MONDAY, 26 JUNE 2000

 

PROGRESS REPORT

 

  Ms GÜLEK (Turkey).- First, I thank the rapporteur for a good summary of what

truly has been a very busy time for the Bureau and the Standing Committee.  I must point  out that we received a report on the Progress Report.  I know that you tried to include  the results of the meeting this morning, Mr President, but would it be possible in future to  obtain a copy at least by 3 p.m. - not by 3.30 p.m. - so that we can take a look at it?

 

 Under the heading “References and transmissions to committees” there are two

 motions, No. 2499 and No. 2500.  Both involve Cyprus and the Turkish Cypriot

 People.  A resolution adopted by the Assembly of the Council of Europe itself in 1997

  “instructs the committees concerned to invite representatives of the political forces of the Turkish Cypriot community to be represented whenever the situation in Cyprus is

 discussed”.  Although a rapporteur has already been appointed to consider one of the

 motions and the other, I think, is on the agenda, that has not been done.  The Assembly is the very institution that adopted the resolution, and undoing what we resolved to do a few  years back would be is unfortunate and unacceptable.  Whenever issues involving the  Turkish Cypriot people are being discussed, representatives of the Turkish Republic of  Northern Cyprus are outside, but they should always be involved in these decisions.  It is  important for the record to point that out.

 

The problem in Cyprus cannot be solved by ignoring one party or by ignoring one

reality.  If we are all sincere about solving the problem in Cyprus, we should all encourage the successful and speedy resolution of the proximity talks between the two parties in  Cyprus taking place under the aegis of the United Nations Secretary General.  It is very  much in the interests of all members of the Council of  Europe to encourage our governments to achieve as much understanding as possible and to encourage our member  states to support the process so that a just, peaceful and speedy resolution can be  accomplished.

 

This issue is also being discussed by the Committee of Ministers.  Again, if we are

sincere - I know that we all are - it is extremely important that the talks succeed.

     

         DRAFT EUROPEAN LANDSCAPE CONVETION

 

      Mrs AKGÖNENÇ (Turkey).- I thank our rapporteur for his valuable

     contribution to the debate on the draft European Landscape Convention.

 

      The initiative of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe is

     important, as it directly concerns the improvement of our quality of life and the protection

     of the common landscape heritage.  The issue of sustainable development of landscape is

     crucial in terms of the environment and of its impact on the cultural heritage of Europe.

     The establishment of a legal instrument will complement and reinforce the efforts already

     realised in landscape management in the Council of Europe.  It will also constitute a

     flexible and dynamic framework for co-operation between our countries in such a

     sensitive endeavour.

 

      The right balance must be struck between the needs of our societies and the

     protection of the landscape.  The convention’s main aim must be the achievement of

     harmonious relationships between social needs, economic activity and the environment.

 

      Eonomically developed and highly industrialised member states of the Council of

     Europe must respect the needs of less-developed states, while helping them to reach

     common standards.  Problems that could arise in the implementation of the convention

     must be solved through co-operation and consultation.  In that context, I support the idea

     of setting up joint landscape programmes for member countries.

 

      I agree with the rapporteur that the monitoring must be entrusted to the Council

     of Europe’s existing intergovernmental committees.  I expect the convention to become a

     major legal instrument, allowing international co-operation on the protection, management

     and planning of all European landscapes.

 

      Mr AKÇALI (Turkey).- The committee and the regional planning authorities

     have been closely following the drafting process of the European Landscape Convention.

     This future instrument is important in terms of preserving and managing the landscape

     throughout Europe.  The draft presented by our colleague, Mr Martínez Casañ, was

     preceded by two earlier texts drafted in support of the convention and we hope that this

     second opinion regarding the final draft will influence the Committee of Ministers to adopt

     the draft convention at its next meeting in July 2000 and to present the convention for

     signature by member states in autumn this year.

 

      I stress that the draft opinion presented by Mr Martínez Casañ received

     unanimous support from the committee. 

 

     REFORM OF THE ASSEMBLY’S WORKING METHODS

 

    Mr MUTMAN (Turkey).– I believe that this is one of the most

    important issues of this part-session.  Efficiency is in great demand in our

    Assembly, particularly at a time when we are faced with a difficult budgetary

   situation.

