Questions  by Ambassador s – Per manent Repr esentatives of Member  States to the CoE  to the candidates for  the post of the Secr etar y Gener al of the Council of Eur ope 

Questions  by Ambassador s – Per manent Repr esentatives of Member  States to the CoE  to the candidates for  the post of the Secr etar y Gener al of the Council of Eur ope 

Questions by Ambassador s – Per manent Repr esentatives of Member States to the CoE to the candidates for the post of the Secr etar y Gener al of the Council of Eur ope ­ Reply by Senator Włodzimier z Cimoszewicz I. How to increase the role of the Council of Europe? 1. How do you envisage the strengthening of the position and authority of the Council of Europe as a leading organization promoting and protecting human rights, democracy and the rule of law in the contemporary international arena? [Azerbaijan] There is a need to strengthen the position of our organisation in the European political landscape and to confirm its unique role as a leading organisation promoting and protecting human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The visibility of the Council of Europe must be increased. In this context the emphasis should be placed on exploiting the Council of Europe added value – its pan­European formula, remarkable achievements of consolidating democracy, impressive number of legal instruments like, in the first place, the European Convention of Human Rights and various monitoring mechanisms. The ECHR, together with corresponding political and legal monitoring mechanisms, makes a difference vis a vis all the other European institutions, that each and every citizen of our States can appreciate. The second key to strengthen the position of the Council of Europe is by raising its political profile. This should be realised through a genuine agreement of Member States at an appropriate political level. Third element which is essential to strengthen the position of the Council of Europe is to increase its credibility. The credibility of the Organisation is based on avoiding double standards in assessing the implementation of Member States’ commitments. Nobody is perfect and accordingly there is no Member State in the Council of Europe who should feel as judge only. All are subject to criticism. I strongly reject any formula which would divide the European family into “teachers” and “pupils”. Fourth element should be better management of resources. We need a critical assessment of the money spent. Better targeted financial and human resources should result in more substantial activities, having more impact without placing additional financial burden on Member States. Fifthly, the co­operation with other organisations should be enhanced. Of particular importance is the relationship with the European Union and the OSCE. The cooperation with the UN should also continue to occupy a special place. The Council of Europe should be made more open to the world.
1 2. Now that the majority is EU members in the Council of Europe, how do you think that this organization could remain a relevant actor in pan­European and international scene? [Turkey] The Council of Europe can and will remain a relevant actor in pan­European and international scene. The expansion of the European Union should not be perceived as a source of threat to the Council of Europe. It may become a source of opportunity. It is definitely not in the interest of the European Union to try to do everything and to solve all the problems on the European agenda. It should seek partnership with the Council of Europe to address some of the key issues. The Council of Europe has its uncontested sphere of competence. This sphere of competence is already recognised by the European Union, for instance in its new initiative – the Easter n Partnership. The Council of Europe has an important role to play to prevent artificial divisions between the EU and non­EU States, in particular those who do not seek the membership in the Union in the foreseeable future. Europe divided between the EU and non­ EU area would be an unfortunate development. Therefore, the Council of Europe’s role becomes so important today. In addition, the Council of Europe provides a basis for partner­like dialogue and cooperation to all European states. It is a family embracing all European states where everybody is equal, everybody is judged by its performance in implementing the common standards and obligations, and where everybody is a judge of the performance of other partners. The Council of Europe should be more open to the wor ld. There is a lot of experience which should be shared with other regions. The legal instruments of the Council of Europe and the good services of the Venice Commission in evaluation of legislation are good examples to this idea. The cooperation with the UN should not be limited to the biannual discussions on the General Assembly resolutions on the cooperation between the UN and the Council of Europe. The promotion of the Council of Europe values in the UN context should not be perceived as an attempt to impose European model on other regions. I am in favour of new initiatives for incremental organic development of the ties between the Council of Europe and the UN, in particular, in the process of peace building in some conflict­prone regions of the world. 3. Unlike the 1990s which was characterized as the decade in which the Council of Europe made history, today the Council’s relevance in the pan­European architecture is questioned. In which specific ways do you intend, if elected, to promote efforts to revive and modernize the Council of Europe, to adapt to today’s challenges and opportunities and to create synergies with other European and international organizations while avoiding duplication? [Cyprus] Efforts to revive and modernise the Council of Europe are already underway. The Warsaw Summit of the Council of Europe held in 2005 adopted a new strategic programme for the Organisation. This has led to a number of important changes in the work of the Council of Europe – a Memorandum of Understanding with the EU and Declaration on cooperation with the OSCE have been signed. Increased cooperation on issues of mutual interest, like protection of human rights in conflict areas, should be furthered.
