Vienna, 5 May Check against delivery. Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Transcription

1 Remarks to the OSCE Permanent Council s Human Dimension Committee by Isabel Santos, Chairperson of the OSCE PA General Committee on Democracy, Human Rights and Humanitarian Questions Vienna, 5 May 2015 Check against delivery Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, I warmly thank you for inviting me to speak to you as Chair of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly s human rights committee. This is an important dialogue for us to have. I return to this committee for the third time. It is with great pleasure that I do, but I sincerely hope not to do so many more times. I say this because for the sake of democracy, rejuvenation is needed and it will soon be time to pass the Chair of my committee to another parliamentarian. But I say this also because advances are very slow in human rights and I run the serious risk of being repetitive in my speeches. The success of the Helsinki Final Act, and its lasting relevance up to this fortieth anniversary, are primarily due to the fact that it addresses difficult issues in an honest way. We must continue to do so if we are to live up to the Final Act s aspirations, so I intend to raise some issues that will no doubt be difficult for some countries here today. I would note that this open dialogue is common in the Parliamentary Assembly, where we have much greater flexibility to raise sensitive topics in an open manner than you and your governments often can. Migrants and Refugees In recent weeks, we have woken up morning after morning to headlines of yet more tragedies in which refugees and migrants are dying in the Mediterranean. The plight of refugees and migrants is not a new phenomenon, and the OSCE region has often faced this challenge in the past. Nonetheless, we cannot simply continue as usual in the hope that the problem will go away on its own. It is not going away. Quite the contrary the International Organization for Migration reports that deaths of migrants crossing the Mediterranean this year is thirty times higher than last year and we are only in May. This is a humanitarian crisis, and the OSCE must not be passive. Front-line countries, particularly Turkey,Italy, Greece and Malta are clearly carrying the greatest burden in caring for refugees fleeing for their lives and migrants seeking a better life. Indeed, Turkey is now host to some 1.7 million refugees, almost all of whom have arrived since the Syrian crisis erupted four years ago. That is roughly the population of Vienna. As you go home today, please ask yourself if your country has the capacity to house an entire new city like Vienna within just a few years. I suspect very few of us acting alone could provide acceptable living conditions under these circumstances. So we must instead work 1

2 together within the OSCE community and with our partner States to share this burden and act in a humanitarian way. Forty years ago, in the Helsinki Final Act, our leaders recognized the pain of those who are separated from their homelands and agreed that they Make it their aim to facilitate freer movement and contacts and to contribute to the solution of the humanitarian problems that arise. We should take inspiration from their vision and see migrants and refugees in a humanitarian spirit. It was in this spirit that last year in Baku the Parliamentary Assembly adopted a resolution on The Situation of Refugees in the OSCE Area, and I hope all participating States will work to implement the recommendations included in it. Within the OSCE PA, we have already showed some ways forward. However, we must build on this together to create a genuine common vision based on a much more open approach within the European Union and even the wider OSCE. The EU s response to the current crisis in the Mediterranean, the recent 10-point package is insufficient, as it remains based on the idea of maintaining Europe as a fortress. Yes, money is being added to addressing the crisis, but much greater political courage is needed to engage in open dialogue and co-operation with the countries that migrants are fleeing from. Yes, we must stop the vicious exploitation of migrants by traffickers and combat the money laundering and other illegal operations that profit from their misfortune, but a real long-term solution also requires that we exploit the great opportunity and strength that new migrants bring to this old and sick Europe. So the real test will be if we have the will to speak out against the rising tide of political parties exploiting racism, fear and hate within all of our countries. We must start our work at home. I am deeply concerned at the increase of restrictive immigration laws slowly expanding across Europe. These laws run counter to our basic principles laid down in the Helsinki Final Act. Our parents and grandparents, many of whom belonged to the generation of refugees, intuitively understood the importance of housing and welcoming those less fortunate than us. It is with them in mind that I call on all participating States to speak out vocally against restrictive immigration policies. If not: what would our parents and grandparents think? Rule of law Since becoming Chair of the OSCE PA s human rights committee, I have regularly been in touch with many of your governments about concerns I have in your countries, particularly regarding how critics of your governments are treated. I have enjoyed good dialogue with some of you, but regret a lack of dialogue with others. It remains my firm belief that little or no progress can be made unless we are willing to openly face the challenges we have and the mistakes we have made. I therefore fully intend to continue raising issues of concern. I and the Parliamentary Assembly have raised concerns about the situation of disappeared persons and prison conditions in some countries. Within this context, I have engaged in a dialogue with authorities in Turkmenistan about such cases in that country. This is also a humanitarian question on a human level, it is only right to provide families information about their loved ones, their detention locations and conditions. Needless to say, it remains critical to grant access to all those detained for appropriate international organizations. It has unfortunately also been necessary for me repeatedly to raise concerns about the situation of human rights defenders in the OSCE. It is far too easy to assume that 2

