to the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) and European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) for information.

11 Also see the reply by the Committee of Ministers to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1714 (2005) on the “abolition of restrictions on the right to vote” (CM/AS(2006)Rec1714 final).

12 This code elaborated by the Venice Commission has been given political support by the Committee of Ministers by way of a Declaration on the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters adopted on 13 May 2004 at its 114th Session. The Code provides that “it would be advisable for foreigners to be allowed to vote in local elections after a certain period of residence” (point I.1.b.ii). This right could be granted for example after 5 years of permanent residence.

13 Bosnia and Herzegovina (22 October 2008) and Finland (6 August 2008) ratified the European Convention on Nationality (ETS No. 166) and the Council of Europe Convention on the avoidance of statelessness in relation to State succession (CETS No. 200) has been signed (1 December 2008) and ratified (7 January 2009) by Hungary and will come into force on 1 May 2009.

14 In its reports, ECRI recommends, amongst other things: that arrangements be made to consult foreigners when policy decisions are taken; that provision be made for the right of foreigners who have been resident in the country for a long time to vote in local elections; and that measures be taken to facilitate the acquisition of the nationality of the country of residence by foreigners who have been living there for a certain length of time. It also recommends the ratification of the Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level and of the Convention on Nationality, considering that they play a significant role in the process of integration of migrants.

15 Report of the Secretary General on missing persons of 3 February 2009 (A/HRC/10/28).

16 The Ad hoc Committee shall first consider from the point of view of standard-setting technique, whether it is feasible to fulfil these terms of reference by drafting a single instrument, or whether it is preferable to draft two instruments (such as a convention and a protocol thereto). In the latter case these two instruments shall be drafted so as to form a coherent whole.

17 Recommendation Rec(2002)5 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the protection of women against violence, which deals exclusively with violence against women, lists the following examples of violence occurring in the family or domestic unit: physical and mental aggression, emotional and psychological abuse, rape and sexual abuse, incest, rape between spouses, regular or occasional partners and cohabitants, crimes committed in the name of honour, female genital and sexual mutilation and other traditional practices harmful to women, such as forced marriages.


 Top

 

  Related Documents
 
   Meetings