Ministers’ Deputies

    Decisions

    CM/Del/Dec(2012)1134     17 February 2012



    1134th meeting, 15-16 February 2012

    Decisions adopted



    CONTENTS

    Page

    List of those present 6

    Introduction 9

    1. General questions

    1.1 Adoption of the agenda 9

    1.2 Preparation of forthcoming meetings+

    1.3 Dialogue with the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General 9

    1.4 Report of the Bureau 9

    1.5 Exchange of views with Mrs Deborah Bergamini, Chair of the North-South Centre (Item withdrawn)

    1.6 Draft revised guidelines for the reform and modernisation of the Committee's working methods 10

    1.7 European Social Charter –

    Preparation of items relating to the European Social Charter by a rapporteur group 10

    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 11

    . Republic of Moldova

    b. Other questions +

    - Statement by the Representative of the European Union

    2.2 Situation in Cyprus2

    2.3 17th session of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Local and

    Regional Government (Kyiv, 3-4 November 2011) – Report by the Secretary General 11

    3. Parliamentary Assembly

    3.1 1st part of the 2012 Session (Strasbourg, 23-27 January 2012) – Texts adopted 12

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

    a. Written Question No. 611 by Mrs Taktakishvili: “Elections in the Russian Federation” 13

    b. Written Question No. 612 by Mr Gabashvili: “Council of Europe and commitments by Russia” 14

    4. Human rights

    4.1 United Nations – Exchange of views (human rights questions) with experts from capitals +

    4.2 European Social Charter – Governmental Committee of the European Social Charter

    a. Abridged report concerning Conclusions XIX-3 (2010) of the European Social Charter 14

    b. Abridged report concerning Conclusions 2010 of the European Social Charter (revised) 15

    Page

    4.3 “More women in economic and social decision-making bodies” –

    Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1977 (2011) 15

    4.4 European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) –

    Abridged report of the 56th plenary meeting (Strasbourg, 6-9 December 2011) 15

    4.5 Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities –

    Election of an expert to the list of experts eligible to serve on the Advisory Committee –

    Candidates in respect of Latvia 16

    4.6 “Strengthening torture prevention mechanisms in Europe” –

    Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1968 (2011) 16

    5. Media

    5.1 Steering Committee on Media and New Communication Services (CDMC)

    a. Abridged report of the 15th meeting (Strasbourg, 29 November – 2 December 2011) 16

    b. European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG) 16

    c. Draft Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on Public Service Media Governance 17

    d. Draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)… of the Committee of Ministers to member States on public service media governance 17

    8. Youth and sport

    8.1 Advisory Council on Youth (CCJ) – Composition for the period 2012-2013 17

    10. Legal questions

    10.1 Draft Council of Europe Strategy for the Rights of the Child (2012-2015) 18

    11. Administration and logistics

    11.1 Regulations for secondments to the Council of Europe – Draft Resolution 19

    APPENDICES

    APPENDIX 1 1134th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies

    (Item 1.1) (Strasbourg, 15 (10 a.m.) – 16 (10 a.m.) February 2012)

    Agenda 20

    APPENDIX 2 Reply to Written Question No. 611 by Ms Taktakishvili on the
    (Item 3.2a) “Elections in the Russian Federation” 24

    APPENDIX 3 Resolution CM/ResChS(2012)1

    (Item 4.2a) on the implementation of the European Social Charter

    (Conclusions XIX-3 (2010), provisions related to “Labour rights”) 25

    APPENDIX 4 Resolution CM/ResChS(2012)2

    (Item 4.2b) on the implementation of the European Social Charter (revised)

    (Conclusions 2010, provisions related to “Labour rights”) 26

    APPENDIX 5 Reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1977 (2011) on

    (Item 4.3) “More women in economic and social decision-making bodies” 27

    Page

    APPENDIX 6 Resolution CM/ResCMN(2012)4

    (Item 4.5) Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities –

    Election of an expert to the list of experts eligible to serve on the Advisory
    Committee in respect of Latvia 28

    APPENDIX 7 Reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1968 (2011) on

    (Item 4.6) “Strengthening torture prevention mechanisms in Europe” 29

APPENDIX 8 Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on Public Service
(Item 5.1c) Media Governance 30

    APPENDIX 9 Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)1

    (Item 5.1d) of the Committee of Ministers to member States

    on public service media governance 33

    APPENDIX 10 Resolution CM/Res(2012)2

    (Item 11.1) establishing Regulations for secondments to the Council of Europe 45

    The 1134th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies opened on 15 February 2012 at 10.00 a.m. and continued on 16 February 2012 at 10.00 a.m. under the chairmanship of Ms E. Fuller, Deputy for the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom.

    PRESENT

    ALBANIA

    Ms M. Gega, Vice- Chairperson

    Mr F. Peni

    Mr D. Koreshi

    ANDORRA

    Mr J. Dallerès

    Mr A. Jordi Tomàs

    Ms R. Solà Amat

    ARMENIA

    Mr A. Papikyan

    Mr S. Kartashyan

    Ms V. Melikyan

    Ms I. Beglaryan

    AUSTRIA

    Mr T. Hajnoczi

    Mr W.-L. Strohmayer

    AZERBAIJAN

    Mr A. Mammadov

    Mr J. Mirzayev

    Mr A. Gunashov

    Mr E. Aslanov

    BELGIUM

    Mr A. Cools

    BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

    Mr Z. Martinović

    Ms M. Muharemagić

    Mr B. Babić

    BULGARIA

    Mr A. Tehov

    Mr A. Ananiev

    Mr M. Bozhkov

    CROATIA

    Ms A. Djamić

    Ms L. Glavaš Kovačić

    Mr I. Mintas

    CYPRUS

    Ms T. Constantinidou

    Mr S. Hatziyiannis

    Mr T. Pittakis

    CZECH REPUBLIC

    Mr T. Boček

    Mr M. Bouček

    DENMARK

    Mr C. von Barnekow

    Mr H. Svoldgaard

    ESTONIA

    Ms G. Rennel

    Ms K. Tikenberg

    Mr P. Pedak

    FINLAND

    Mr P. Hyvönen

    Ms L. Liira

    FRANCE

    Mr L. Dominati

    Mr P. Ray

    Ms M. Bilocq

    Mr F. Liétout

    GEORGIA

    Mr M. Jgenti

    Mr I. Giviashvili

    Ms A. Doborjginidze

    GERMANY

    Mr H. Haupt

    Mr J. Holzenberger

    Mr M. Klinger

    GREECE

    Mr A. Dendoulis

    Ms M. Solomou

    Mr T. Zafeirakos

    HUNGARY

    Mr F. Robák

    Mr V. Garai

    Ms A. Tóth-Ferenci

    ICELAND

    Mr J.L. Logason

    IRELAND

    Mr P. Gunning

    Mr R. Scannell

    Mr J. Moloney

    Mr D. Chiheb

    ITALY

    Mr G. Cavagna

    LATVIA

    Ms A. Liepina

    LIECHTENSTEIN

    Mr D. Ospelt

    LITHUANIA

    Mr G. Šerkšnys

    Ms U. Matulevičiené

    LUXEMBOURG

    Mr R. Mayer

    Ms A. Kayser-Attuil

    MALTA

    Mr J. Licari

    Mr A. Ghigo

    REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

    Ms T. Pârvu

    Ms V. Agrici

    Ms L. Ilieş

    Mr A. Paladuta

    MONACO

    Mrs C. Gastaud

    MONTENEGRO

    Ms A. Vukadinović

    Ms D. Markovic

    NETHERLANDS

    Ms E. Berends

    Ms K. Adhin

    NORWAY

    Mr P. Wille

    Ms K. Hefre

    Mr J. Høvik

    POLAND

    Ms U. Gacek

    Mr J. Grabowski

    Mr R. Drzazga

    Ms E. Suchożebrska

    PORTUGAL

    Mr P. Neves Pocinho

    Mr L. Sequeira

    ROMANIA

    Mr S. Stoian

    Mr C. Urse

    Ms M.-I. Musteata

    Ms M. Marin

    Mr D. Dumitrache

    Mr G. Buliga

    RUSSIAN FEDERATION

    Mr I. Kapyrin

    Mr I. Podolskiy

    Mr V. Ermakov

    Mr V. Nevzorov

    Mr I. Zakharov

    Mr I. Maltsev

    Mr E. Ryzhkin

    Ms M. Kostyanaya

    Mr D. Rykovskov

    Mr K. Kosorukov

    Mr A. Muratov

    SAN MARINO

    Ms B. Para

    Ms M. Bovi

    SERBIA

    Ms D. Filipovic

    Mr V. Lazovic

    Ms V. Radonjic-Rakic

    Ms J. Backovic

    SLOVAK REPUBLIC

    Ms L. Erdelská

    Mr M. Babicz

    SLOVENIA

    Mr D. Bergant

    Ms B. Sušnic

    SPAIN

    Mr F. Alvargonzález

    Mr P. Jiménez Nacher

    Mr P. Desportes

    SWEDEN

    Mr C.-H. Ehrenkrona

    Ms A. Lundkvist

    Ms F. Tamas-Hermelin

    SWITZERLAND

    Mr C.-E. Held

    Mr B. Gubler

    Ms B. Schaer

    “THE FORMER

    YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC

    OF MACEDONIA”

    TURKEY

    Mr R. E. Soysal

    Ms N. Erdem-Ari

    Mr C. Kahyaoğlu

    Mr U. Acar

    Ms S. Özaydin

    Mr E. Türesin

    Mr T. Ok

    Mr Y. Yeşilada

    UKRAINE

    Mr M. Tochytskyi

    Mr A. Nadzhos

    Mr D. Podolskyi

    Mr S. Shevchuk

    Ms O. Petrenko

    Ms S. Pereverten

    UNITED KINGDOM

    Ms E. Fuller, Chairperson

    Ms K. Jones

    Mr S. Kelly

    Ms M. Williams

    Ms J. Kelly

    *

    * *

    EUROPEAN UNION

    Ms L. Pavan-Woolfe

    Ms K. Markovová

    Mr L.P. Tarin Martin

    *

    * *

    CANADA

    HOLY SEE

    Mgr A. Giordano

    Mgr S. Ćosić

    JAPAN

    Mr H. Karube

    Mr T. Kikuchi

    Mr H. Gunji

    MEXICO

    Ms L. Madero

    Mr A. Martinez Peralta

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

    Mr E. Reade

    Introduction

    At the start of the meeting, the Chair welcomed Ambassador Theodora Constantinidou, Permanent Representative of Cyprus, Mr Emin Aslanov, Deputy to the Permanent Representative of Azerbaijan, and Mr Marcel Babicz, Deputy to the Permanent Representative of the Slovak Republic. She wished them a pleasant stay in Strasbourg and a very successful mission within the Committee.