3 governments have all of the right answers. We need civil society to point out shortcomings including shortcomings in implementing the OSCE principles we have all pledged to adhere to and to push us a little bit. They must have the freedom to raise concerns about how governments act whether this is in the field of minorities rights, electoral rights, corruption, freedom of expression, or any of the many other challenges facing our countries. Civil society will not have all of the right answers either, but if we don t provide them the space to work and to ask the questions, we all lose. I assure you that in the Parliamentary Assembly, made up of representatives of the people, we value and listen to their input. Doing so is a feature of all well-functioning democracies. Regrettably, in a number of OSCE countries, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are facing increasing restrictions on their work, or even violence. The trend of labelling groups that receive foreign funding as foreign agents thereby publicly demonizing and attempting to discredit them must be reversed. I have repeatedly raised my concern about this in Russia, where hundreds of NGOs, from environmental groups to LGBT rights groups to election-monitoring organizations, have been subject to searches by the authorities since the foreign agent legislation came into effect in late I sincerely hope that draft legislation introducing similar provisions in Kyrgyzstan will not be adopted. Beyond the sometimes difficult legal confines in which NGOs must now work, however, I have also noted many cases in which critics human rights defenders, lawyers, journalists and sometimes political activists are personally persecuted. Tax laws and other regulations are used (or in fact abused) to pursue and prosecute these courageous critics with the aim of silencing them. Based on the facts of these cases, some of them must be recognized as political prisoners or prisoners of conscience. There are many cases, but you will all have seen my expressions of concern about: Anar Mammadli, Rasul Jafarov, Emin Huseynov, Leyla Yunus and Khadija Ismayilova in Azerbaijan. In Russia, I have raised concerns about the sentencing of Sergei Udaltsov and Leonid Razvozzhayev, and remain concerned about the case of Nadiya Savchenko. In Tajikistan, I have raised concerns about the sentencing of Shukhrat Kudratov and new charges against Zayd Saidov, shortly before the elections earlier this year. While I still have questions about the cases of several individuals in Kazakhstan, I appreciated the openness to dialogue by authorities there and their facilitation of my visit to opposition leader Vladimir Kozlov in a penal colony last June and to my call for the early release of Roza Tuletaeva. I will continue monitoring closely further human rights related developments in this and other countries. In this context, I welcome the emphasis put by the Chairmanship on support for National Human Rights Institutions. These groups, who advocate for the rights of all of us, have an important complementary role to play in the promotion of the rule of law in the OSCE area. Within the OSCE PA, we have seen that parliaments can also support their work for instance by establishing a Human Rights Committee the work of the British Parliament s Human Rights Committee is a positive example. Parliaments should welcome the input of national human rights institutions and take advantage of their expertise, studying their recommendations, and hearing from them within parliamentary commissions. Guantanamo Earlier this year, I led a delegation from the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly to Washington and to the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The continued detention of well over 100 people at Guantanamo for many years remains a dark spot on the United States 3