2 Ensuring the complementarity of the activities of all European and transatlantic institutions remains a valid task for the future. This relationship should be based on partner ship, respect for mutual political mandates and striving for synergy. It can be achieved by way of increased working contacts between the Secretariat and its counterparts in other international organisations, making use of each other’s expertise where appropriate and regular exchange of information. Of crucial importance for the Council of Europe is the relationship with the European Union. The political profile of the CoE in its relations with the EU should be enhanced. More emphasis should be put on joint programmes. The cooperation between the CoE and the OSCE should receive a new impetus. More direct dialogue between leadership of the two organisations is necessary. The Council of Europe remains the only pan­European organisation in terms of serving as platform for political dialogue. This role should be strengthened. The Organisation needs a new political impetus, better prioritisation concepts, a modernised management and a stronger engagement by the Member States. 4. Do you have concrete ideas to intensify the present EU/CoE­coordination and do you see specific fields for improvement? [Netherlands] The relationship between the Council of Europe and the EU is of strategic importance as the two organisations will determine the future shape of the European identity. Therefore one has to build a workable mechanism for political dialogue between the leader ship of the two organisations and develop further mechanisms for programmatic cooperation. The Chairmanship of the CoE and the Presidency of the EU have an important role to play in this context. Supported by the Secretariat and the Commission, respectively, they can contribute greatly to the creation of synergy between the two organisations. More emphasis should be put on joint projects. Of course, the scope of the agendas of both organisations differs tremendously. But there are common areas of interest. The Council of Europe should be the partner of choice for the EU in promoting the human rights, democracy and the rule of law goals in the framework of the Eastern Partnership. The Eastern Partnership should thus provide a new stimulus to the cooperation process. The accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty will be of particular importance. This will make the link between the two Organisations even more organic. I support fully the vision embodied in Juncker’s report of the EU becoming in the final stage a member of the Council of Europe. 5. What will be the Council of Europe priorities vis­à­vis the South Caucasus in next five years? [Azerbaijan] The Council of Europe has a clear comparative edge in building institutions and legal framework as well as capacities to promote the human rights protection system. This role should be continued bearing in mind the present day challenges and it will be a priority for the Organisation. However, what is even more important is that the Council of Europe launches confidence­ building initiatives in the areas of the Caucasus where political, ethnic and social relations are still fragile and weak. It offers a platform for dialogue, based on the principles of
3 partnership and equality. This dialogue, both in the intergovernmental and parliamentarian dimension, should be maintained, in order to assist the process of restoring confidence between all the countries of the South – and North – Caucasus. The Organisation should be particularly active in promoting r egional cooper ation in the area. 6. What is, in your opinion, the Council of Europe’s role in the Nagorno­Karabakh conflict? Should it remain an outside observer of the OSCE Minsk Group initiatives or should it be more active (have its own say) in the process of conflict settlement? [Azerbaijan] The Council of Europe has no mandate to serve as a political crisis management agent although both the Parliamentary Assembly and the Committee of Ministers should be available as a platform for auxiliary political dialogue stimulating the quest for political settlement of the conflict. The Council of Europe has, however, the primary responsibility to ensure that the human rights standards extend to all areas of conflict, in particular those governed by the de facto authorities who are not part of the European Convention on Human Rights framework. I am in favour of the Council of Europe working with all parties concerned so as to extend the operation of the Council of Europe’ obligations and standards to citizens living there. 7. Do you believe that the 60­year­old Statute of the Council of Europe requires any innovation to meet today’s challenges? In the affirmative, can you give us any concrete ideas on how you intend to proceed on this issue? [Cyprus] The Statute of the Council of Europe is an international treaty establishing a European organisation based on values. Those values are universal in nature and do not change. The provisions of the Statute still seem to fulfil their goal of creating a framework for proper functioning of the Council of Europe. It is true that Europe today is very different from Europe of the time when the Statute was drafted. The drafters in many ways would be shocked by the present face of Europe. The Organisation itself is also very differ ent from the situation 60 years ago. As one example, the 10 founding members expanded to 47. The number of Member States makes a difference to many procedural aspects. Today we are also richer by the institutional experience of other organisations, including the European Union. Whereas the EU had to adapt its treaty basis to changing circumstances, sometimes through painstaking efforts, the Statute of the Council of Europe remained intact. Changing the Statute, as evidenced by the story of the revision of the UN Charter, can be sometimes insurmountably difficult. There are more efficient ways. In the UN context – in my capacity as the then Foreign Minister of Poland – I suggested to adapt the Charter through the adoption of a politically binding New Political Act. If mandated by the Member States to examine the best possible solutions for the statutory basis of the Council of Europe – I am confident that I would be able to provide some workable options.