    Item 1.1

    Adoption of the agenda

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. agreed to add the following sub-item to the agenda of their present meeting:

 

2.1bis

Current political questions

b. Other questions

- Statement by the Representative of the European Union

    2. taking into account the decision above, adopted the agenda of their 1134th meeting, as it appears at Appendix 1 to the present volume of Decisions.

    Item 1.3

    Dialogue with the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General
    (SG/Com(2012)1134)

    Decision

    The Deputies took note of the communication of the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General (SG/Com(2012)1134) and the exchange of views under this item.

    Item 1.4

    Report of the Bureau
    (CM/Bur/Del(2012)4)

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. approved the Bureau’s recommendations with regard to the agendas of their 1134th (15-16 February 2012) and 1135th (22 February 2012) meetings, as they appear in the appendix to the Bureau report;

    2. agreed to start their 1137th meeting (24 March 2012) at 9.30 a.m.;

    3. approved the Bureau’s recommendation to hold an exchange of views with the President of the European Court of Human Rights, Sir Nicolas Bratza, at their 1135th meeting;

    4. approved the Bureau’s recommendation to hold an exchange of views with the new Governor of the Council of Europe Development Bank, Dr Rolf Wenzel, at their 1138th meeting (28 March 2012);

    5. entrusted the position of Chair of the Rapporteur Group on External Relations (GR-EXT) to Ambassador Laurent Dominati, Permanent Representative of France;

    6. approved the Bureau’s recommendation that Ambassador Arif Mammadov, Permanent Representative of Azerbaijan, in his capacity as Chair of the Rapporteur Group on Education, Culture, Sport, Youth and Environment (GR-C), represent the Committee of Ministers at the 12th Council of Europe Conference of Sport Ministers (15 March 2012, Belgrade, Serbia);

    7. took note of the report of the meeting of the Bureau of 14 February 2012 (document CM/Bur/Del(2012)4) as a whole.

    Item 1.6

    Draft revised guidelines for the reform and modernisation of the Committee's working methods

    (CM(2011)96 prov7)

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. approved the revised guidelines for the reform and modernisation of the Committee's working methods, as they appear in document CM(2011)96 final;

    2. instructed the Secretariat to compile the various reference texts governing their working methods into one single clear and user friendly handbook;

    3. instructed the GT-REF.INST to consider possible further amendments to their working methods on the basis of concrete and targeted proposals to be submitted before 15 April 2012.

    Item 1.7

    European Social Charter –
    Preparation of items relating to the European Social Charter by a rapporteur group

    (GR-H(2012)CB2)

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. agreed to task their Rapporteur Group on Social and Health Questions (GR-SOC) with the preparation of items relating to the European Social Charter (decisions to be taken under the Charter’s collective complaints’ system and under the reporting system and related issues) for a trial period of six months;

    2. agreed to evaluate their decision under 1 above at the end of this trial period.

    Item 2.1bis

    Current political questions

    a. Activities for the development and consolidation of democratic stability

    - Republic of Moldova

    (GR-DEM(2012)CB2, GR-DEM(2012)CB2 corr and DGII/Inf(2012)1)

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. took note of the synopsis of the GR-DEM meeting held on 2 February 2012 (documents GR-DEM(2012)CB2 and GR-DEM(2012)CB2 corr);

    Concerning the Republic of Moldova

    In the light of the report presented by the Secretariat on the confidence-building measures across the river Nistru/Dniester (document DGII/Inf(2012)1): 

    2. welcomed the successful implementation of the confidence-building measures across the river Nistru/Dniester in the course of 2011;

    3. approved the programme for confidence-building measures across the river Nistru/Dniester in 2012 and 2013;

    4. instructed the Secretariat to ensure their implementation and to report to the Rapporteur Group on Democracy (GR-DEM) in due course;

    5. invited the Secretariat to explore the possibility to develop this programme, with a view to submitting possible proposals for additional activities for consideration by the GR-DEM;

    6. also instructed the Secretariat to explore ways of supplementing the funding currently available for the above-mentioned programme and invited member States to consider granting voluntary contributions to this end;

    7. invited the GR-DEM to follow the implementation of the programme.

    Item 2.3

    17th session of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Local and Regional Government (Kyiv, 3-4 November 2011) – Report by the Secretary General

    This item was postponed.

    Item 3.1

    Parliamentary Assembly –

    1st part of the 2012 Session (Strasbourg, 23-27 January 2012) –

    Texts adopted

    (2012 Session (Provisional Compendium of texts adopted))

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. concerning Recommendation 1990 (2012) – “The right of everyone to take part in cultural life”

      a. agreed to communicate it to the Joint Council on Youth (CMJ), the Steering Committee for Culture, Heritage and Landscape (CDCPP), the Steering Committee for Educational Policy and Practice (CDPPE), the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH) (the Gender Equality Commission (GEC)) and the Executive Committee of the North-South Centre, for information and possible comments by 30 April 2012;

      b. in the light of possible comments, invited their Rapporteur Group on Education, Culture, Sport, Youth and Environment (GR-C) to prepare a draft reply for adoption at one of their forthcoming meetings;

    ***

    2. concerning Recommendation 1991 (2012) – “Guaranteeing the authority and effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights”

      a. agreed to communicate it to the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH) for information and possible comments by 30 April 2012;

      b. in the light of possible comments, invited their Working Party on the Reform of the Human Rights Convention system (GT-REF.ECHR) to prepare a draft reply for adoption at one of their forthcoming meetings;

    ***

    3. concerning Recommendation 1992 (2012) – “The situation in Belarus”

      invited their Rapporteur Group on Democracy (GR-DEM) to prepare a draft reply for adoption at one of their forthcoming meetings;

    ***

    4. concerning Recommendation 1993 (2012) – “Protecting human rights and dignity by taking into account previously expressed wishes of patients”

      a. agreed to communicate it to the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ), the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH) (Committee on Bioethics (DH-BIO)) and the European Committee for Social Cohesion (CDCS), for information and possible comments by 30 April 2012;

      b. 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;

    *

    * *

    5. took note of the following resolutions:

    Resolution 1855 (2012) – “The functioning of democratic institutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina”

    Resolution 1856 (2012) – “Guaranteeing the authority and effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights”

    Resolution 1857 (2012) – “The situation in Belarus”

    Resolution 1858 (2012) – “The honouring of obligations and commitments by Serbia”

    Resolution 1859 (2012) – “Protecting human rights and dignity by taking into account previously expressed wishes of patients”

    Resolution 1860 (2012) – “Advancing women’s rights worldwide”

    Resolution 1861 (2012) – “Promoting the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence”

    Resolution 1862 (2012) – “The functioning of democratic institutions in Ukraine”

    Resolution 1863 (2012) – “Enforced population transfer as a human rights violation”

    Resolution 1864 (2012) – “Demographic trends in Europe: turning challenges into opportunities”

    *

    * *

    6. adopted the following reply to the texts adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly at the 1st part of the 2012 Session (Strasbourg, 23-27 January 2012):

    “The Committee of Ministers took note of Recommendations 1990 to 1993 (2012) and Resolutions 1855 to 1864 (2012) adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly at its 1st part of the 2012 Session (Strasbourg, 23-27 January 2012).

    The Committee of Ministers entrusted Recommendations 1990 to 1993 (2012) to the competent organs and/or committees of experts for information or comments and to Rapporteur Groups 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. 611 by Ms Taktakishvili: “Elections in the Russian Federation”

    Decision

    The Deputies adopted the reply to Written Question No. 611 by Ms Taktakishvili on the “Elections in the Russian Federation”, as it appears at Appendix 2 to the present volume of Decisions.3

    Item 3.2b

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

    b. Written Question No. 612 by Mr Gabashvili: “Council of Europe and commitments by Russia”

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. instructed the Secretariat to prepare a draft reply to Written Question No. 612 in light of the discussions which are to take place within their Rapporteur Group on Democracy (GR-DEM);

    2. agreed to resume consideration of this question at one of their forthcoming meetings.

    Item 4.2a

    European Social Charter – Governmental Committee of the European Social Charter

    a. Abridged report concerning Conclusions XIX-3 (2010) of the European Social Charter

    (CM(2012)11)

    Decision

    In accordance with Article 29 of the European Social Charter and the decision adopted by the Committee of Ministers at the 541st meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies (June 1995, item 4.6), the Deputies, in their composition restricted to the representatives of the Contracting Parties to the European Social Charter or to the Revised Charter in the Committee of Ministers,4 on the basis of the abridged report of the Governmental Committee of the European Social Charter concerning Conclusions XIX-3 (2010) (CM(2012)11), adopted Resolution CM/ResChS(2012)1 on the application of the European Social Charter (Conclusions XIX-3 (2010), provisions related to “Labour rights”), as it appears at Appendix 3 to the present volume of Decisions.

    Item 4.2b

    European Social Charter – Governmental Committee of the European Social Charter

    b. Abridged report concerning Conclusions 2010 of the European Social Charter (revised)

    (CM(2012)12)

    Decision

    In accordance with Article 29 of the European Social Charter and the decision adopted by the Committee of Ministers at the 541st meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies (June 1995, item 4.6), the Deputies, in their composition restricted to the representatives of the Contracting Parties to the European Social Charter or to the Revised Charter in the Committee of Ministers,5 on the basis of the abridged report of the Governmental Committee concerning Conclusions 2010 of the European Social Charter (revised) (CM(2012)12), adopted Resolution CM/ResChS(2012)2 on the application of the European Social Charter (revised) (Conclusions 2010, provisions related to “Labour rights”), as it appears at Appendix 4 to the present volume of Decisions.

    Item 4.3

    “More women in economic and social decision-making bodies” –
    Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1977 (2011)

    (Parliamentary Assembly REC_1977 (2011), CM/AS(2012)Rec1977 prov)

    Decision

    The Deputies adopted the reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1977 (2011) on “More women in economic and social decision-making bodies”, as it appears at Appendix 5 to the present volume of Decisions.6

    Item 4.4

    European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) –
    Abridged report of the 56th plenary meeting (Strasbourg, 6-9 December 2011)

    (CM(2012)2, CM(2012)2 add1, CM(2012)2 add2, CM(2012)2 add3, CM(2012)2 add4, CM(2012)2 add5, CM(2012)2 add6, CM(2012)2 add7, CM(2012)2 add8 and CM(2012)2 add9)

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. transmitted to the governments concerned ECRI’s country-by-country reports on Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Montenegro and Ukraine;

    2. transmitted to the governments concerned ECRI’s conclusions on the implementation of the recommendations subject to interim follow-up it had addressed to Bulgaria, Hungary and Norway;

    3. took note of the abridged report of ECRI’s 56th meeting as a whole, as it appears in document CM(2012)2.