 

   In this context, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur on his

   meticulous job.  I read the report with interest and agree with all the findings

   and proposed solutions.  Reducing the number of the Assembly committees

   and rendering their work more concentrated and effective seems to be the

   best solution to the problems at hand.  We have to remember that the main

  priorities of this Assembly are human rights, the rule of law and democracy.

  We have to focus on the core issues of this Organisation.  At the moment,

  we do not have the luxury of considering every motion that is presented to

  this Assembly.  I agree that the Bureau should apply a stricter screening

  process to the motions that are presented to it.  I think the President of the

   Assembly has an important role to play in this screening process.

 

   The number of reports to be dealt with each year by the Assembly

   should be limited to forty.  I once again agree with the rapporteur.  This will

   in turn enable us to spend more time on each report and discuss them all

   properly.  How many times has the protest been made that, because the list

   of speakers was cut short, all listed speakers were not able to participate in

  the debate?  I really think that reducing the number of the reports is the

   solution to our time restrictions.  This will also enable the committees to

   spend more time on each report.  As a result of these measures, the work of

  the committees, and consequently the work of the Assembly will become

   more efficient and more manageable in terms of both time and budget.

   I would like to recommend that Amendment No. 4, which proposes making

   the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Woman and Men a

   sub-committee, should be rejected.  This very important committee does

   excellent work and we should not diminish its importance by making it a

    sub-committee.  Therefore, I applaud the proposals put forward by Mr Vis

    and would like to call on my colleagues to support these changes.

 

     WEDNESDAY, 28 JUNE 2001

 

     HONOURING OF OBLIGATIONS AND COMMITMENTS BY ALBANIA

 

     Mr SA?LAM (Turkey).- I congratulate the co-rapporteurs on having produced a

     balanced report that reflects the situation in Albania.  Albania has made considerable

     progress since the unfortunate events of 1997.  I am confident that the process of reform

     and reconstruction will be further advanced.

 

    The Stability Pact plays a leading role in this process, and I see it as a beacon of

     hope for the people of the Balkans.  We should never forget that Albania and Macedonia

     were the two countries most affected by the Kosovan crisis.  They should be given

     special treatment under the Stability Pact.  Although many positive developments have

     taken place since the inception of the pact, countries in the region have complained about

     the slow pace of implementation.  I urge the governments involved to facilitate efforts to

     normalise and stabilise the situation in countries such as Albania.

 

    I should like to draw the Assembly’s attention to the fact that the reforms listed in

     the report were achieved despite the raging crisis in the humanitarian obligations of

     Kosovo and Albania towards refugees and displaced persons.  Albania has proved that it

     has the will fully to honour its obligations and commitments.  All these achievements must

     be viewed in a proper context.  I do not think that it would be fair to ask Albania to

     achieve in a few years what other countries have taken more than 100 years to achieve.

 

     I sincerely believe that the forthcoming local and general elections in Albania will

     further help to consolidate the reforms.  It goes without saying that the Assembly should

     focus on the elections in Albania and provide any assistance that may be needed by the

     Albanian authorities.

 

    I congratulate Albania on its achievements, and I hope that Albania will never

     again need a monitoring procedure.

 

     ARMENIA’S APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP TO THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

 

    Mr GÜRKAN (Turkey).- Today we have in front of us the important decision on

     the accession of two new members to our Organisation, Armenia and Azerbaijan.  As

     MrVolcic’s report points out, following its application to become a member of the

     Organisation, Armenia has made progress in complying with a number of standards and

     principles of the Council of Europe.

 

     As a member of the Council of Europe, I am confident that Armenia will be able

     more willingly to concentrate its efforts on the ideals of the Organisation to achieve greater

     co-operation and harmony with its partners.  However, much remains to be done.

     Armenia is still going through the process of democratisation.  Significant advances in the

     democratisation of Armenia will also contribute to finding a peaceful solution to the

     Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

 

     Armenia continues to occupy 20% of Azerbaijan’s territory.  The conflict has

     created a massive refugee and displaced persons problem.  Almost 1 million Azeris and a

     few hundred thousand Kurds have been displaced and are living under difficult

     conditions.  The problem has a grave humanitarian aspect and a peaceful solution to the

     conflict should be given priority. Due attention should be paid to finding a lasting solution

     that can rapidly be achieved.