4 II. How to consolidate values and standards? 8. In which way do you intend to achieve the goals set at the 2005 Warsaw summit, in particular to focus the Council’s activities towards ‘Human rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law’? [Netherlands] At the Warsaw Summit the Member States adopted a strategic vision and set up goals which are crucial for the future of the Organisation and its role in the further European integration. Now, time has come to accelerate and deepen the implementation of its strategic goals. The elements of my strategy how to achieve the goals set at the 2005 Warsaw summit are presented in my Political Platfor m. Firstly, let’s do less but do it better. We have to concentrate on the priorities and to streamline our activities. We have to focus on the implementation of standards, obligations and commitments in the field of human rights, democracy and rule of law. The effective implementation of obligations undertaken by Member States should be fostered through cooperation, assistance and dialogue. Monitoring mechanisms, convention­based and non­conventional ones, which are playing central role in assessing the record of Member States should be better har monised and coordinated. Secondly, practical activities should prevail over conceptual ones. Resources should be converted on more substantial and meaningful activities. The role of the Secretary General should be to assist the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly in moving forward this common agenda. The Secretary General should work hand in hand with other organs and, in particular, with Member States to remove the obstacles which constrain the potential of the Council of Europe. The Secretary General should work to tap better the political energy and commitment of Member States. 9. What are the main challenges, according to your point of view, that lie before the European Court of Human Rights and what can be the ways and means to overcome such difficulties? [Turkey] 10. How do you intend to guarantee the ECHR’s effective functioning in the future? [Netherlands] The effective functioning of the ECHR’s can be guaranteed only if the problem of excessive workload will be tackled together by the Court itself, by the Council of Europe and by Member States. The huge backlog of pending cases (around 100000 applications) seriously threatens the effectiveness of the Court. It is urgent to find solutions which will stop the continuing deterioration in the situation of the Court. The entry into force of Protocol no. 14 would be the best and the quickest solution to respond effectively to the Court’s caseload. However, it is no longer adequate to wait for Russia to ratify Protocol no. 14. The lack of implementation of Protocol no. 14 should be overcome. There are some alternatives on the table which are now under examination. It is absolutely crucial that Member States come to an agreement on this issue. The implementation of certain procedures provided in Protocol no. 14 would be desirable from the viewpoint of the Court’s effectiveness and should be supported. Of course the possible provisional application should be considered as a temporary and short­term solution pending the entry into force of Protocol no. 14 itself.
5 The reform of the working methods of the Court remains a priority. I have read with great interest the last report on guaranteeing the long­term effectiveness of the control system of the European Court on Human Rights. It contains proposals not requiring amendment of the Convention and those requiring such amendment. Some of these proposals like pilot judgment procedure have already proved to be useful and flexible tools. We have to remember that the Court is not the only institution in Europe dealing with human rights. Still national judiciary should be at the frontline to uphold the rule of law and respect of human rights. The Court is to help States in that endeavour not to replace them. The national judiciary and non­judicial remedies in the Member States have to be made more effective and better known to citizens. As a rule, to get help citizens should not turn to Strasbourg but get their human rights at home. 11. Are there any values, norms or conventions of the Council of Europe’s aquis (concerning i.e. the death penalty; national, religious and other minorities, LGBT­persons; etc.) where you would find it difficult actively to promote and protect the standards of the Council of Europe? [Denmark] I would not find it difficult to promote and protect any on the Council of Europe’s shared values and common standards. The question is how to promote them efficiently. The Council of Europe has created an impressive system of human rights protection, both conventional and non­conventional. The Council can be proud of its convention system constituting the outcome of 60 years work and amounting to more than 200 instruments. But full obser vance of the Council of Europe’s aquis is a goal yet to be attained by all Member States. The main goal is to guarantee that the existing values and norms are fully executed and respected. The compliance with their obligation and commitments by Member States remains fundamental. In this matter, concentrated efforts and cooperation in needed between all Council of Europe’s organs and bodies. 12. Protecting and developing the rights of minorities, be they ethnic, religious, language, sexual orientation or other to their nature, is one of the main tasks of the Council of Europe. Would you asses on how you, as Secretary General, would promote these rights and which feature, in your opinion, seems to require most attention at this moment. [Finland] I am in favour of decisive actions of the Council of Europe wherever the discriminative acts against minorities, be they ethnic, religious, language, sexual orientation occur. Equal rights for all human being are shared value of the Council of Europe and the Secretary General’s role is to promote these values. Violations of rights of minorities may occur in respect of any type of minority. Rights of national minorities may be violated for instance as regards the use of minority languages, rights of sexual minorities may be breached for example with regard to the freedom of expression – to mention only those two examples. The violations of rights of various minorities cannot be ranked as more or less important. All require similar decisive response. The Council of Europe has developed a large number of instruments and mechanisms to protect rights of minorities. The Framewor k Convention on the Rights of National Minorities is the first international legally binding instrument which was intended to protect the rights of national minorities. The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages is designed to protect and promote regional and minority languages. Article 14 of