    Item 4.5

    Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities –
    Election of an expert to the list of experts eligible to serve on the Advisory Committee –
    Candidates in respect of Latvia

    (CM(2012)3)

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. having proceeded to election in conformity with Rules 8 and 9 of Resolution Res(97)10, declared elected to the list of experts eligible to serve on the Advisory Committee:

    Mr Reinis Āboltiņš, in respect of Latvia;

    2. consequently adopted Resolution CM/ResCMN(2012)4, as it appears at Appendix 6 to the present volume of Decisions.

    Item 4.6

    “Strengthening torture prevention mechanisms in Europe” –
    Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1968 (2011)

    (Parliamentary Assembly REC_1968 (2011) and CM/AS(2012)Rec1968 prov3)

    Decision

    The Deputies adopted the reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1968 (2011) on “Strengthening torture prevention mechanisms in Europe”, as it appears at Appendix 7 to the present volume of Decisions.7

    Item 5.1a,b

    Steering Committee on the Media and New Communication Services (CDMC)

    a. Abridged report of the 15th meeting (29 November – 2 December 2011)
    b. European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG)

    (CM(2012)13)

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. took note of comments of the CDMC on Parliamentary Assembly recommendations, as they appear at Appendices 4 to 6 to document CM(2012)13;

    2. agreed to support and encourage the active participation of all Council of Europe member States in relevant local, national, regional and global Internet governance dialogue, including in particular the European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG);

    3. called on member States to protect and encourage respect for rights and freedoms in cyberspace;

    4. in the light of the decisions 1 to 3 above, took note of the abridged report of the 15th meeting of the CDMC, as it appears in document CM(2012)13, as a whole.

    Item 5.1c,d

    Steering Committee on the Media and New Communication Services (CDMC)

    c. Draft Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on Public Service Media Governance
    d. Draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)… of the Committee of Ministers to member States on public service media governance

    (CM(2012)14 rev, CM(2012)15 rev)

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. adopted the Declaration by the Committee of Ministers on Public Service Media Governance, as it appears at Appendix 8 to the present volume of Decisions;

    2. adopted Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)1 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on public service media governance, as it appears at Appendix 9 to the present volume of Decisions.

    Item 8.1

    Advisory Council on Youth (CCJ) – Composition for the period 2012-2013

    (CM(2012)9)

    Decision

    The Deputies designated the following thirty members of the Advisory Council on Youth (CCJ) for a period of two years (2012-2013):

    a. Twenty representatives proposed by the European Youth Forum:

    International Non-Governmental Youth Organisations (13)

    Ms Ilaria ESPOSITO World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts (WAGGGS);
    Mr Gerard TOSSERAMS European Alliance of Young Men’s Christian Associations (YMCA);
    Mr Benedikt SCHONECK International Union of Socialist Youth (IUSY);
    Mr Bartolomeo BUFI Youth for Exchange and Understanding (YEU);
    Ms Ivica ALPEZA Organising Bureau of European School Student Unions (OBESSU);
    Ms Mia MAGAZIN Democrat Youth Community of Europe (DEMYC);
    Mr Alexandru COICA World Organisation of the Scout Movement (Europe office) (WOSM);
    Mr Kyrylo IVLIEV Youth and Environment Europe (YEE);
    Ms Lea BENIRSCHKE Erasmus Student Network (ESN);

    Mr Jürgen WESTERMANN International Movement of Catholic Agricultural and Rural Youth (MIJARC);
    Mr Mihai-Paul FLORAN International Young Catholic College Students (JECI-MIEC) ;
    Mr Thomas LEYS International Federation of Liberal Youth (IFLRY);
    Mr Ruben LOODTS Young European Federalists (JEF).

    National Youth Councils (7)

    Ms Maria PASCHOU National Youth Council of Greece;
    Ms Simona MURSEC National Youth Council of Slovenia;
    Ms Ausrine ARMONAITE Council of Lithuanian Youth Organisations;
    Mr Matti NIEMI Finnish Youth Co-operation Allianssi;
    Mr Vladimir KHARCHENKO National Youth Council of Russia;
    Mr Giovanni CORBO National Youth Forum of Italy;
    Ms Unnur HJALMARSDOTTIR Icelandic Youth Council.

    b. Ten representatives proposed by the Secretary General:

    Mr Micah GRZYWNOWICZ Association of Nordic and Pol-Balt LGBTQ Student Organisations
    (ANSO – Sweden);
    Ms Adina CALAFATEANU Centre for Sustainable Community Development (CSCD – Romania);
    Mr Hakan KAHRAMAN Community Volunteers Foundation (TOG – Turkey);
    Ms Shannon STEPHENS European Youth for Action (EYFA – The Netherlands);
    Ms Muna MOHAMED Forum of European Muslim Youth and Student Organisations
    (FEMYSO – Belgium);
    Mr Adem ADEMI Forum of European Roma Young People (FERYP – France)
    Ms Hranush SHAHNAZARYAN Loesje International (Loesje Armenia);
    Mr Sergio BELFOR UNITED for Intercultural Action (UNITED – The Netherlands);
    Ms Hyakueth WAKO Voices of Young Refugees in Europe (VYRE – Montenegro);

    Ms Anna DOBROVOLSKAYA Youth Human Rights Movement (YHRM – Russian Federation).

    Item 10.1

    Draft Council of Europe Strategy for the Rights of the Child (2012-2015)
    (CM(2011)171 prov4, CM(2011)171 addprov4)

    Decisions

    The Deputies

    1. adopted the Council of Europe Strategy for the Rights of the Child (2012-2015), as it appears in document CM(2011)171 final, and took note of the non-exhaustive list of activities contained in the Action Plan for the implementation of the Strategy (document CM(2011)171 final);

    2. invited their Thematic Co-ordinator on Children (TC-ENF) to follow closely the implementation of the Strategy;

    3. instructed the Secretariat to provide it, by the end of May 2012, with alternative options for the setting-up of the Children’s Rights Commission referred to in the Strategy, also taking into consideration the role of the national focal points;

    4. invited the Secretary General to provide a mid-term report to the Ministers’ Deputies on its implementation by 31 January 2014.

    Item 11.1

    Regulations for secondments to the Council of Europe –

    Draft Resolution
    (CM(2011)120 corr5)

    Decision

    The Deputies adopted Resolution CM/Res(2012)2 establishing Regulations for secondments to the Council of Europe, as it appears at Appendix 10 to the present volume of Decisions.

    Appendix 1

    (Item 1.1)

    1134 meeting of the Ministers' Deputies
    (Strasbourg, 15 (10 a.m.) – 16 (10 a.m.) February 2012)

    Agenda

1.

General questions

     

1.1

Adoption of the agenda

   
   

(CM/Del/OJ(2012)1134)

     

1.2

Preparation of forthcoming meetings

     

1.3

Dialogue with the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General

     
   

(SG/Com(2012)1134)

     

1.4

Report of the Bureau

     
   

(CM/Bur/Del(2012)4)

     

1.5

Exchange of views with Mrs Deborah Bergamini, Chair of the North-South Centre

(Item withdrawn)

     

1.6

Draft revised guidelines for the reform and modernisation of the Committee's working methods
(Item prepared by the GT-REF.INST on 12.1.2012 and by written procedure)

     
   

(CM(2011)96 prov7, DD(2012)164 and DD(2012)166)
(CM/Notes/1134/1.6 of 10.2.2012)

     

1.7

European Social Charter –
Preparation of items relating to the European Social Charter by a rapporteur group
(Item prepared by the GR-H)

     
   

(GR-H(2012)CB2)
(CM/Notes/1134/1.7 of 27.1.2012)

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, CM(2009)PV add2, SG/Inf(2009)10, SG/Inf(2009)5 add, SG/Inf(2009)9, CM/AS(2009)Quest572, DD(2009)447, SG/Inf(2009)15 final, SG/Inf(2009)5 add2, Parliamentary Assembly REC_1846 (2008) and CM/AS(2009)Rec1846 final, Parliamentary Assembly REC_1857 (2009) and CM/AS(2009)Rec1857 final, CM(2009)164, Parliamentary Assembly REC_1869 (2009) and CM/AS(2010)Rec1869 final, DD(2010)71, DD(2010)95, SG/Inf(2010)7, SG/Inf(2010)8, DD(2010)238, CM/Del/Dec(2010)1090/2.1, SG/Inf(2010)19, DD(2010)559, SG/Inf(2011)8 and SG/Inf(2011)24)

     

2.1bis

Current political questions

   
 

a. Activities for the development and consolidation of democratic stability
(Item prepared by the GR-DEM on 2.2.2012)

   
 

. Republic of Moldova

     
   

(GR-DEM(2012)CB2 and DGII/Inf(2012)1)
(CM/Notes/1134/2.1bis of 9.2.2012)

     
 

b. Other questions

 

- Statement by the Representative of the European Union

2.2

Situation in Cyprus

   

2.3

17th session of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers responsible for Local and Regional Government (Kyiv, 3-4 November 2011) – Report by the Secretary General

(Item postponed)

   

(CM(2011)178)

     

3.

Assemblée parlementaire

     

3.1

1st part of the 2012 Session (Strasbourg, 23-27 January 2012) – Texts adopted

   
   

(2012 Session (Provisional Compendium of texts adopted))
(CM/Notes/1134/3.1 of 3.2.2012)

     

3.2

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

   
 

a. Written Question No. 611 by Mrs Taktakishvili: “Elections in the Russian Federation”

   
   

(CM/Notes/1134/3.2a of 2.2.2012)

     
 

b. Written Question No. 612 by Mr Gabashvili: “Council of Europe and commitments by Russia”

   
   

(CM/Notes/1134/3.2b of 2.2.2012)

     

4.

Human rights

     

4.1

United Nations –
Exchange of views (human rights questions) with experts from capitals (16 February 2012)

   
   

(CM/Del/Dec(2012)1131/4.2, SecCM/OUT(2012)7, CM/Inf(2012)5 and CM/Inf(2012)6)
(CM/Notes/1134/4.1 of 3.2.2012)

4.2

European Social Charter – Governmental Committee of the European Social Charter

   
 

a. Abridged report concerning Conclusions XIX-3 (2010) of the European Social Charter

     
 

b. Abridged report concerning Conclusions 2010 of the European Social Charter (revised)

   
 

(Item prepared by the GR-H on 7.2.2012)

     
   

(CM(2012)11 and CM(2012)12)
(CM/Notes/1134/4.2 of 8.2.2012)

     

4.3

“More women in economic and social decision-making bodies” –
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1977 (2011)
(Item prepared by the TC-ET and the GR-H on 7.2.2012)

   
   

(Parliamentary Assembly REC_1977 (2011) and CM/AS(2012)Rec1977 prov)
(CM/Notes/1134/4.3 of 8.2.2012)

     

4.4

European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) –
Abridged report of the 56th plenary meeting (Strasbourg, 6-9 December 2011)

   
   

(CM(2012)2, CM(2012)2 add1, CM(2012)2 add2, CM(2012)2 add3, CM(2012)2 add4,
CM(2012)2 add5, CM(2012)2 add5corr, CM(2012)2 add6, CM(2012)2 add7, CM(2012)2 add8 and CM(2012)2 add9)
(CM/Notes/1134/4.4 of 3.2.2012)

     

4.5

Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities –
Election of an expert to the list of experts eligible to serve on the Advisory Committee –
Candidates in respect of Latvia
(Item prepared by the GR-H on 7.2.2012)

   
   

(CM(2012)3)
(CM/Notes/1134/4.5 of 8.2.2012)

     

4.6

“Strengthening torture prevention mechanisms in Europe” –
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1968 (2011)
(Item prepared by the GR-H on 7.2.2012)

   
   

(Parliamentary Assembly REC_1968 (2011) and CM/AS(2012)Rec1968 prov3)
(CM/Notes/1134/4.6 of 8.2.2012)

     

5.