 

      From a broader perspective, a rapid solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

     is extremely important in that it will make a considerable contribution to peace and

stability in the Caucasus.  As we all know, that region is unfortunately still torn by    conflicts  and problems, and it will prosper only if democratic stability is strengthened.  I hope that  the political will for achieving that objective is present at every level.  For that reason, and  for many others, I believe that Armenia’s membership of the Council is important and   should be supported.  Membership of the Council can help Armenia to solve existing problems with its neighbours, thus contributing to the stability of the southern Caucasus  region.  It will also help Armenia to strengthen its democracy, develop political pluralism, improve the functioning of its institutions and advance its local and regional democracy.

 

      Finally, in that region, Moscow seeks to create a south Caucasus regional security

     forum of Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia.  Russia’s influence would clearly

     predominate in such a forum, which Mr Putin calls the Caucasus Four.  Moscow expects

     to play first fiddle in that forum and hopes that the Caucasus Four will eclipse wider

     forums in which the Council of Europe, for example,  would play a role in shaping a

     peaceful future for the south Caucasus.  Moscow’s chosen motto for the Caucasus Four

     is, “The Caucasus countries must alone shape the region’s fate.”  That slogan implies an

     attempt to marginalise the west’s role, leaving Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia face to

     face with an overbearing Russia.

 

      To avoid such a relapse, we should support the early and simultaneous accession

     of Armenia and Azerbaijan to the Council of Europe.  That, not the old dreams of Russia,

     which should be left in the waste basket of history and not reign over the southern

     Caucasus, represents the road to the values and ideals of the Council.

 

AZERBAIJAN’S APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP TO THE COUNCIL OF    EUROPE

                 Mr GÜRKAN (Turkey).- We fully support the accession of Azerbaijan to the

     Council of Europe.  Azerbaijan has achieved reforms of the utmost importance in

     integrating the Council of Europe’s principles into its own system and has demonstrated

     its full commitment to democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights.

 

      Azerbaijan has shown itself able and willing to complete the commitments and

     obligations that it has been asked to undertake.  I remind the Assembly that Azerbaijan is

     fully co-operating with Council of Europe experts in preparing for the forthcoming general

     election.  The accession of Azerbaijan to the Council of Europe will support that

     co-operation and the ongoing reforms.  It is therefore imperative that accession be

     achieved as soon as possible.

 

      Mr Baumel’s report confirms that Azerbaijan possesses the qualities to become a

     full member of the Council of Europe.  I congratulate him on the consensus reached at the

     joint meeting of the Political Affairs Committee and the Committee on Legal Affairs and

     Human Rights, which truly reflects the present situation in the southern Caucasus.

 

     We have just held a debate on Armenia’s accession to the Council of Europe.

     Armenia and Azerbaijan have an unfortunate link - Nagorno-Karabakh.  It is extremely

     important to maintain a balanced approach to those two countries.  Their simultaneous

     accession to the Council of Europe will, I hope, contribute to efforts to find a lasting

     solution to that issue.  Azerbaijan has shown that it is committed to a peaceful settlement

     of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, even though 20% of its territory is still under

     occupation and nearly one million of its people are displaced.  That occupation constitutes

     a serious violation of international law.

 

      I hope that Azerbaijan, as well as Armenia, will soon be members of our

     Organisation so that all those problems will be overcome and regional peace and stability

     will be promoted effectively.

    

     Mr KALKAN (Turkey).– Mr President, my country has special relations with its

     eastern neighbour Azerbaijan.  As Mr Aliyev, the President of Azerbaijan, put it during

     one of his recent visits to Turkey, Turks and Azeris constitute a single nation living in two

     separate states.  Therefore, the Turkish nation in general, and my electorate in particular,

     supports Azerbaijan’s full integration in the European structures.

 

           The Assembly should approve the proposals of the Political Affairs Committee

     and recommend that the Committee of Ministers invite Azerbaijan to join the Council of

     Europe at the earliest possible time.  Simultaneous membership of the two Caucasian

     states will certainly contribute to the peace and stability in the region.  On the other hand,

     a discriminatory approach may be counter-productive in terms of the efforts to promote

     European values in the region.