6 the European Convention on Human Rights obliges States to ensure observance of human rights covered by the Convention without discrimination on any ground. Protocol no. 12 to the Convention has been adopted to strengthen the protection against discrimination and secure the equal enjoyment of any right in the law. A new recommendation on measures to combat discrimination based on sexual orientation is now being prepared by the Steering Committee for Human Rights. Main effort should be placed on ensuring the implementation of existing nor ms. Council of Europe task is to monitor the situation of monitories in Member States and to assist them to improve their protection. Monitoring mechanisms, convention­based and non­conventional ones, like in first place Commissioner for Human Rights, report on the factual situation of national minorities and give recommendations. Monitoring must be followed by concrete measures of implementation. The role of the Council of Europe is to assist Member States in this endeavour by giving advice on necessary reform, developing training programs and giving support to national institutions. And last but not least, the Council of Europe task is to monitor the situation of human rights in Member States and to assist them to improve the situation at national level. The general policy should be that the Council of Europe’s institutions such as the Committee of Ministers, Parliamentary Assembly and the Commissioner for Human Rights as a matter of priority work to enhance the national, domestic procedures and institutions responsible for the promotion and protection of minorities rights. 13. How do you see the role of the Council of Europe in promotion of intercultural dialogue? [Azerbaijan] Many international organisations are involved in activities promoting intercultural dialogue, but the Council of Europe’s capabilities in this respect are particular if one bears in mind the success of the document elaborated within its framework, i.e. the White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue “Living together as equals in dignity”. Intercultural dialogue is a crucial component in building societies without xenophobia and prejudice. It is essential in view of the presence of numerous national minorities in Europe and growing immigration from outside the continent. Ethnic and religious diversity of Europe makes it imperative to ensure harmonious contacts between various groups. At present, the task for the Council of Europe is to translate words into everyday reality and make the idea of intercultural dialogue wor k in practice. Two areas in my view are crucial here: education of intercultural competences and governance of cultural diversity. Now the task is to move from talking about the intercultural dialogue into conducting the intercultural dialogue as such. By addressing directly the civil society, including NGOs and youth organisations, as well as authorities, in particular local ones, the CoE should create conditions enabling people to enter in the process of learning, understanding and communicating with each other. Although the CoE should concentrate its activities on the intercultural dialogue within its societies, enhanced dialogue and cooperation with regional non­European organisations, particularly those in countries neighbouring Europe, is also indispensable. The conference of ministers responsible for culture, which was held in December 2008 in Baku and gathered participants not only from the CoE Member States but also from the neighbouring regions, constituted a very important step in that direction. The Baku Declaration has also provided many ideas and
7 initiatives how to move forward the process of intercultural dialogue both by the CoE and at national level. We need really few but concrete targeted projects. The Council of Europe has many assets which might be used to this end, including its comprehensive legal framework (relevant conventions and recommendations), educational tools, youth and NGOs co­operation mechanisms, the Intercultural cities project or annual Exchanges on the religious dimension of intercultural dialogue. It has created mechanisms of co­operation which extend beyond the European continent, e.g. the activities of the North­ South Centre or the recently established Faro Platform. All those initiatives and mechanisms are being enriched and developed thanks to the contribution of the Parliamentary Assembly and the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities. The concept of intercultural dialogue would have, however, no meaning without cultural identity and diversity. In the world of globalisation – which occurs also at the level of culture – there is a need to preserve the cultural heritage. This concerns the heritage not only in its material and historical aspect but also – or even in the first place – the heritage in its dynamic living aspect of cultural identities of people. And here I see the particular role for the Council of Europe and its educational, cultural and youth instruments, which support national policies and raise awareness of the importance of the European heritage. Intercultural dialogue should not lead to the creation of one “intercultural identity” but on the basis of human rights, democracy and the rule of law it should help us to value and preserve our and others’ cultural heritage in its diversity. 14. Despite the fact that a significant portion of the Warsaw Action Plan refers to the future goals to be achieved by the Council of Europe for ‘building a more humane and inclusive Europe’, there seems to be a tendency particularly to overlook related issues in social and cultural dimensions at the expense of the so­called “ core business” . Taking into account the fact that the Council of Europe is a truly pan­European institution, how do you assess the future role of the Council of Europe in developing standards on how to respond to common challenges threatening the idea of a ‘more humane and inclusive Europe’? [Turkey] The Warsaw Summit of the Council of Europe adopted a new strategic programme for the Organisation. The vision setting the priorities of the Council of Europe such as human rights, democracy and the rule of law remains valid. The implementation of this vision should not happen, however, by means of artificial curtailment of the Council of Europe mandate. This relates in particular to its role in the promotion of social cohesion. The action in the social cohesion field has become even more relevant now in times of economic crisis. Social tensions which might result therefrom can in turn result in the growth of such phenomena as nationalism, xenophobia and intolerance affecting the human rights and democracy situation in Europe. Preventing these phenomena, fostering dialogue and tolerance, building more “humane and inclusive” societies based on core values, is the essence of the Council of Europe’s mission. No other institution in Europe has a similar comprehensive approach to the issue. No institution can replace the CoE. The strategic question is therefore not if to continue the Council of Europe activities in the social cohesion and culture fields but how to do it. In my opinion, the process of reflection on this crucial issue has not been ter minated yet.