Media

   

5.1

Steering Committee on Media and New Communication Services (CDMC)

   
 

a. Abridged report of the 15th meeting (Strasbourg, 29 November – 2 December 2011)

   
 

b. European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG)

   
   

(CM(2012)13)

     
 

c. Draft Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on Public Service Media Governance

   
   

(CM(2012)14 rev)

     
 

d. Draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)… of the Committee of Ministers to member States on public service media governance

   
   

(CM(2012)15 rev)

     
 

(Item prepared by the GR-H on 7.2.2012)

   
   

(CM/Notes/1134/5.1 of 9.2.2012)

8.

Youth and sport

   

8.1

Advisory Council on Youth (CCJ) – Composition for the period 2012-2013

(Item prepared by the GR-C on 31.1.2012)

   
   

(CM(2012)9)
(CM/Notes/1134/8.1 of 1.2.2012)

     

10.

Legal questions

   

10.1

Draft Council of Europe Strategy for the Rights of the Child (2012-2015)
(Item prepared by the TC-ENF on 8.2.2012)

   
   

(CM(2011)171 prov4 and CM(2011)171 addprov4)

(CM/Notes/1134/10.1 of 13.2.2012)

     

11.

Administration and logistics

   

11.1

Regulations for secondments to the Council of Europe – Draft Resolution

(Item prepared by the GR-PBA)

   
   

(CM(2011)120 corr5)

(CM/Notes/1134/11.1 of 10.2.2012)

     

13.

Any other business

    Appendix 2

    (Item 3.2a)

    Reply to Written Question No. 611 by Ms Taktakishvili on the
    “Elections in the Russian Federation”

    (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 February 2012
    at the 1134th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

    In reply to Written Question No. 611, the Committee of Ministers informs the Honourable Parliamentarian that the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers has no plans to visit Russia with the Secretary General right after the Presidential elections in March 2012.

    Appendix 3

    (Item 4.2a)

    Resolution CM/ResChS(2012)1
    on the implementation of the European Social Charter
    (Conclusions XIX-3 (2010), provisions related to “Labour rights”)

    (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 February 2012
    at the 1134th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

    The Committee of Ministers,8

    Referring to the European Social Charter, in particular to the provisions of Part IV thereof;

    Having regard to Article 29 of the Charter;

    Considering the reports on the European Social Charter submitted by the governments of Austria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Latvia, the Netherlands (Antilles), Poland, Slovak Republic, Spain, “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” and the United Kingdom;

    Having regard to the failure to submit a report in due time by Hungary, Luxembourg and the Netherlands (Aruba);

    Considering Conclusions XIX-3 (2010) of the European Committee of Social Rights appointed under Article 25 of the Charter;

    Following the proposal made by the Governmental Committee established under Article 27 of the Charter,

    Recommends that governments take account, in an appropriate manner, of all the various observations made in Conclusions XIX-3 (2010) of the European Committee of Social Rights and in the report of the Governmental Committee.

    Appendix 4

    (Item 4.2b)

    Resolution CM/ResChS(2012)2

    on the implementation of the European Social Charter (revised)

    (Conclusions 2010, provisions related to “Labour rights”)

    (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 February 2012
    at the 1134th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

    The Committee of Ministers,9

    Referring to the European Social Charter (revised), in particular to the provisions of Part IV thereof;

    Having regard to Article 29 of the Charter;

    Considering the reports on the European Social Charter (revised) submitted by the governments of Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Italy, Lithuania, Malta, Republic of Moldova, Netherlands (Kingdom in Europe), Norway, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Sweden, Turkey and Ukraine;

    Having regard to the failure to submit a report in due time by Finland and Ireland;

    Considering Conclusions 2010 of the European Committee of Social Rights appointed under Article 25 of the Charter;

    Following the proposal made by the Governmental Committee established under Article 27 of the Charter,

    Recommends that governments take account, in an appropriate manner, of all the various observations made in Conclusions 2010 of the European Committee of Social Rights and in the report of the Governmental Committee.

    Appendix 5

    (Item 4.3)

    Reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1977 (2011) on
    “More women in economic and social decision-making bodies”

    (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 February 2012
    at the 1134th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

    1. The Committee of Ministers has taken due note of Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1977 (2011) on “More women in economic and social decision-making bodies”.

    2. It has decided to take account of the Action Plan “Taking up the challenge of the achievement of de jure and de facto gender equality” in the Council of Europe’s work in this field. In this context, it also refers to the Declaration: “Making gender equality a reality”, adopted at the 119th Ministerial Session in Madrid in May 2009.

    3. The Committee of Ministers considers that the European Social Charter has a major contribution to make in the efforts to improve women's economic and social situation as several Charter provisions have a direct and crucial bearing on the position of women in employment. The full implementation of these provisions by the member States would help to achieve equality between women and men in employment, thereby also creating better conditions for the increased representation of women in decision-making positions.

    4. Recommendation Rec(2003)3 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on balanced participation of women and men in political and public decision making advocates a series of principles and measures which also cover the specific question raised by the Assembly. The Steering Committee for Equality between Women and Men (CDEG) has regularly monitored the implementation of this recommendation and has just recently incorporated the issue of women’s participation in economic decision making into the process together with collecting examples of good practice. The Gender Equality Commission will continue to review the implementation of the relevant recommendations, as well as of the 2009 Madrid Declaration and the 2010 Baku Action Plan.

    5. The Assembly proposes that two recommendations by the Committee of Ministers to the member States should be prepared, one on equal opportunities for women and men in access to employment and promotions, and the other on equal opportunities and the reconciliation of private and professional life. The Committee of Ministers considers it more advisable, before beginning to draw up new guidelines, to assess the follow-up on the implementation of existing instruments – particularly Recommendation Rec(96)5 on reconciling work and family life, which already proposes a number of measures for equal opportunities and balance between private and professional life – in order to draw the necessary conclusions and consider ways of improving their implementation.

    Appendix 6

    (Item 4.5)

    Resolution CM/ResCMN(2012)4

    Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities –

    Election of an expert to the list of experts eligible to serve on the Advisory Committee

    in respect of Latvia

    (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 February 2012
    at the 1134th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

    The Committee of Ministers,

    By virtue of Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and of Rule 9 of Resolution Res(97)10 (Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers on the monitoring arrangements under Articles 24 to 26 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities),

    Considering that the Government of Latvia ratified the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities on 6 June 2005, and that the Convention entered into force in respect of Latvia on 1 October 2005;

    Having regard to the nominations of candidates, in accordance with Rule 8 of Resolution Res(97)10, by Latvia by letter on 6 December 2011;

    Having proceeded to election by secret ballot,

    Declare elected to the list of experts eligible to serve on the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities on 15 February 2012:

    - Mr Reinis Āboltiņš, in respect of Latvia.

    Appendix 7

    (Item 4.6)

    Reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1968 (2011) on
    “Strengthening torture prevention mechanisms in Europe”

    (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 February 2012
    at the 1134th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

    1. The Committee of Ministers notes with interest Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1968 (2011) on “Strengthening torture prevention mechanisms in Europe”, which it has communicated to the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) and to the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) for information and possible comments. The Committee of Ministers takes this opportunity to underline the importance which it attaches to the work of the CPT and its independence.

    2. With respect to the concrete proposals made in the Assembly’s recommendation, the Committee of Ministers sees no need to amend the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the Convention) as suggested by the Assembly, i.e. in order to permit i) the election of members of the CPT by the Parliamentary Assembly, and ii) the automatic publication of CPT visit reports and of the responses of the Parties concerned, subject to the possibility of a State to request postponement of publication for up to six months after transmission of the visit report.

    3. As regards the election process, the key requirement is that the procedures in place ensure that persons elected to the Committee fully meet the requirements set out in Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee of Ministers agrees that Assembly Resolution 1540 (2007) contains many elements that could be useful for member States in the conception of their national selection procedures (public calls for candidatures, consultations on candidates with both State and non-governmental bodies, and interviews with shortlisted candidates to assess their qualifications, motivation and availability, as well as language skills). The goal should be that all persons placed on lists of candidates forwarded by the national delegations in the Assembly are capable of making an effective contribution to the CPT’s activities. The Committee of Ministers also notes that the stipulation in paragraph 4 of Assembly Resolution 1808 (2011), that “If it is considered that a candidate may have a conflict of interest, the person in question shall be required to undertake in writing that, if elected, he or she will relinquish the functions that may give rise to such a conflict”, has already been put into practice in some cases.

    4. The Committee of Ministers agrees that the timely publication of the CPT’s visit reports can only increase the impact of the Committee’s work. This allows other relevant organisations to contribute to the process of taking forward the implementation of recommendations contained in a report and enables the CPT to participate directly in public debate on the issues involved. Consequently, authorising publication of visit reports can be seen as an important means of facilitating co-operation with the CPT. However, the Committee of Ministers has some misgivings as regards the proposal to amend the Convention and provide for the automatic publication of the Committee’s visit reports no later than six months after their transmission. Firstly, there may be exceptional situations when the rapid publication of a visit report would do more harm than good. The Committee of Ministers is also concerned that weakening the principle of confidentiality by providing for the automatic publication of the visit reports could upset the balance in the Convention’s provisions, to the detriment of the CPT’s future co-operation with States. Instead of envisaging an amendment of the Convention, the Committee of Ministers repeats the message it delivered on 6 February 2002, when it “encouraged all Parties to the Convention to authorise publication, at the earliest opportunity, of all CPT visit reports and of their responses”.

    5. The Assembly finally invites the Committee of Ministers to place on its agenda and discuss as a matter of urgency any public statement adopted by the CPT under Article 10 of the Convention. The Committee of Ministers agrees with the Assembly that when a public statement is made under Article 10, the exceptional character of this measure should merit that such a step be taken. The Committee of Ministers notes, however, that a public statement should above all be thoroughly examined by the national authorities concerned.