 

           Azerbaijani people and the leadership of the country have clearly demonstrated

     their willingness and determination to create a fully-fledged democracy.  As Mr Baumel

     underlines in his report, despite many difficulties – including an ongoing invasion, I might

     add – Azerbaijan has implemented many reforms on the way to becoming a democratic

     country governed by the rule of law.  There is a vibrant debate on almost every aspect of

     political life in the Azeri society.  The many independent newspapers in the country

     contribute much to the political life.  In brief, pluralism is taking root in Azerbaijan.

 

           As many colleagues in this Hemicycle would agree, transformation from an

     authoritarian system into a pluralistic democracy is no easy task.  Therefore, it is quite

     understandable that our Azeri neighbours have problems, which are worsened by the

     conflict with Armenia and by the existence of about one million refugees and internally

     displaced persons from the Armenian-occupied Azeri territories.  I believe that, as a

     Council of Europe member, Azerbaijan will be better equipped to tackle its problems.

 

           Membership of the Council of Europe by all three countries of the southern

     Caucasus is, in itself, a clear contribution not only to the democratisation process pursued

     by these countries but to the efforts to ensure peace and stability in the region.

 

           Here, I would like to make an appeal to the Committee of Ministers to provide

     adequate financial resources for the co-operation programmes that would include the new

     Caucasian members.  The secretariat should play its part by organising multi-faceted

     co-operation projects, such as ADACS co-operation programmes, to help Caucasian

     peoples build their truly democratic societies and establish in the region a climate of

     peace, stability and co-operation.

 

           I believe that Azerbaijan must be accepted as a member state.  I will vote in this

     direction and call on my colleagues to vote favourably to recommend that the Committee

     of Ministers invite Azerbaijan to become a member of the Council of Europe at the

     earliest time.

 

    

                 Mr TELEK (Turkey).– First and foremost, I thank Mr Baumel for the report on

     Azerbaijan’s membership of the Council of Europe.  Mr Baumel rightly states in the

     conclusion of his report that he is “able to propose … to the Parliamentary Assembly, to

     recommend the Committee of Ministers to invite Azerbaijan to become a member of the

     Council of Europe”.  I welcome and wholeheartedly support this proposal.

 

                 As we look back to June 1996, when Azerbaijan received special guest status in

     the Council of Europe, we see a clear pattern of enhanced co-operation between

     Azerbaijan and the Council of Europe in all fields.  During this period, Azerbaijan has

     persistently and irreversibly continued building a democratic and secular society governed

     by the rule of law.

 

                 The Azeri Government has carried out concrete and comprehensive reforms to

     enable the country to integrate into European structures.  I share Mr Baumel’s view that

     Azerbaijan is moving towards a democratic, pluralist society in which human rights and

     the rule of law are respected, and is able and willing to continue the democratic reforms.

 

                 The establishment and promotion of a democratic and pluralist culture in the south

     Caucasus are very important, and crucial for Europe.  This region has long been neglected

     and now calls for our attention.  The Council of Europe can best promote its values and

     principles in a conflict-ridden area like the Caucasus by accepting both Azerbaijan and

     Armenia for membership as soon as possible.  This approach will support the trend of

     democratisation in an unstable area and even give it a new impetus.

 

                 For a long time, Azerbaijan has been burdened by the serious problems created

     by the Armenian occupation of more than 20% of its territory, including the region of

     Nagorno-Karabakh.  The plight of the refugees and displaced persons is only one aspect

     of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem.  The scale of the difficult humanitarian situation faced

     by refugees and displaced persons calls for international attention.

 

                 We all understand the importance of stability and good neighbourly relations in the

     Caucasus.  I trust that membership of the Council of Europe will help to resolve the

     differences that hamper the stability of the region.

 

                 With this understanding, I look forward to seeing Azerbaijan take her deserved

     place in the Council of Europe as part of the European family.

           

     THURSDAY, 29 JUNE 2001

     SITUATION IN CHEHCNYA

    

                 Mr GÜL (Turkey).- As interpretation is provided, I shall speak in my own

     language.

 

                 (The speaker continued in Turkish)

 

                 Lord Judd’s speech had protected the credibility of the Assembly.  However, it

     was to be regretted that the Committee of Ministers had failed to show the same attitude.