8 The CoE should have a long­ter m vision regarding each of the general fields of its mandate. It should better define its role and objectives as well as scope of activities. It should choose the most suitable and effective forms. It should further develop relations with other international organisations particularly active in the respective areas, e.g. the EU and OSCE. III. How to increase cost­efficiency? 15. Vu le contexte économique et budgétaire actuel, le Conseil de l’Europe ne fait pas exception avec un budget à croissance zéro en termes réels. Comment comptez vous promouvoir le recentrage, sachant qu’il existe une opposition a cet égard et quelle stratégie adoptez vous pour mettre fin à des activités qui ne rentrent plus dans le « core business » (démocratie, droits de l’homme et État du droit) du Conseil ou qui n’atteignent pas le résultats escomptés? [Switzerland] With broad agenda but so limited resources, the Council of Europe has to learn how to better prioritise its activities. The “added value” and the expectations of Member States should be the guiding principles. I see my principal duty – if elected Secretary General – in providing the Member States with a frank assessment of the cost ­ benefit ratio of the CoE activities. I would try to identify which activities can bring added value and which should rather be pursed through other international organisations or by Member States alone. My role would be to tell you where I see duplication. I would also prepar e a concrete initiative on better cost­sharing ar rangements with other international organisations. The final decision on the shape of the Programme of Activities lies with the Member States. But I would ensure that you have a good basis for this decision with options where necessary. The role of the Secretary General should be also to facilitate the consensus building reflection on the priorities by the Committee of Ministers as well as by the PACE. There is a need for more interface between the organs of the Council of Europe in this regard. But in the final instance ­ you will have to choose and decide. Member States ar e master s of this Organisation. 16. Do you believe that the Council of Europe will be able to keep its current extensive scope of activities given its shrinking annual budget which the EU spends in one day or should it reduce its action radius? If yes which ones? Do you foresee the future of the Council of Europe mainly in the area of human rights, democracy and the rule of law or should the Council of Europe acquire greater political weight? [Cyprus] As mentioned, the driving force behind the prioritisation process should be the interest of Member States and the Organisation’s ability to bring practical impact. A priori none of the areas often referred to as “non­core” is secondary for the Council of Europe provided that it brings concrete results and is inextricably linked with the essence of the mandate of the Organisation. My approach would be to put more emphasis on direct assistance and advice to Member States addressing their concrete needs. More emphasis should be put now on the
9 implementation of the CoE’s acquis in all the fields. Less conceptual and theoretical reflection, more practice­oriented activities. More action in the field, less bureaucratic activities in Strasbourg. And first of all, more harmony between the Programme of Activities and the Warsaw Summit Action Plan. I fully subscribe to the motto: Let’s do less but let’s do it better. I am convinced that such a reorientation is the key to the answer on how the Council of Europe could gain greater political weight – as the political significance does not depend on quantity but on impact. Along these lines we should quickly work out a strategic consensus. Such a consensus is possible. I am convinced that actually we all expect the same from the Council of Europe – concrete, timely and practical support to fulfil our core values in the areas of the CoE mandate given by the Warsaw Summit. 17. Les difficultés économiques et financières auxquelles sont confrontés nombre d’Etats membres imposeront sans doute le maintien d’une croissance zéro du budget de l’organisation pour les années à venir. Dans l’hypothèse où vous seriez élu, comment envisagez­vous de faire face à cette contrainte, alors que la plupart des marges de productivité potentielles ont déjà été explorées? Pensez­vous que les mesures de rigueur ou d’économies budgétaires doivent s’imposer de manière égale à toutes les composantes de l’organisation ? Sinon, estimez­vous que certains programmes, thématiques ou organes statutaires devraient en être exonérés ? [France] We should always reflect how to achieve this practical impact in the most cost­efficient manner. I am sure that the possibilities to increase the efficiency of wor k of the Council of Europe have not been exhausted so far. These possibilities may vary depending on