    Appendix 8

    (Item 5.1c)

    Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on Public Service Media Governance

    (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 February 2012

    at the 1134th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

    I. As regards public service media in a democratic society

    1. Freedom of expression, and free and pluralist media, are indispensable to genuine democracy. Media are the most important tool for freedom of expression in the public sphere, enabling people to exercise the right to seek and receive information. Council of Europe member States have undertaken to secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the fundamental right to freedom of expression and information, in accordance with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 5).

    2. In a democratic society, people should be able to understand, contribute to and participate in the decision-making processes which concern them. Public service media play a fundamental part in sustaining this right through their mandate to ensure, via the relevant modes of delivery, universal access to impartial news and a diverse range of high-quality content which meets the needs of the wide variety of audiences.

    3. The primary mission of public service media is to support general interest objectives such as social progress, public awareness of democratic processes, intercultural understanding and societal integration, and to achieve this through a varied and high-quality mix of content. As an important public source of unbiased information and diverse political opinions, public service media must remain independent from political or economic interference and achieve high editorial standards of impartiality, objectivity and fairness.

    4. Public service media should be subject to constant public scrutiny and be accountable and transparent when performing their functions as they have the obligation to serve the public in all its diversity, including minority communities that would not be served in a purely commercial market. Public service media must also take into account the gender equality perspective in terms of both content and staff.

    5. Editorially independent public service media help counterbalance the risk of misuse of power in a situation of excessive concentration of media, services and platforms.

    6. For some public service media organisations, the transition from State broadcaster to public service media has yet to be completed. The challenge is both to secure independence from the State and also to earn the trust of the audience by using that independence to exercise genuine editorial autonomy. For all public service media, new skills and approaches will be needed to complement, or in some cases replace, long-established ways of functioning.

    7. The Committee of Ministers has always provided unfaltering support for public service media, calling on member States to secure the necessary legal, political and organisational conditions for their independence and to provide adequate means for their functioning. In keeping with this, it has adopted Recommendation Rec(96)10 on the guarantee of the independence of public service broadcasting and Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)3 on the remit of public service media in the information society, as well as the Declaration on protecting the role of the media in democracy in the context of media concentration (31 January 2007), and has expressed its support for Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1878 (2009) on “The funding of public service broadcasting” (reply of 26 April 2010).

    II. As regards public service media in a new media environment

    8. Media across Europe face rapid and profound change and, as a result, public service media find themselves in an unprecedented period of transition. The emergence of digital media brings about certain challenges to media as they strive to provide multimedia, interactive and non-linear services.

    9. The development of new information and communication technologies gives public service media an unrivalled opportunity to fulfil their remit in new and more effective ways, allowing them to offer better-targeted and more interactive content and services. It also allows public service media to enter into a meaningful dialogue with their audiences, engaging them as stakeholders, participants and co-creators, rather than as simply passive recipients. This is particularly relevant to services aimed at youth, whose use of Internet-delivered, mobile and participatory media is significant. Successful adaptation and adoption of new platforms assist public service media in fulfilling additional purposes within their public service remit.

    III. As regards the need for an effective new system of governance

    10. A robust and forward-looking system of governance is essential for the successful transition of public service media to a new media environment. Public service media need to show that their own governance systems subject any decision to proper scrutiny, while ensuring that any external oversight (by governments or independent regulators) do not undermine the organisation’s independence. As is also the case for public service media undergoing a transition from State to public institutions, it is essential to define the necessary levels of independence from the State. This should be balanced by accountability to a wide range of stakeholders and coupled with a culture that is open to new ideas and which demonstrates high levels of professional integrity. For public service media seeking to justify continuing levels of public funding, it is important to demonstrate that funding decisions and resource allocations are focused entirely on meeting public needs of all citizens, irrespective of their gender and background, and that the organisation’s assessment of its future requirements is rooted in its public service remit.

    11. An appropriate system of governance is a decisive factor in the ability of both member States and the public service media they support to meet these and future challenges, and take full advantage of the new opportunities offered by digital technologies and platforms. The effective governance of public service media, to the equal benefit of all members of the public, is an important element and a specific example of the larger concept of good governance in democratic society. In order to fulfil its role, governance should expand beyond the narrow understanding of the concept as related to appointment procedures and the composition of boards of public service media. Governance should therefore be broadly defined so as to include:

    – the legal frameworks through which the State ensures an appropriate balance between the independence and accountability of public service media;
    – the regulations and practices through which public service media ensure that their processes and culture are the most appropriate to fulfil their remit and best serve the public interest;
    – an active and meaningful dialogue with its wider stakeholders including new levels of interaction, engagement and participation.

    12. A properly functioning governance system depends on a number of conditions. These include the processes through which the support of the key stakeholders – including the State – is secured, the existence of an appropriate level of independence from government or other public and private interests, and the procedural guarantees ensuring that the decisions of public service media are consistent with their remit, are properly taken and fully implemented.

    13. It is of great concern for all member States that public service media governance should be addressed, and where necessary rethought and reconstructed, so as to ensure that public service media can take advantage of the new possibilities to overcome present and future challenges and obstacles.

    14. The Committee of Ministers therefore:

    – declares that the duty of public service media to promote the values of democracy and diversity within and through their content and services remains of utmost importance in the new dynamic media environment. Public service media play a vital role in supporting such non-commercial objectives as social progress, public interest and ability to engage with democratic processes, gender equality, intercultural understanding and societal integration. These can be achieved through a varied and high-quality mix of content and services adhering to the highest professional standards which public service media have offered and will continue to deliver;

    – alerts member States to the risks to pluralism and diversity in the media and, in consequence, to democratic debate and engagement, should the current model which includes public service, commercial and community media not be preserved and if the transitions from State to public service and from broadcasting to public service media are not successfully completed;

    – reiterates member States’ commitment to firmly support the remit, funding, editorial and organisational independence of public service media operating on any relevant platform, and underlines the importance of this support which has not always been uniformly thorough and sufficiently timely;

    – encourages the establishment of dialogue at different levels with all stakeholders, including civil society and the public at large.

    Appendix 9

    (Item 5.1d)

    Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)1

    of the Committee of Ministers to member States

    on public service media governance

    (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 February 2012
    at the 1134th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

    Freedom of expression and the right to seek and receive information are fundamental for the functioning of a genuine democracy. As stated in the Committee of Ministers’ Declaration on public service media governance, adopted on the same day, media are the most important tool for freedom of expression in the public sphere, enabling people to exercise the right to seek and receive information.

    Public service media play a specific role with regard to the respect of this right and the provision of a varied and high-quality content, contributing to the reinforcement of democracy and social cohesion, and promoting intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding.

    Public service media need to operate and evolve within a sustainable governance framework which secures both the necessary editorial independence and public accountability. In the above-mentioned declaration, the Committee of Ministers alerts to the risks to pluralism and diversity in the media and, in consequence, to democratic debate and commitment, if the current model, which includes public service, commercial and community media, is not preserved.

    The transition from State to public service and from broadcasting to public service media has yet to be successfully completed in many Council of Europe member States. Rethinking and reconstructing their governance systems will be a decisive factor in public service media organisations’ ability to address this and other challenges they are confronted with.

    The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15.b of the Statute of the Council of Europe, recommends that member States further strengthen and, where necessary, enhance the appropriate legal and financial environment, including the external governance arrangements for public service media organisations, by drawing inspiration from the appended guiding principles, thereby guaranteeing the independence and sustainable development of public service media and empowering them to take up the challenges of technological progress and editorial competition, in particular by:

    - including, where they have not already done so, provisions in their legislation/regulations for the remit of public service media, particularly with regard to the new communication services, thereby enabling these media to make full use of their potential and, especially, promote broader democratic, social and cultural participation, inter alia, with the help of new interactive technologies;

    - encouraging public service media and providing them with the necessary resources and tools to review and develop their internal governance arrangements, regardless of where they stand in the transformation into fully-fledged public service media, by drawing inspiration from the appended guiding principles;

    - encouraging public service media to co-operate actively on a pan-European scale and to exchange ideas on best practice and best content, in order to create a vibrant European public sphere and foster democratic citizenship within the wider Europe;

    - ensuring wide distribution of the specifically designed guiding principles, appended hereto, to the public authorities in order to allow public service media to reinforce their essential position in the media system and improve their functioning in the digital environment to fulfil their democratic mission;

    - encouraging the public authorities to support and promote the implementation of these guiding principles.

    Appendix to Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)1

    Guiding principles for public service media governance

    I. The context: challenges facing public service media

    1. Public service media10 across Europe face an unprecedented range of significant challenges.

    The challenge of securing the right level of independence from the State

    2. The first priority for public service media must be to ensure that their culture, policies, processes and programming reflect and ensure editorial and operational independence.

    3. For some organisations, the shift is from being the State broadcaster – with strong links to the government, and weaker accountability to the wider audience or civil society – to becoming genuine public service media, with editorial and operational independence from the State. For many public service media organisations, this shift requires a significant raising of quality standards and editorial ambition.

    4. However, even in countries with more strongly developed and deeply rooted systems of public service broadcasting, the relationship between the public service media and the government, which sets their overall remit and secures their funding, is one that needs constant vigilance. Recent changes in certain member States to the funding arrangements or decisions to use the licence fee to fund services delivered by commercial media have once more focused attention on the relationship between public service media and the State.

    The challenge of transformation from public service broadcasting to public service media

    5. The traditional model of public service broadcasting is increasingly impacted by the emergence of alternative ways of creating and distributing content and engaging with audiences. While broadcasting relies on linear transmission of programmes, emerging digital media give traditional broadcasters, and other content creators and providers, new and exciting possibilities of reaching audiences with a greater degree of interactivity and personalised choice. Public service media organisations must therefore look afresh at their public purpose and determine, within their remit, the correct balance of broadcast and other services that will best match audience need with available resources.

    6. Public service media organisations across Europe are responding at a different pace, depending on the maturity of their market and the extent to which their resources and the freedom they enjoy within their remit permit them to diversify. But even where public service media organisations are less well placed to take advantage of new means of production and distribution, they are nevertheless aware that their audiences are increasingly accustomed to greater levels of choice and control over the services available to them from others in the market. It therefore follows that, no matter at what speed, or to what depth, public service media organisations need nevertheless to be actively encouraged to respond positively and effectively to these changing audience expectations.

    The challenge of justifying the “dual system” in today’s market

    7. All public service media organisations now operate within a wider, potentially global, market, characterised by increasing competition and the disruptive power of new business models which are now competing directly for revenue with previously established players. Against this background, apparently settled systems of funding for public service broadcasting are under increasing scrutiny, such that all public service media organisations, and not only those already offering a more diverse range of services, are challenged to justify both the level and the allocation of their spending.

    8. The requirements imposed upon European Union member States to put in place some form of ex-ante test before public service media organisations can launch new services is an example of the increased scrutiny that these organisations are now subject to, driven not least by the determination of market players to ensure that public funds are not used to stifle legitimate private enterprises. Public service media organisations therefore have to be responsive in how they define their goals, how they justify them within their overall remit, and how they define the public benefit they will be able to deliver.