     Mr Dini’s presentation had been a disappointment.  In the name of realpolitik the

     Assembly had been asked to forget human rights violations and massacres.  There might

     be many economic interests in Russia in which western countries had a stake, but the

     principles of the Council of Europe stood above them all.

 

                 The credibility of the Council of Europe  would be extinguished if human rights

     violations were swept under the carpet.  The Chechen problem had been discussed on

     several occasions by the Assembly against the background of the ebb and flow of the

     conflict.  The Council of Ministers had said that the military conflict had come to an end,

     but that was inevitable, given that Chechnya had been almost completely demolished.

     Russia was not trying to find a solution  by working with elected Chechen representatives;

     in fact, the reverse was true.  Mr Putin wanted to put Chechnya under the direct control

     of Moscow and had selected those Chechens he wished to deal with - issues that Mr Dini

     regrettably chose to overlook.  There would not be an end to the Chechen crisis without

     genuine negotiations involving the elected representatives of the Chechen people.

 

     Mr GÜRKAN (Turkey).– The optimism of Foreign Minister Lamberto Dini of

       Italy, which he also shared with us two days ago, is to my regret, not justified.  There is

       no cease-fire, de facto or otherwise, in Chechnya.  The Russian military are carrying out

       indiscriminate attacks as usual.  Besides, the recent statements by the Russian

       Government’s spokesman on the war show that Moscow does not have the will to

       present a new initiative on Chechnya.

 

           The assurances given by the Russian authorities and the so-called improvements

     have proved to be mere window dressing.  Moscow’s basic line continues: it wants to win

     the Chechen war by exclusively military means.  The option of a political solution seems to

     have been completely eliminated, and the safety of innocent civilians, together with that of

     a few hundred thousand refugees, is totally disregarded.

 

           Russia’s conduct of its military campaign is a challenge to our Assembly’s

     resolutions and recommendations.  This should be a source of great concern, not a reason

     for a backwards step.  It is we who should shoulder the responsibility, because the

     Committee of Ministers, under the Italian presidency, has no intention of taking the

     appropriate measures.

 

           I fully believe that the Chechen issue should be resolved within the territorial

     integrity of the Russian Federation, but with due respect for human rights.  There should

     be a balance between the use of effective force and decent respect for individual rights

     and international norms.  But, to be frank, preventing Chechen terrorism was never

     Moscow’s primary purpose, and the modern approach to fighting terrorism is totally

     denied by an atrocious war strategy.  Disproportionate force is being used, and attacks

     on civilian targets have not ceased.  The views of democratically elected Chechen

     representatives were not taken into account.  Instead, appointed representatives were

     imposed on the Chechen population.

 

             This war strategy has put Russia on the road to nationalist adventurism at a heavy

     cost in blood.  Russia has always gained far more from approaching problems

     co-operatively than from falling into the trap of nationalist adventurism.  I believe that the

     international community, and particularly our Assembly, still has a critical role to play in

     this regard.  Until now, as has been said about Wagner’s music, this role sounds better

     than it is.  That is something to think about.  Are we after better sounds, or are we

     determined to play our role in ensuring democratic rule of law and respect for human

     rights on the road to peace and stability in Chechnya?  We will give our answer with our

     votes.

 

                 Mr AKGÖNENÇ (Turkey).– The northern Caucasus continues to be an area of

     grave concern. Chechnya is again on our agenda and, aside from minor efforts exerted by

     the Committee of Ministers and even smaller ones by the Russian authorities, we have not

     seen any major change in the situation on the ground.

 

                 It is particularly disturbing to hold this debate in the absence of the Russian

     delegation.  They have chosen not to participate in the discussion in this Assembly.  We

     would have expected the Russian parliamentarians to apply pressure on the Russian

     Government so that the necessary developments could take place in Chechnya.

     However, they have opted to fall in line behind the Russian Government.

 

                 It seems that this Assembly is here for nothing.  I do not know why we adopt

     resolutions and recommendations, as they are not even taken into serious consideration.

      It is a fact that the ill-treatment and harassment of civilians continue to add to the

     violations of human rights and freedoms.  We still do not have any signs of a political

     dialogue with representatives of a cross-section of the Chechen people, with the objective

     of achieving a comprehensive political solution to the conflict.