the area. A flexible approach is crucial. There might be a need to de­bureaucratise the co­operation in some of the fields. We should explore to the full extent the potential of other forms of co­operation such as ad hoc requests and partial agreements. Added value, clearly set objectives, timely and efficient action should be the guiding principles when drafting new Programmes of Activities. The Evaluation Policy and the Resource Management and Mobilisation Strategy for the CoE Programme of Activities should be fully implemented. Obviously, the goal of incr easing the efficiency must be a continuous objective for all components of the CoE. None of the parts of the Council of Europe can be exempted therefrom, no matter how effective it has been so far. However, I do not think that the equal slicing of the budgets of all segments of the Secretariat is the right approach. My task as a Secr etary General would be to organise the wor k of the whole Organisation using the available human and financial r esources in such a manner that the CoE would best serve all the programme goals. At the same time I would look into the possibility of cutting down the administration costs. The staff table of the Secretariat shows that many people are assigned to pure administration tasks only. The added value approach, which I favour, would also mean that appropriate resources will have to be allocated to those parts of the Organisation which constitute its particular added value, including the Commissioner for Human Rights. At the same time, being in favour of
10 financial and personnel autonomy of the European Court of Human Rights, I do not think its problems can be solved by a continued growth of staff. More flexibility is needed. We cannot let deteriorate the CoE’s greatest assets. In sum, we cannot afford an unproductive and illusory ambition of the Council of Europe acting everywher e and at the same time. We should always adopt a duly prioritised sequence of activities. We should not disper se our resour ces but use them with a long­term vision. 18. In light of the recent trends which have prevailed in the budgetary discussions of the past years, as well as the effects of the global financial crisis, how do you evaluate the current budgetary situation of the Council of Europe? What will your priorities be with respect to future budgets of the Council of Europe? [Turkey] We have to accept the sad fact that in the climate of economic crisis Member States have fewer possibilities to finance international organisations. More efforts are therefore needed on the part of the international organisations to avoid duplication of works, cooperate and share resources. Let’s turn the difficult situation into positive consequences. The growing level of joint programmes with the UE is not only a very good response to the financial problems but at the same time to the need for more complementarity and prioritisation. I am optimistic. My assessment is that the Council of Europe can still have more impact where necessary without increasing Member States’ contributions. More joint programmes with the European Union are possible. More direct and coordination­oriented consultations at the level of leadership of the CoE and the OSCE are needed. New partnerships providing additional channels of funds for the activities should be explored. As a Secretary General I will spare no efforts to maintain the positive trends which permit increasing funds for the CoE from extra­budgetary sources. I will make full use of the Resource Management and Mobilisation Strategy for the CoE Programme of Activities, an indeed innovative instrument which gives concrete tools to increase the financial capabilities of the Organisation. At the same time, there is a need for a critical assessment of the money spent. The genuine implementation of the Evaluation Policy should be treated as a priority. We should better target financial and human resources. This would result in more substantial activities with more impact – without placing additional financial burden on Member States. I would try to stop negative tendencies in the CoE budget, such as the decreasing share of operational expenditures for the Programme of Activities. The current situation, where in the light of budgetary austerity policy expenditure on programme activities of the Council steadily decreases, is in the long­term not sustainable. I believe that the Council of Europe budget r equires a structural reform. This reform should pursue principles of transparency, efficiency and realism. The budgeting should appropriately reflect priorities. Long­term budgeting would be desirable. I would support concentration – fewer but more substantial programmes. The task is to give the CoE a budget which would be an effective tool for pur suing our goals and priorities without abusing the principle of zero real growth of Member States’ contributions.