    The wider context of public service provision

    9. Public service media organisations are typically institutions with obligations to meet a wide range of content objectives, funded primarily by public financing (even if supplemented by commercially generated revenue).

    10. Consideration is sometimes given to the possibility of a “distributed” approach to public funding where the public service media might share public resources with other media companies who enter into some form of contract with the State to deliver specific content outcomes. In certain circumstances, such approaches might be appropriate, but they are currently remote from the experience of most countries, and are therefore not specifically addressed in these guiding principles.

    11. The guiding principles are designed to operate at the level of the public service media themselves, but they could also provide some guidance in cases where a public service media organisation may be charged with distributing public funding to a range of other organisations.

    Conclusion

    12. Taken together, these challenges – technological, societal, cultural and financial – explain why established policy concerning public service media should be re-assessed, and also why public service media organisations themselves can no longer take comfort in easy assumptions about their role and status.

    II. The role of governance in meeting these challenges

    13. It is vitally important that member States review, and where necessary strengthen, the external governance arrangements for public service media designed to guarantee editorial and operational independence as well as appropriate funding. This should be accompanied by a matching obligation for public service media themselves to assess the adequacy of their internal governance arrangements. The current guiding principles are significantly based on best practice in governance, and should help both governments and public service media organisations to identify and determine their own response to needs.

    A new framework for governance

    14. Traditional definitions of governance are insufficient to take full account of the new and more complex media environment. Narrow definitions typically focus on the precise legal and administrative steps taken to ensure the appropriate composition of boards and managing structures. They tend to concentrate on the detail of appointment procedures, the terms of tenure and permissible grounds for dismissal, conflicts of interest and methods by which the organisation will be held accountable. While these issues are all of fundamental importance in a proper and well-functioning governance system, they must be placed in a broader context.

    15. A properly functioning governance system will be the way in which the organisation:

    - defines, within the public service remit, the vision and overall purpose of the organisation and ensures that it is best equipped to fulfil its remit;
    - sets and monitors delivery of its objectives;
    - secures the endorsement of its key stakeholders;
    - secures and protects the appropriate level of independence;
    - structures its relations with stakeholders;
    - ensures that the management priorities are properly aligned with the organisation’s overall purpose;
    - ensures that its decisions are consistent with its remit, are appropriately informed and fully followed through.

    16. This framework recognises:

    - that all public service media organisations face the same need for robust governance systems;
    - that this need is universal and is not dependent on the degree of development within individual countries or markets;
    - that good governance is a self-reinforcing system – and that action taken in any part of the governance system should therefore serve to influence and reinforce best practice across the whole system;
    - that both governments and public service media organisations themselves should review their own governance system and determine where change and improvement are needed.

    17. An interlocking set of criteria that public service media organisations can use to assess their system of governance is proposed in the current guiding principles. The criteria are designed to operate at every level within the organisation: they relate to the highest decision-making level of the media organisation, but they are also directly related to structures, processes and behaviours operating throughout the organisation. They relate respectively to the principles of independence, accountability, effective management, transparency and openness as well as responsiveness and responsibility.

    This approach is set out in Figure 1 below.

    Figure 1

    Tier 1 – Structures



    Tier 2 – Management


    Tier 3 – Culture


    Overview of the model

    18. The model operates at three levels:

    A. The first tier is concerned with the formal structures and processes that, between them, make the essential features of the governance framework:

    a. the steps taken to secure independence – the primary goal of any public service media governance framework, since without independence the public service media cannot be guaranteed to operate effectively or deliver against its wide set of public purposes and maintain its focus as purely to serve the public interest;

    b. the accountability framework – the way in which a public service media organisation identifies its stakeholders and the mechanisms through which it is held to account, and which ensures that the independence of the organisation is focused on meeting the needs of its stakeholders.

    These two aspects of the organisation effectively balance each other: the independence granted to the public service media to protect them from undue influence from the State or any other party is balanced by the public service media organisations’ obligation to be fully accountable to the State and to its many stakeholders.

    B. The second tier deals with the effective management of the organisation: the processes by which the goals and purposes of the organisation are turned into practical and outcome-oriented activities. In this context, a key goal is to ensure that the resources and capacity of the organisation are effectively brought to bear upon the changing demands of the audience and able to respond effectively to innovation in content and delivery. This bears on the choice of staff and calls for minority and gender representativeness at all levels of the workforce.

    C. The third tier comprises interdependent systems and behaviours which, taken together, define the operational culture of the organisation. The following systems and behaviours are likely to enhance the capacity of the organisation to connect with audiences and stakeholders, to win political support and to ensure that it is best placed to identify audience need, understand the scope for change and be best placed to implement it:

    a. transparency: the ways in which the public service media make their processes and decisions open to audiences and stakeholders, thus supporting the formal approaches to accountability;

    b. openness: the extent to which the public service media are open to new ways to engage and interact with audiences and explore new partnerships with other organisations;

    c. responsiveness: the ways in which the public service media respond to audience and stakeholder feedback, and integrate the results of an active and meaningful dialogue with audiences into their future approach;

    d. responsibility: the ways in which public service media guarantee high journalistic and other production standards and set the criteria by which their output should be judged.

    19. The guiding principles contain characteristics, rather than precise mechanisms, which will inevitably vary from organisation to organisation. These variations will be driven by different legal systems and by different political cultures, and will reflect different social systems and levels of engagement by groups in society. But the outcome of such a framework would be a system of governance that is outward focused, robust, capable of taking well-informed and future facing decisions, and one that is best placed to command the support of all relevant stakeholders.

    20. The following sections deal with these characteristics, describing their importance and their contribution to the wider system of governance.

    Tier 1 – Structures

    Independence

    21. Independence is the core requirement for every public service media organisation. Without demonstrable independence of action and initiative, from government as well as from any other vested interest or institution, public service media organisations cannot sustain their credibility and will lose (or never gain) popular support as a forum for carrying forward the national debate and holding power to account.

    22. Securing and safeguarding independence is therefore a primary role of any framework of public service media governance, and this is why independence has been at the heart of all of the relevant Council of Europe standards.

    23. The fundamental requirement is that the editorial autonomy of the public service media should be guaranteed, and the structures necessary to ensure independence of editorial action clearly and unambiguously set out.

    The guiding principles can be summarised under three key headings:

    Regulatory and policy framework

    24. Public service media organisations operate within a statutory and policy framework which sets out the responsibilities of the different parties involved: government, parliament, regulatory authorities (including auditing and other inspectorates) and the public service media themselves, as well as any specified engagement from designated third parties (civil society, market representatives, etc.).

    25. The framework should, regardless of its configuration, be such that:

    - there is explicit recognition of the scope and reach of the public service media remit, and absolute clarity about whose role it is to set it and review it;
    - the policy goals for public intervention are clearly and consistently laid out, including unambiguous support for the principles of freedom of expression and journalistic enquiry;
    - there is clarity about the responsibility of the regulator in relation to the public service media;
    - the regulator is required to operate openly and transparently in respect of regulatory action, and is itself guaranteed independence from the State in its decision-making powers.

    Funding

    26. While it inevitably remains the State’s responsibility to set both the method and the level of funding, it is nevertheless imperative that the system should be so designed that:

    - it cannot be used to exert editorial influence or threaten institutional autonomy – either of which would undermine the operational independence of the public service media;
    - the public service media is consulted over the level of funding required to meet their mission and purposes, and their views are taken into account when setting the level of funding;
    - the funding provided is adequate to meet the agreed role and remit of the public service media, including offering sufficient security for the future as to allow reasonable future planning;
    - the process for deciding the level of funding should not be able to interfere with the public service media’s editorial autonomy.

    Appointments

    27. As public institutions, it is legitimate for the State to be involved in the appointment of the highest supervisory or decision-making authority within the public service media. To avoid doubt, this involvement should not normally extend to appointments at executive or editorial management level. Furthermore, any such appointment processes should be designed so that:

    - there are clear criteria for the appointments that are limited, and directly related, to the role and remit of the public service media;
    - the appointments cannot be used to exert political or other influence over the operation of the public service media;
    - the appointments are made for a specified term that can only be shortened in limited and legally defined circumstances – which should not include differences over editorial positions or decisions;

    - in line with Council of Europe standards, representation of men and women in decision-making bodies should be balanced.11

    Accountability

    28. Public service media are ultimately, and fundamentally, accountable to the public. However, the public is composed of an increasingly complex range of institutional and other stakeholders:

    - the public as represented by the State – through government and parliament, as well as other independent regulatory and supervisory bodies;
    - the public directly as audience and as citizens and participants;
    - the public as represented by civil society groups as well as wider communities of interest.

    29. The precise nature of this accountability will necessarily differ between countries, determined by the political systems, cultural and civil society traditions and the wider development of the market. It is not the purpose, however, of the guiding principles to define exactly to whom public service media organisations should be held accountable or the precise mechanisms for doing so. Instead, the guiding principles set out the characteristics that any system of accountability should display if it is to give both the public service media and its stakeholders confidence that it is fit for the purpose.

    30. Any accountability framework should offer clear answers to four questions:

    - Accountable to whom? Public service media organisations should operate within a framework that clearly establishes the bodies to whom they are to be held accountable. They should also identify those organisations and representatives to whom, even if they are not covered by a formal relationship, public service media organisations should nevertheless be prepared to give account of themselves: this should include, inter alia, youth and women’s organisations, minority and ethnic groups, unions and other specific interest groups. Public service media organisations should include their own staff among the groups to whom they should consider themselves accountable.

    - Accountable for what? The accountability framework should make clear the public purposes and wider responsibilities for which the public service media are to be held accountable. These will include the purposes set out in the remit, but may also go wider to embrace issues of value for money and efficiency. Where the public service media are charged with collaboration with other market players – for instance, through requirements to commission work from independent third parties, or through their wider responsibility to share its research and development or training – these responsibilities should be clearly set out. The outcomes for which the public service media will be held accountable should also be clearly set out.

    - Held accountable how? The framework should set out clearly the information that the public service media are required to supply, and the access that they should offer to their stakeholders.

    - Held accountable when? In addition to establishing a clear timetable for annual reports and other audit processes, the framework should set out the terms on which the public service media are required to consult with stakeholders ahead of their key decisions.

    Tier 2 – Management

    Effective management

    31. The purpose of the guiding principles is not to attempt to explain how public service media organisations should manage themselves. Nevertheless, if the focus is on ensuring that public service media organisations have a governance framework that can meet the challenges outlined in the first section of the guiding principles, then it is essential that the way they manage themselves and their resources should be focused on how to achieve change and should allow them to adapt to rapidly transforming conditions.

    32. Above all, it is essential that the public service media organisation can feel confident that the decisions it takes have been properly considered and weighed, with the appropriate mix of skills and perspectives brought to bear and the right level of engagement across the organisation.