 

                 The fighting still goes on in the Chechen Republic, however slowed down it may

     be.  Therefore, we cannot talk about a cease-fire.  The continuation of hostilities, apart

     from its adverse affects on the civilian population, undermines the search for a political

     solution.  Parameters for a political resolution of the conflict have already been laid down

     in the OSCE Istanbul Final Declaration.  Having accepted those parameters then, Russia

     should now convince the international community that she is doing her utmost to realise

     them.

 

                 The so-called inquiries into allegations concerning human rights violations and war

     crimes in the Chechen Republic are far from being independent and efficient.  They lack

     all credibility.  The Russian Government is far from fulfilling the requirements that we set

     out in Recommendation 1456.  The Russian Government, instead of trying to meet these

     requirements, has been waging a campaign against the Parliamentary Assembly.

 

                 The memorandum presented by Lord Judd confirms that nothing has changed in

     Chechnya and that arrangements made by Russia to remedy the situation have yet to

     provide tangible results.  Well, I am sorry if we, the parliamentarians, do not heed the

     “realpolitik” and ignore all the violence and suffering that the Russian Government is

     inflicting upon its own people.  I am sorry if this Assembly is turning a blind eye to all the

     violations that the Russian Government has committed.  Maybe the Committee of

     Ministers may choose to do this.  They will surely be judged by history.  However, we

     are responsible for upholding the principles that this House is built upon, and we should

     speak for all those innocent civilians who were indiscriminately killed, tortured, ill treated

     and uprooted.

 

                 The appointment by Moscow of an interim administrator for the Chechen

     Republic is hardly a step to further democracy in the region.  This appointment is

     controversial in terms of both legality and constitutionality.  We are all aware that there

     are democratically elected leaders of the Chechen Republic who are being chased by

     Russian troops.  Without commenting on the personal qualities of Mr Ahmed Kadirov,

     the newly appointed chief administrator of the Chechen Republic by Moscow, I think this

     appointment is not acceptable.  Russia should clearly demonstrate its resolve to live by the

     principles of the Council of Europe.

 

                 The visits by the Chairman-in-Office of the Committee of Ministers, Mr Dini, and

     Secretary General Schwimmer have been instrumental in conveying our concerns.

     However, this is not enough.  The Committee of Ministers should stop appeasing Russia

     and start pressuring Russia to live up to her commitments.  We listened with dismay to the

     speech delivered by the Chairman-in-Office of the Committee of Ministers, the Italian

     Minister for Foreign Affairs.  It seemed that he was in a hurry to provide excuses for the

     way in which the Russians have been conducting themselves in the Chechen Republic.  I

     do not believe that we should suspend Russian membership of the Council of Europe.

     However, I do not think the way in which our Committee of Ministers has been appeasing

     the Russian Government is appropriate either.

 

                 The question of Chechnya should be resolved within the territorial integrity of the

     Russian Federation through peaceful political means and with due respect to human

     rights.  However, the recent statements by the Russian authorities indicating that they are

     intent on resolving this problem only by military means are contrary to the principles of the  international community and are a source of great concern.  Such an approach eliminates

 the option for a political solution and totally disregards the safety of innocent civilians.

 

      It is impossible to isolate Chechnya from the rest of the region.  As a matter of

     fact, the repercussions of the crisis have already produced negative effects on the stability

     of the Caucasus as a whole.  The refugee crisis is the most outstanding and vivid aspect of

     those multifaceted negative effects and seems to be deteriorating even more, given the

     reluctance of the Russian authorities to comply with the international standards of human

     rights.

 

     I hope that an immediate and lasting cease-fire will soon be declared and a

     political dialogue between the two sides will be established.  The international community,

     and especially the Council of Europe, has a role to play in this regard.  We should

powerfully urge the Russian authorities to start a political dialogue immediately, and call  on  Russia to abide by the principles of the Council of Europe.

 

        The Russian authorities have so far considered the problem of Chechnya as an

     internal matter.  However, in the contemporary world, human rights issues and

     humanitarian problems cannot be considered solely as internal problems.

 

     It is obvious that the root cause of the large-scale human suffering in the region is

     the excessive and indiscriminate use of force.  Consequently, we should immediately and

     strongly call on Russia to stop the military campaign, to let the civilians and the refugees

     go back to their homes, to open the channels of humanitarian aid and to assume the

     responsibilities that stem from her being a member of the Council of Europe.