11 19. Which reforms of the Council of Europe Secretariat’s working methods and matters related to the administration, human resources and budgeting, including additional financial sources, would you attempt to make? [Azerbaijan] Undoubtedly, the Secretariat of the CoE belongs to the most competent in the professional sense among the international institutions in Europe. The members of the staff have the right to expect that their competence and professionalism is used for a broader strategic purpose. As the Secretary General I will do my best to make the political vision of the CoE being well under stood by all members of the Secretariat. The important and direct responsibility of the Secretary General is to modernize and streamline the work of the Secretariat in order to release the high potential of its professional ser vice. I will analyse in depth the existing working methods within the Secretariat and its structure with a view to identifying areas requiring further reforms. I will use to this end all the professional advice available and, of course, the experience of the present Secretary General in this regard whose achievements I appreciate. My priorities would be threefold: ­ to de­bureaucratise the internal decision­making procedures in the Secretariat, to delegate as many powers as possible to the departments, and to engage to the maximum the wisdom and experience of the Deputy Secretary General in the administration and management; ­ to cut down the purely administrative costs where feasible and to relocate appropriately staff resources; ­ to analyse the possibilities for more cost­efficient outsourcing, including the consultancy policies. Not more than after one year in office I will propose a plan for the refor m of the Secr etariat. I would involve in my work on it both the staff and the Member States early in the process. It is also important to well adjust the scope of activities to the available human resources. “Too much” might mean “nothing”. I repeat, let’s do less but let’s do it better. This motto is relevant also to the Secretariat’s functioning. The Secretariat should do more to engage Member States in its activities – both permanent representations here in Strasbourg and experts sitting at inter­governmental committees. The members of the staff should be able to focus their competencies more on the assistance and implementation aspects. We should make further use of cooperation tools the effectiveness of which has already been well proved, such as partial agreements. We should continue our endeavours to improve and deepen the co­operation mechanisms with other international organisations. We should continue the review of the functioning of steering committees and expert groups. Good examples of working methods from other inter­governmental organisations should be explored and used.
12 It is our obligation to apply such working methods – at the Secretariat and governmental committees’ levels – which would permit the Council of Europe to act more timely and effectively. The Council of Europe needs more flexibility in its budgetary, administration and staff structures. *** I believe that there is a lot of potential and tools that could make the wor k of the Council of Europe more prioritised and relevant to Member States, and thus, more effective despite budgetary constraints and without incr easing Member States’ financial obligations. All the relevant elements – Budget, Programme of Activities and Wor king Methods – should be put together – through a consensus­oriented approach of all Member States – in one comprehensive and efficient system ser ving the strategic vision of the Council of Europe as an indispensable pan­European Organisation. IV. How to elect Secretary General? 20. L’article 12 du Statut de Londres adopté le 5 mai 1949 dispose que “ les langues officielles du Conseil de l’Europe sont le français et l’anglais” . Dans l’hypothèse où vous seriez élu, êtes­vous prêt à veiller à la stricte application de ce principe afin de garantir un traitement équivalent à chacune d’entre­elles, non seulement pour l’établissement et la diffusion des documents émanant de l’organisation, mais aussi dans vos contacts avec les agents du secrétariat et les interlocuteurs extérieurs qui souhaiteraient s’exprimer dans l’une des langues officielles plutôt que dans l’autre ? [France] The Council of Europe has two official languages. However, the Council of Europe should be heard and understood by all European citizens speaking various languages, even if the CoE official documents could not be prepared – for technical and financial reasons – in more than two languages. Our objective should be to make the Council of Europe capable to establish genuine dialogue with national authorities of all Member States and with repr esentatives of all European societies, to be able to effectively pass its values­based message to all Member States. The linguistic comparative advantage which I could personally bring into this effort of dialogue is my good knowledge of Russian and fair understanding of other Eastern and Western Slavic languages. The role to the two official languages of the Organisation remains crucial. “Operational bilinguality” on the part of Member States representatives and staff members is the best way to reduce interpretation costs. I will contribute per sonally to the equal treatment of both languages of the Council of Europe also during my official contacts. J e voudrais vous promettre que je vais travailler sur mon français.