    Internal management and resource allocation

    33. Public service media organisations, coming from a tradition of stable schedules and linear services, comprising more or less fixed volumes of a known asset (namely their programmes), have a tendency to become fixed in their internal management systems. Audiences’ demands for different kinds of content, delivered in different ways and with far greater levels of interactivity and engagement will require public service media organisations to re-examine their organisation and processes. If they are to thrive and prosper in the future, they need to be able not only to sustain their existing services, but also to develop new ways of meeting and serving their audiences, which are increasingly used to accessing and participating in media in more direct and interactive ways:

    - they must use the new opportunities afforded by the Internet and other new and more interactive distribution platforms to find new ways of expressing enduring public service goals reinterpreting them as technology enables wider user choice;

    - they must strive to use their brand to enable all parts of society to participate in the richness of content and experience that new media make available, thus giving real energy and drive to a media literacy and digital empowerment agenda which, in the long run, will contribute to a better functioning of democratic societies.

    34. Public service media organisations should therefore be prepared:

    - to innovate in the way they allocate resources to allow for new media or different ways of serving audiences to receive the necessary levels of funding and management time and focus;

    - to ensure that all staff resources are managed in such a way that the changing needs of audiences are being met, including through: making progress towards a more balanced participation of women and men in decision-making processes; providing training opportunities that enhance the participation of staff in the delivery of services (including gender-awareness and cultural diversity training at all levels of the organisation and for all media professionals); and establishing appropriately transparent recruitment policies that leads to the creation of a diverse workforce with the necessary skills to produce and deliver services that meet the changing patterns of consumer behaviour;

    - to focus on how best to meet senior management challenges, recognising that the best editorial leaders may not have learnt the most appropriate general and strategic management skills during their editorial career, and devising ways to fill these gaps either through training or specific external recruitment; and also to recognise the value of getting fresh thinking into the senior management team by more diverse recruitment at the top;

    - to ensure that workplace practices and policies are in place to secure that all employees in the organisation can work in an environment free from discrimination and harassment.

    Tier 3 – Culture – Transparency and openness, responsiveness and responsibility

    35. The formal structures described above are those that comprise any governance system: the legal framework, the protection for independence and the way that operational decisions are aligned with the overall remit. These need to be given life within the organisation by the way that it chooses to operate: the systems it has for engaging with audiences, the behaviours it inculcates across its staff; in short, its culture.

    36. In future, public service media organisations will need to adopt a new set of relationships with the public, relationships that are based on the linked values of transparency (how the public service media let the audience see what they are doing) and openness (how the public service media opens up to new ideas and influences, while seeking new partners and creative opportunities to work collaboratively).

    37. Public service media organisations will also need to demonstrate high levels of both responsiveness (actively engaging in debate and dialogue with their audience); and responsibility (creating and reinforcing a culture of journalistic and production standards against which stakeholders are invited to judge them).

    38. These characteristics should also underpin the way in which the public service media deal internally with their own staff and suppliers.

    Transparency

    39. The section on “accountability” describes the range of structured relationships that public service media organisations need if they are to ensure that their decisions are appropriately informed and their actions properly supported. This will be importantly underpinning if public service media organisations also operate to a high degree of transparency. Among other things, this implies that:

    - groups who may not have been formally consulted on the policy and content can nevertheless feel engaged with the way in which the public service media operate;
    - operational decisions that have not been subject to formal consultation are nevertheless more likely to be open to public scrutiny; and
    - the information that the public service media rely on to take their decisions will be widely available and understood.

    40. Among the approaches to transparency that public service media could consider are the following:

    - making financial and audience performance information available on a more regular and open basis;
    - opening up the work of the board and key decision-making bodies by publishing agendas and minutes where possible;
    - disseminating the results of thorough scrutiny of content (including news, education, entertainment and, if applicable, advertising) reflecting its diversity objective.

    Openness

    41. While “transparency” ensures that the operation of the public service media themselves is more widely understood, public service media also need to be receptive to new ideas and influences. This is particularly important at times when, as now, the nature of audience engagement and the ways in which media services are reaching them is changing so rapidly.

    42. Public service media must therefore operate with a culture in which, not only their content, but also their whole operation reflects an openness based upon participation and engagement, whilst maintaining the requisite quality and standards within the scope of the public service remit, actively seeking out new ideas and approaches to identifying and serving public need.

    43. This could typically include:

    - exploiting the widest range of opportunities to meet and engage with audiences, especially using interactivity and participation, and not confined to broadcast or distributed content, but also making use of engagement beyond the content itself;
    - exploring the widest diversity of sources, representing a broad spectrum of views consulted in the stories covered;
    - exploring ways to involve the audience more in shaping the editorial offer (including youth, women, minorities and other groups), not least by using new technologies to seek richer opportunities for access;
    - exploring the widest possible range of partnerships with other providers – public and commercial – to deliver the greatest benefit to the audience;
    - exploring ways in which content created using public funds can be made available and put to enduring use by future audiences;
    - exploring, in particular, ways in which younger audiences can be attracted to public service content by using a wider range of techniques and ways of interacting with them, while undertaking steps to ensure that senior members of the audience are not excluded from the opportunities offered by new media.

    Responsiveness

    44. As well as making themselves as transparent as possible and open to new ideas and influences, public service media need to be responsive to the concerns and issues raised by audiences and other stakeholders.

    45. At the highest levels, these may well be picked up through the formal processes and structures of accountability, but on a day-to-day basis, public service media organisations need to demonstrate that they are actively seeking the views and opinions of their stakeholders, and are committed to responding and engaging with them.

    46. To this end, public service media organisations will need to consider how they can:

    - develop channels of communication with audiences and stakeholders that are immediate, unmediated and consistently and universally available;
    - encourage active debate with a broad range of audiences, reflecting the diversity in society, about editorial standards and journalistic ethics through structured as well as informal processes;
    - develop ways in which audience feedback can be demonstrably integrated into editorial decision making.

    Responsibility

    47. Public service media organisations occupy a uniquely privileged place in public debate and democratic processes. Their independence is prized precisely because of the expectation that public service media organisations will reflect and promote open and public debate, to underpin wider democratic goals. Public service media organisations need to be confident that they can hold power to account on behalf of the public whose interests they serve without political interference.

    48. However, this role carries with it great responsibility, and public service media should ensure that they operate to the highest editorial and journalistic standards.

    49. These will be fostered by the interplay of culture and codes:

    - public service media should actively promote a culture of responsible, tough journalism that seeks the truth. There should be a culture of rigorous enquiry and debate, characterised by even-handed treatment of conflicting views and an appetite for internal challenge and review;
    - this will be reinforced and protected by the existence of clear and publicly available codes of journalistic and production conduct, which will set out the rules that the public service media intend to operate, and against which their output should be judged;
    - the codes of conduct should include the highest diversity and equality standards;
    - public service media should ensure that there are clear and widely publicised processes of internal editorial control and the handling of complaints, with the duties and responsibilities of the editor-in-chief clearly set out;
    - these codes should not be limited to journalistic behaviour, but should also embrace wider issues of editorial standards and ethical behaviour.

    Appendix 10

    (Item 11.1)

    Resolution CM/Res(2012)2

    establishing Regulations for secondments to the Council of Europe

    (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 February 2012
    at the 1134th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

    The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 16 of the Statute of the Council of Europe,

    Considering that secondments to the Council of Europe entail advantages for the Organisation, for member States and for other international organisations, in particular through the cross-fertilisation of ideas and the presence on a limited-term basis of expertise;

    Considering that persons seconded to the Council of Europe should have the tools to manage projects effectively and the right to exercise hierarchical authority within well-defined limits;

    Considering that Resolution Res(2003)5 on the Regulations on the secondment of international or national, regional or local officials to the Council of Europe should be amended;

    On the proposal of the Secretary General, the Staff Committee having been consulted in accordance with Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Regulations on Staff Participation (Appendix I to the Staff Regulations);

    Resolves as follows:

    I. General rules

    1.a. The present Regulations lay down the conditions for the secondment of international, national, regional and local officials, as well as other persons sent by member States in accordance with their national legislation, to the Council of Europe (“seconded officials”).

    b. Excluded from the scope of the present Regulations are:

      i. staff members recruited to the Council of Europe pursuant to Article 12, paragraph 3, of the Staff Regulations (whereby the Secretary General seeks to secure the services, for a limited time period, of civil servants and specialists);

      ii. experts called for brief consultations who are covered by the rules concerning travel and subsistence expenses of government experts and other persons chargeable to the Council of Europe budgets;

      iii. persons outside the Secretariat who are hired as consultants.

    c. The rules and regulations applicable to staff shall apply to seconded officials only as specified hereafter. These Regulations may not be interpreted as conferring the status of staff members on seconded officials.

    2. Seconded officials shall remain in employment or be paid by the member State from which he/she is seconded throughout the period of secondment, and shall receive no salary from the Council of Europe.

    3. National seconded officials shall be nationals of a member State of the Council of Europe and, in case of partial agreements, nationals of a member State of the Council of Europe or of the partial agreement concerned.12

    4. Seconded officials may work in any field where their services are deemed necessary, provided that there is no conflict with the interests of the Organisation. While on secondment with the Council of Europe, seconded officials shall neither receive nor seek instructions in connection with the performance of their duties from any government, authority, organisation or person outside the Council of Europe.

    II. Implementation of secondment to the Organisation

    5. The Secretary General shall communicate to the Permanent Representatives of the member States or, as the case may be, to the Heads of international organisations, information as to the number and type of officials that the Council of Europe would like to have seconded to it, asking them if they wish to make detailed proposals in writing.

    6. On the basis of the proposals received from the Permanent Representatives of the member States or, as the case may be, the Heads of international organisations and within the appropriations allocated under the annual budget, the Secretary General shall make the requisite appointments, which shall take account of the specific needs of the Council of Europe departments, the qualifications of the candidates and the need to ensure a gender balance, as well as a balanced geographical representation between the member States.

    7.a. Secondment shall be effected by an agreement between the Secretary General and the Permanent Representative of the member State concerned or the Head of the international organisation. Upon a request of the Permanent Representative of the member State concerned, such an agreement may also be concluded with a person duly authorised under the national law of that State to represent the sending authority or institution. This agreement shall specify the following matters:

    - the grade and function occupied by the seconded official in his or her employment in the administration to which he or she belongs (Article 14 below);

    - the period of secondment (Articles 8 and 9 below);

    - the duties to be entrusted to the seconded official and the Council of Europe official to whom he or she shall be answerable (Articles 11, 12 and 13 below);

    - the place of residence of the seconded official prior to his or her secondment to the Council of Europe and the organisational and geographical details of the assignment at the Council of Europe (Articles 20 and 23 below);

    - a certificate of social and medical cover (Article 16 b below);

    - whether the relocation allowance and/or related expenses shall be paid to the seconded official or, alternatively, a stipulation that the relocation allowance and/or related expenses are not to be paid (Article 23 below);

    - an assurance that the employer concerned as well as the seconded official have been informed of, and accept, the conditions provided for under the present Regulations;

    - any special agreement varying the seconded official's obligation to serve on a full-time basis (Article 10 below).

    b. The Council of Europe shall provide advice and information to the seconded official as regards the practical arrangements in relation to his/her secondment to the Organisation.