 

     Mr TELEK (Turkey).– The ongoing conflict in Chechnya continues to be a

     source of concern for all of us.  Gross violations of human rights perpetrated by the

     Russian forces continue in Chechnya.  People are still not allowed to return to their

     homes.  Even if they are allowed to return, they find wreckages of homes bombed,

     burned and looted by the Russian army.  Notorious “filtration camps” exist with all their

     cruelty, and no substantial humanitarian assistance is provided by Russia to the innocent

     Chechen civilian victims of its aggression.

 

     It seems that Russia is once again applying its long-forgotten policy of punishing

     entire nations, as in the Soviet period, with the Crimean Tartars, Chechens, Meskhet

     Turks and other nations and communities after the second world war.  If Russia wants to

     prove that it is the civilised state it claims to be, it must immediately stop its policy of

     punishing entire peoples.

 

     The Council of Europe is the guardian of European values, one of the most

     important of which is the rule of law.  In no civilised society can a legal system ever allow

     indiscriminate bombing of civilians.

 

     We seem to have forgotten the agony of people who were forcibly expelled from

     Moscow for having dark skin and dark hair.  At the beginning of the Russian campaign

     against the Chechen people, up to 20 000 people were expelled from Moscow.  I refer

     all of you to the Amnesty International report on Chechnya which was confiscated by

     Russian Customs and therefore could not be distributed during the Vladikavkaz Seminar

     organised by the Council of Europe.

 

      As Lord Judd indicated in his memorandum, which he presented as a follow-up

     to the relevant Assembly recommendations, nothing much changed in Chechnya and the

     arrangements made by Russians have yet to bear any fruit.  On the other hand, the

     Committee of Ministers is busy organising seminars during which reports criticising Russia  cannot be distributed.  After a long delay we have finally managed to send a couple of

experts to the famous Kalamanov office to sit together with their Russian colleagues.  We

expect them effectively to investigate violations of human rights and to report to us with

clear results.  Has this Assembly been informed about the way investigations are

supposedly being carried out by the office?  How many applications has it received so far,

and how many of them have been concluded?  Do we have any concrete information on

these?  One would be naive to assume that the Russians will let our experts investigate

anything beyond the limits they have already imposed, although I hope that I am mistaken.

 

In conclusion, I express my belief that the Committee of Ministers should be more

Active in its efforts to preserve the Council of Europe’s values in Chechnya.  Also, the

 Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr Gil-Robles, whom this Assembly elected with a

 clear mandate should investigate the situation in Chechnya.  We should not leave to the

 Kalamanov office the responsibility we have to follow the situation in Chechnya.

 

    Last, but not least, the European Court of Human Rights should play its important

     role with regard to the Chechen problem.  It should take the necessary measures,

     including employing Chechen language interpreters, to deal effectively with the

     applications lodged by the Chechens and encourage the Chechens to apply to the Court.

 

     Mr SA?LAM (Turkey).– The northern Caucasus continues to be an area of

     instability.  Being an indivisible part of European stability, the Caucasus – and particularly

     Chechnya – needs the full attention of European institutions, and especially the Council of

     Europe as a whole.

 

     We have a collective responsibility to bring the situation back to normal, to

     prepare the necessary conditions to enable the civilians to return to their homes and to

     their daily lives, and to re-establish the rule of law in the region.  To achieve these

     objectives, it is necessary that all the organs of the Council of Europe should act in

     harmony and with determination.

 

      I believe that, for the re-establishment of the rule of law and human rights in

     Chechnya, active co-operation with the Russian authorities is also indispensable.

     Therefore, I regret and find it very unfortunate that the parliamentary delegation of the

     Russian Federation refused to participate in the Assembly part-session.  I hope that they

     will reconsider this decision and will choose co-operation rather than isolation.  In this

     respect, I welcome a few members of the Duma who joined us today.

 

     I understand that a number of activities were recently undertaken to promote

     Council of Europe values and principles in Chechnya in co-operation with the Russian

     authorities.  Two regional seminars were held and there were a number of visits to the

     region but, most important of all, the Council of Europe has very recently established a

     presence in the office of Special Representative Kalamanov.  This is an important step

     forward.