13 21. How do you think that you fulfil the Juncker criteria concerning the qualifications of future Secretary­Generals of the Council of Europe as they were adopted by the Ministers in May 2007? [Denmark] The recommendation of the Juncker report concerning qualifications of future Secretaries General was made with a view to electing to this post a person, who through his or her political standing and high level of recognition would facilitate more frequent and “natural” contacts with top political leaders of the EU member states and institutions. I have every reason to believe that I have acquired such recognition being the former prime minister, minister of foreign affairs and minister of justice of my country, especially in such crucial moments as preparation for and accession of Poland to NATO and the European Union. I fully share the analysis of Prime Minister Juncker that a Secretary General meeting the criteria contained in his report is crucial in ensuring better political standing and visibility of the Council of Europe. What I would bring into this process is not only the deep knowledge of the nature of political dialogue and decision­making among States and between States and international organisations but also my acquaintance with many of the key political figures in European politics both at national and international level, in all parts of the political spectrum – left, right and the centre. 22. The Juncker Report discusses in depth the role of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and defines the abilities and qualifications of the future Secretary General. Would you describe your personal achievements (leadership, networking, governance, diplomatic skills) and motivation in relation to the above requirements. [Finland] In its report to the 117th Session of the Committee of Ministers, the high­level group entrusted with examining the follow­up to the Juncker report rightly stated that some of the qualities required by Secretaries General of the Council of Europe are – in Mr Juncker’s view – much the same as those expected from Presidents of the European Commission or Heads of State or Government. I do share this view as well. For that reason I have accepted the offer of the Prime Minister of Poland and agreed to stand for the election for the post of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe. My political career and several tangible achievements like: successful reform of the government’s structure, reform of the ministry of justice, as well as my contribution to Poland’s membership in NATO and the EU, seem to justify that I can provide the necessary leadership to the Organisation, under the guidance of the Committee of Ministers, and serve well as the first point of contact at the CoE for political leaders of Europe and the world. The Government I was the Prime Minister of, achieved highest indicators of the level of the economic growth and highest decrease in the unemployment rate in Poland since 1989. Thanks to the initiative to create a tripartite negotiations mechanism, involving the representatives of the government, employers and trade unions, my term of office as a Prime Minister enjoyed the lowest level of social tensions in Poland. It was the only Polish Government which terminated its mandate with the overall positive assessment by the public opinion. I believe that I am able to lead the Council of Europe towards the increased effectiveness on the basis of such consensus approach.
14 I have had quite successful experience in international diplomatic negotiations – the task of negotiating the Treaty of Accession to the European Union being its apex but I also consider my participation in the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) and negotiations on the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe as important lessons. This experience provided me also with the invaluable opportunity to learn the workings of the European Union – at all levels. These are clear assets which I would bring into the Council of Europe. Equally important are the personal contacts with political leaders both at international and national level. Many politicians whom I have met in my career are active. Some of them I consider personal friends. Anyone elected as the Secretary General of the Council of Europe should count on good personal relationship with fellow European leaders. 23. At the 117 th Ministerial Session the Committee of Ministers agreed, concerning the procedure for election of the Secretary General, that it will henceforth present to the Parliamentary Assembly candidates who enjoy a high level of recognition, are well­known among their peers and the people of Europe, and have previously served as Heads of State or Government, or held senior ministerial office or similar status relevant to the post. Do You Find this decision relevant in 2009? Would You prefer the Committee of Ministers sending names of all candidates to the Parliamentary Assembly without evaluating their competencies for the post of the Secretary General? [Slovak Republic] The decision taken two years ago at the 117 th Ministerial Session regarding the profile of candidates for the post of the future Secretary General of the Council of Europe constituted an important part of the more broad follow­up action on Mr Juncker’s report and recommendations put forward therein by Prime Minister of Luxembourg. The strategic objective of this process has been – as far as I can judge – to enhance the political standing of the Council of Europe and its place in the pan­European architecture. In this process, the Council of Europe Secretary General has an important role to play. As Mr Juncker explained in his report, the high profile of the future Secretary General and his experience as a head of state or government “would certainly make it easier to move ahead more rapidly on the pan­European issues for which the Council is responsible”. In 2009 when the Council of Europe celebrates its Sixtieth Anniversary and Europe – the twentieth anniversary of the democratic changes in the Central and Eastern Europe, the task for the Council of Europe to fulfil its values and the pan­European vocation is particular ly relevant. The Organisation finds itself at a crucial point in its history. Therefor e, a new Secretary Gener al should feel assured that he has the necessary confidence and support of the Member States. A thorough examination of the candidate by the Committee of Ministers would send an important signal to anybody who would eventually be elected by the Parliamentary Assembly. I am ready to submit my candidature to this thorough examination by the Committee of Ministers. I believe that Members States through the means of a secret vote should be able to pass their judgment of my suitability for the job. The election procedure is of two­stage character and depends on co­participation of both statutory organs of the Council of Europe each of them having important role to play. It is for the Committee of Ministers to decide how it is going to evaluate my competencies for the demanding post of Secretary General and my proposals for the future of the Council of Europe before recommending my candidature to the Parliamentary Assembly with a view to electing a new Secretary General.
15 On my part I can assure you that if elected Secretary General I will spare no efforts to live up to high expectations reflected in the ministerial decision and I will fulfil the vision of the Council of Europe enshrined in the War saw Summit Documents and J uncker report.
16