    III. Period of secondment

    8. The period of secondment must be at least four months and not more than two years. Secondment may be prolonged or renewed, but the total duration of one secondment period for any one seconded official may not exceed three years, except in cases of derogation granted by the Secretary General.

    9. Any secondment shall terminate if the seconded official is no longer in employment or paid by the member State from which he/she was seconded.

    10. Seconded officials shall serve on a full-time basis throughout the period of secondment, save in the event of a derogation by the Secretary General.

    IV. Duties to be performed

    11. Seconded officials shall assist the Secretariat of the Council of Europe and carry out the duties entrusted to them in the context of a pre-determined work programme or job description.

    12. a. Seconded officials may enter into commitments on behalf of the Organisation by delegation by the Secretary General or by Heads of the Major Administrative Entities and exercise hierarchical authority to the extent necessary for the purpose of carrying out the duties entrusted to them.

    b. Seconded officials may enter into financial commitments on behalf of the Organisation within the framework of a specific delegation by the Secretary General or by Heads of the Major Administrative Entities.

    13. Seconded officials shall have their performance assessed under the rules and regulations on appraisal at the Council of Europe. Appraisal reports shall be taken into account when deciding upon extension or renewal of the secondment. Seconded officials may conduct appraisals under the rules and regulations on appraisal at the Council of Europe, to the extent that this is necessary for the purpose of any general management tasks entrusted to them.

    V. Qualifications required

    14. Seconded officials must have at least three years’ experience of administrative, advisory or supervisory duties in a grade equivalent to categories A or B4 to B6 at the Council of Europe. They may be asked to undergo specific training if considered necessary by the hierarchical superiors they are answerable to.

    15. Seconded officials must have a thorough knowledge of one of the Council of Europe’s official languages and, where necessary for the performance of their duties, a satisfactory knowledge of the other.

    VI. Social insurance

    16.a The Council of Europe shall not be liable for providing the seconded official and the members of his or her family with social and medical cover.

    b. Prior to the commencement of the period of secondment, the administration in question shall certify to the Council of Europe that throughout the relevant period the administration will guarantee social and medical cover for the seconded official.13

    c. During the period of secondment the seconded official shall be affiliated by the Council of Europe to a private accident insurance scheme.

    VII. Breaks in, or termination of, periods of secondment

    17. The Secretary General may grant breaks in periods of secondment and shall specify the terms applicable. The relocation allowance referred to in Article 23 a of the present Regulations shall not be payable during such breaks. The expenses referred to in Article 23 b and c of the present Regulations shall be covered only if the break is at the Secretary General’s request.

    18. The secondment of an official may be terminated by the Secretary General or the Permanent Representative of the member State or the Head of the international organisation concerned at two month’s prior notice.

    VIII. Obligations of seconded officials

    19. Seconded officials:

    a. shall carry out their duties and conduct themselves solely with the interests of the Council of Europe in mind, and shall refrain from any action which might be prejudicial morally or materially to the Council of Europe;

    b. shall abstain from any action, and in particular any public expression of opinion, which may reflect on their position as a seconded official with the Council of Europe;

    c. shall inform the Head of the Major Administrative Entity to which they are assigned if, in the course of their duties, they are called on to deal with a matter which impinges on their personal interests in a manner which might affect their objectivity;

    d. shall maintain the utmost discretion in respect of facts and information which come to their notice in, or in connection with, the performance of their duties, and may not, without the authorisation of the Secretary General, communicate in any form whatever to an unauthorised person any document or information which is not public; these obligations shall continue after their period of secondment has terminated;

    e. may not, either on their own initiative or in collaboration with others, publish or cause to be published any text relating to the work of the Council of Europe, nor make public statements or deliver lectures on such matters, without obtaining authorisation in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable at the Council of Europe;

    f. shall be bound by the rules and regulations on hierarchical authority, loyalty and integrity, working time, prevention of fraud and corruption, protection of human dignity, secondary activities, management of alcohol-related risks, use of premises and facilities, use of information technology equipment, access to the personal administrative file and mediation applicable at the Council of Europe;

    g. shall be bound by the rules and regulations on appraisal and on financial obligations applicable at the Council of Europe;

    h. the Secretary General may terminate the secondment with one month’s prior notice in case of a violation of the present Regulations, including the rules and regulations applicable at the Council of Europe referred to in the present Regulations.

    20. Seconded officials may be required to reside at their place of assignment or at no greater distance therefrom than is compatible with the proper performance of their duties.

    IX. Leave

    21. a. Seconded officials are entitled to leave in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable to permanent staff members of the Council of Europe. Officials seconded for at least one year shall, in addition, be entitled to travelling time in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable to permanent staff members of the Council of Europe.

    b. Any further entitlements, eventually accruing under the seconded officials’ employment, shall be credited separately by their employer, and shall be used only after the period of secondment has been completed.

    c. Seconded officials shall be required to use their entitlement to leave before the final expiry of their period of secondment.

    22. Seconded officials may be granted special short periods of leave in the same way as permanent staff members of the Council of Europe.

    X. Expenses

    23. Provided that the agreement referred to in Article 7 of the present Regulations stipulates that the seconded official shall be entitled to the relocation allowance and/or related expenses:

    a. Seconded officials shall be entitled, throughout the period of secondment, to a relocation allowance.

    i. For the first two months, the relocation allowance shall be paid on the basis of 88.65% of the single rate of the daily subsistence allowance for Council of Europe staff members on official journeys to Strasbourg. Thereafter, this rate shall be reduced by 50% for seconded officials without family responsibilities and by 30% for other seconded officials.

    ii. The relocation allowance, which is calculated in proportion to the working time, shall be payable monthly in arrears.

    iii. The relocation allowance shall be payable for periods of official journeys, annual leave, special leave and holidays granted by the Council of Europe. Payment of the relocation allowance will, however, be suspended following an absence on account of illness lasting longer than six months.

    iv. The relocation allowance shall be reduced by 75% if the seconded official’s place of residence prior to secondment to the Council of Europe is less than 100 kilometres from the place of assignment.

    b. The travel and subsistence expenses incurred by seconded officials when travelling between the place of residence and the place of assignment on taking up their duties and on completion of their secondment, as well as the corresponding expenses of their dependent family members, if accompanying them to the place of assignment, shall be borne by the Council of Europe on conditions applicable to permanent staff members.

    c. Removal expenses are not refunded by the Council of Europe. However, officials seconded for an initial minimum period of one year shall also be entitled to:

    - either the reimbursement every two months of their travel expenses on the basis of the pex air fare or the first class rail fare (one return fare) between their place of residence prior to secondment and their place of assignment, whichever is the least expensive;

    - or a lump sum corresponding to six times the above-mentioned return fare per year of secondment, or the proportionate part thereof.

    Seconded officials must, at the beginning of the period of secondment, opt for one or other of these entitlements.

    XI. Privileges and Immunities

    24. Article 18, with the exception of paragraph b, of the General Agreement on Privileges and Immunities of 2 September 1949 is applicable to seconded officials.

    XII. Official journeys

    25. Seconded officials may be sent on an official journey only in the context of the duties assigned to them in accordance with Articles 11 of the present Regulations.

    26. Official journey expenses shall be reimbursed to seconded officials in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable to permanent staff members of the Council of Europe.

    XIII. Final clause

    27. The present Regulations may be completed by implementing rules issued by the Secretary General after consultation with the Staff Committee.

    28. This resolution shall enter into force on the date of adoption and supersedes and replaces Resolution Res(2003)5 on Regulations on secondment of international or national, regional or local officials to the Council of Europe.

    29. The provisions of this resolution are applicable to any agreement between the Secretary General and a Permanent Representative of a member State or a Head of an international organisation concluded before the entry into force of this resolution insofar as they were contained in Resolution Res(2003)5. This resolution may be made fully applicable to such agreements by addendum to the agreement.

+ There were no decisions under this item.

2

3

    See also document CM/AS(2012)Quest611 final.

    4

      At the 492nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies in April 1993, the Deputies “agreed unanimously to the introduction of the rule whereby only representatives of those States which have ratified the Charter vote in the Committee of Ministers when the latter acts as a control organ of the application of the Charter”. The States having ratified the European Social Charter or the European Social Charter (revised) are: Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, Turkey, Ukraine and United Kingdom.

      5

        At the 492nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies in April 1993, the Deputies “agreed unanimously to the introduction of the rule whereby only representatives of those States which have ratified the Charter vote in the Committee of Ministers when the latter acts as a control organ of the application of the Charter”. The States having ratified the European Social Charter or the European Social Charter (revised) are: Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, Turkey, Ukraine and United Kingdom.

        6

          See also document CM/AS(2012)Rec1977 final.

          7

            See also document CM/AS(2012)Rec1968 final.

            8

              At the 492nd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies in April 1993, the Deputies “agreed unanimously to the introduction of the rule whereby only representatives of those States which have ratified the Charter vote in the Committee of Ministers when the latter acts as a control organ of the application of the Charter”. The States having ratified the European Social Charter or the European Social Charter (revised) are: Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, Turkey, Ukraine and United Kingdom.

              9

                At the 492nd meeting of Ministers' Deputies in April 1993, the Deputies “agreed unanimously to the introduction of the rule whereby only representatives of those States which have ratified the Charter vote in the Committee of Ministers when the latter acts as a control organ of the application of the Charter”. The States having ratified the European Social Charter or the European Social Charter (revised) are: Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, Turkey, Ukraine and United Kingdom.

                10

                  The use of the term “public service media” throughout these guiding principles reflects the fact that, for all public service broadcasters, the transition to a more diverse range of content and services is both inevitable and welcome, even if it happens at different speeds, and responds to different opportunities in different countries. By adopting “public service media” as its generic term, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has recognised the need for public service broadcasters to embrace these changes: the focus of the guiding principles is to help such institutions embrace the need for change and to deliver on these new goals.

                  11

                    See Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation Rec(2003)3 on balanced participation of women and men in political and public decision making.

                    12

                      In the case of partial agreements, provided that the agreement referred to in Article 7 of the present Regulations stipulates that the seconded official is entitled to the relocation allowance and/or to related expenses, these expenses are at the charge of the budget of the partial agreement concerned.

                      13

                        The seconded official shall certify that any members of his or her family accompanying him or her to his or her Council of Europe duty station benefit from social and medical cover.



 Top

 

  Related Documents
 
   Meetings