 

     We expect that the Special Representative’s office will actively pursue

     investigations on human rights violations committed in Chechnya and will disseminate the

     results of these investigations to the international community in due course.  I place special

     emphasis on the effective functioning of this office because we, as members of the

     Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, have a responsibility to ensure that

     human rights are respected in member states and that the rule of law prevails.

 

      We all know that gross violations of human rights took place in Chechnya.  It is

     enough to follow independent sources to have an idea of the scale of these violations.

     Now it is time to bring those who are responsible for these violations before the law.  The

     international community expects the Russian Federation to follow a transparent

     investigation process as regards these violations.

 

    I expect and sincerely hope that Russia will abide by her international

     commitments and obligations, so that we can soon see Russian representatives among us

     and resume our co-operation.

 

    FRIDAY, 30 JUNE 2000

 

    PARENTS AND TEACHERS RESPONSIBILITIES IN CHILD EDUCATION

 

                 Mr KALKAN (Turkey) said that he deplored the attack by ETA in Spain.

     There had also been a recent terrorist attack in Turkey which had killed a security chief

     and five officers.  Such events were not unrelated to the issue of children’s education and

     so the report took on even greater importance.  There had been changes in traditional

     education and problems and challenges due to those changes had been outlined in the

     report.  It had also been reported that the traditional family structure had been weakened

     and in some places was non-existent.  Education was being left to schools when it should

     be a complementary venture with families.  The two institutions could not substitute for

     each other.

 

                 National states and international organisations needed to discuss the problems

     and provide answers.  The Council of Europe had discussed the topics and had accepted

     resolutions towards solving them.  He supported the Child and Family Forum 2001,

     which would begin in April 2001 and which the Council of Europe should also support.

     Its aim was to strengthen the relationship between families and schools and to increase

     that vital co-operation.  He said that he supported the report and the idea of a conference

     in 2002.

 

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND BLACK SEA  BASINS

                 Ms AKGÖNENÇ (Turkey).- Mr President, dear colleagues, I shall start by

     congratulating the rapporteur on his report.  Both the Mediterranean and the Black Sea

     basins face serious environmental problems, such as deterioration in the quality of water

     resources, and coastal deterioration.  A lot of work has to be done and a lot of care has

     to be taken in both basins to achieve clear results and sustainable economic development

     for all the countries around them.

 

                 To achieve those results, broad and effective co-operation in initiatives are

     required by the countries of those basins, together with the EU and other international

     organisations.  Solid groundwork has already been undertaken for such co-operation

     among the interested parties.  First, the Assembly’s activities over twenty years around

     the Mediterranean and ten years around the Black Sea basin have already established the

     basis for closer relations.  Secondly, through those activities two areas have been clearly

     identified as those where the Council of Europe could take useful action:  I refer to

     national parliaments and local and regional authorities.

 

                 Thirdly, the groups began to concentrate their efforts on co-operation at the

     respective levels of competence.  I applaud the results of the Varna Conference on the

     Mediterranean and Black Sea basins in October 2000.  We have to achieve a spirit of

     consultation and of commitment to the interests of the region.  I support the establishment

     of closer regulations with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic

     Co-operation.

 

                 We are faced with regional problems so the solutions should also be regional.

     Regional co-operation will provide the necessary answers.  The pollution that descends

     along the Tuna basin is of particular concern to the countries of the Black Sea basin.  It is

     apparent that the Black Sea is seen as a dumping ground by the industrialised countries at

     the source of the Tuna basin.  One only needs to look at a map to see where and how all

     that pollution ends up in the Black Sea.  The principle of “the polluter pays” should be

     applied to the pollution in the Tuna and Black Sea basins. We need also to further

     develop the results that emerged from the Marmaris Conference in February 1999.  That

     was the first forum on international parliamentary and inter-regional dialogue in the

     Mediterranean and Black Sea basins.

 

                 There should be strong inter-governmental and inter-territorial co-operation in

     both regions to encourage the economic development of the nations in those regions.

     That would help to narrow the gap in living standards between those states and the

     members of the Council of Europe.

 

                 In later years, it would also help to have an impact on immigration laws.  Priority

     should be given to developing the pan-European autobahn and communication systems. 

 

    

 

                 In that context, I welcome these reports, all of which draw attention to the

     important water issue.  Utilising water resources rationally is one of  the key elements in

     Turkey’s national resources programmes.