4 reputation in the sphere of human rights and rule of law. To support the U.S. in the process of closing the facility, I have written to officials in all of your countries, asking that your governments actively explore the possibility to host detainees that have been cleared for transfer. Only a small number of the remaining 122 detainees are facing or are likely to face formal charges before a court. Citing the laws of war, the U.S. government asserts that detainees can be held until the end of hostilities. While it is true that there is a long tradition internationally of holding prisoners during war time to keep them out of active combat on battlefields, the U.S. Government s application of this approach to criminal terrorists captured when fighting terrorism is not reasonable. With no clearly defined battlefield and a war that does not have a clear-cut end, this legal theory has worrying consequences for the long-standing principle of the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time. I am therefore encouraging both OSCE parliamentarians and participating States to engage in an active discussion to consider if an alternative legal framework, beyond domestic criminal law and outdated laws of war, may be necessary to address modern security threats. Terrorists and non-state actors continue to pose significant security threats across the OSCE and beyond, and a purely state-based legal framework may no longer be sufficient to address these concerns. And I ask you all for your courageous and determined commitment to create conditions so that your countries can receive detainees deemed suitable for transfer. In January this year there were 54 detainees already approved for transfer. We must mobilize all of our resources in order to allow a return to real and dignified life for these men who were taken away from their countries, away from families and friends and who for 13 years have waited for an opportunity to restart their lives. I hope that one year from now our actions will allow us to all look in the mirror and feel relief at having put an end to this collective shame. I am very happy that some Latin American countries are beginning to show greater readiness to host current detainees and I am encouraged by similar steps taken by some of our participating States. But a real solution requires more and, as I said last year, some of us are able to do more; it will be unforgivable if we don't increase our work towards this end. The Crisis in and around Ukraine We have all been engaged in working to find solutions to the crisis in and around Ukraine, where the Russian Federation is occupying the Crimean Peninsula and supporting separatist rebels in the east of the country. These developments not just in the political-military dimension, but the results in the human dimension have shaken this organization. I am also deeply disturbed by the actions of the occupying power in Crimea, who have exiled many from the local Crimean Tatar population, and who are shutting down independent media outlets. The fighting in eastern Ukraine has resulted in over five thousand fatalities, and has generated over one million six hundred thousand displaced persons. One million have sought refuge abroad and six hundred thousand have sought shelter in other regions of Ukraine. Russia s continued support for separatist rebels perpetuates war and lawlessness, hurting all people in the region. This is a humanitarian crisis that must be addressed here and now. 4

5 Political resolution is required, but a solution to the human suffering has to be a priority. In this regard, I also call on the Ukrainian authorities to quickly and transparently investigate the recent cases of extra-judicial killings of people affiliated with the previous government. While we understandably are focused on the fighting in the east of the country, Ukraine must continue to investigate and hold accountable those responsible for such killings and the Odessa tragedy from May last year. Torture and the death penalty Last year in Baku, the OSCE PA s human rights committee also addressed the issue of torture, once again demonstrating that the Assembly is an effective body for the discussion of difficult topics. We raised concern at the persistence of cases of torture and other gross mistreatment within the OSCE region, stressing the need for constant and proactive commitment from States and their officials. Torture must be abolished not only in law, but in fact, and we continue to urge countries to guarantee independent monitoring of detention facilities so that we can work together towards the complete eradication of torture in the OSCE area. Similarly, the Parliamentary Assembly is on record from 2010 in recognizing the death penalty as an inhuman and degrading punishment, an act of torture unacceptable to States respecting human rights. I reiterate calls on all OSCE participating States to declare an immediate moratorium on all executions and to work towards a complete abolition of this practice. In view of the fallibility of human justice, recourse to the death penalty inevitably carries a risk that innocent people may be killed. Surely we can agree that enough innocent people are already dying and suffering. Final remarks This year we mark the fortieth anniversary of the Helsinki Final Act. Progress in the sphere of human rights has been achieved in many ways during this time. But clearly, that progress has not been enough. My remarks today have been long, yes, but they only begin to scratch the surface of human rights and humanitarian concerns currently facing our populations. Were I to raise all of the issues that I am concerned about, there would be almost no end to this meeting. Nonetheless, I hope that each and every one of you will take this opportunity to address the concerns that I have raised, and to raise yet new concerns. We must be open to addressing these challenges. While I am a strong believer in the OSCE and its principles, I remain disappointed by the inability of the organization to fully deliver on these principles. Reforming the OSCE to make it more effective has been an almost constant discussion for the past decade and longer. Yet here we are today, and the Organization is not even able to agree on a legal status, clearly crippled by the consensus-based decision-making process. The retention of consensus as a basis for the OSCE is failing our ability to deliver on human rights. This is simply not good enough. If we are to deliver on the expectations of our populations in improving their human rights, we cannot delay, as I hope my remarks today have shown. 5