CONADENJlAL SUM (93) PV 1and 2

~,Qt"Eorope Summit Sommet dU~il de I'Euro~Je Wien '93 'Europaratsgipfel

Minutes of the Councilioflurope Summit

(Vienna, 8-9 October 1~3)

Strasbourg CONFIDENTIAL

- i - SUM(93)PV1

SUMMARY

Minutes of the Opening and First Sitting held on Friday 8 October 1993 (afternoon) at the Austria Center Vienna (SUM(93)PV1) ...... 1

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: List of Heads of State and Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs ...... al

Appendix 2: Agenda ...... all

Appendix 3: Declaration on Russia ...... al3

Appendix 4: Address by Mr Thomas KLESTIL, Austrian Federal President ...... alS

Appendix 5: Address by Mr Miguel Angel MARTINEZ, President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe ...... a19

Appendix 6: Address by Mrs Catherine LALUMIERE, Secretary General of the Council of Europe ...... a21

Appendix 7: Statement by Mr Franz VRANITZKY, Federal Chancellor of Austria ...... a25 - I - SUM(93)PVI

OPENING

Mrs Catherine LALUMIERE, Secretary General of the Council of Europe, opened the sitting at 2.53 pm and announced the arrival of Mr Thomas Klestil, Federal President of Austria.

The sitting was interrupted briefly while the Austrian Federal President was ushered in.

Mr Thomas KLESTIL, Federal President of Austria, delivered the inaugural address of the Summit which is reproduced in Appendix 4.

The Secretary General interrupted the sitting for a few moments to accompany the departing Federal President of Austria.

Mr Miguel Angel MARTINEZ, President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, delivered the address reproduced in Appendix 5.

The SECRETARY GENERAL of the Council of Europe delivered the address reproduced in Appendix 6.

At the close of her speech, she proposed that Mr Franz VRANITZKY, Federal Chancellor of Austria, be elected to the Chairmanship of the Summit.

The Federal Chancellor of Austria was elected Chairman of the Summit meeting by acclamation.

The FEDERAL CHANCELLOR OF AUSTRIA took the Chair and made the statement reproduced in Appendix 7.

FIRST SITTING

1. The CHAIRMAN gave the floor to Mr Mitterrand, President of the French Republic.

2. Mr MITIERRAND, President of the French Republic, expressed his satisfaction at the holding of the Summit meeting, which he had not been alone in proposing. The Conference was being held in Vienna, the ideal place in Europe for convening such a meeting. He thanked the Austrian authorities and the Council of Europe for having organised the Conference. He did so not only as a matter of good manners but with sincerity; the remainder of his address would be equally sincere even though everyone might not fully agree with what he said. -, SUM(93)PV1 - 2 - I;. Stressing that all the participants around the Conference table were speaking of Europe, he :~I himself could only perceive bits of Europe, fragments of Europe and he was not sure that ~ ): these bits made up a whole. Yesterday, Europe was divided into two parts - based on opposing philosophical, social and ideological systems - and that had been great misfortune. 11' Today, they were witnessing the triumph of freedom and independence for numerous States and peoples, and deservedly so. Nevertheless, he did not know who could have imagined that human society might ever be peaceful, for scarcely had one crisis been overcome than other threats appeared on the horizon. ,.f He insisted that he had no regrets about the passing away of the former Europe: he was happy to have witnessed the collapse of an empire whose characteristics were diametrically opposed h to his own convictions. Nevertheless, the new circumstances called for clear vision and ~"' ~: strong determination. But, he repeated, one could only see fragments of Europe. Formerly, people deplored having two Europes each attached to a different super-power. They had been 11' right to complain of this situation. But today what kind of Europe were they heading for? A 32-member Europe or an even larger one? Or was there going to be complete fragmentation, with each ethnic group becoming a State? One might in such a situation wonder who could prevent the creation of new powers and the reawakening of former hatreds.

Although geographically speaking Europe was one continent, it also had a history, which none f of them could forget, and a culture: this was reassuring, for it betokened that, despite the ,;, differences, all drew on the same sources. ~i There were places where Europe was taking shape and where an effort was being made to pull in the same direction. There was the Europe of security: namely the CSCE. While the 11' Soviet Union still existed, it had sometimes been difficult to find acceptance for the need for the CSCE's existence. Today, one is justified in wondering exactly what the CSCE is, considering that it has - or should have - the task of ensuring security. The fact was that the CSCE in a sense was everybody and nobody. But who had ever seen his freedom , safeguarded by an institution which, although necessary, was far removed from the ordinary citizen? Peace should be on everyone's agenda at a time when tensions were increasing 11. everywhere, whether in Sarajevo or elsewhere. No one apart from a few humanitarian "' organisations seemed really interested. ~ ~;

He did not intend, however, to dwell exclusively on pessimistic aspects. On the contrary, he • 11' wished to describe his vision - and that of his country - of what might be done to react to the situation. Some of the bits of Europe that he had referred to had considerable importance. The Community of the twelve, with its 340 million citizens, represented a group of countries which, although sorely tried by the economic crisis, were nonetheless the most prosperous in Europe. He wondered whether the Community was capable of absorbing all European I' democratic countries, even though he would like this to be so. It was difficult to achieve this 1!. today owing to the constraints resulting from the creation of a single market within which '';I there was free movement of persons, capital and goods, together with the further constraints :~ accepted by the Twelve in the framework of the Maastricht Treaty. He was happy to have ' taken part in drafting this Treaty, which was very often criticised. Public opinion sometimes I seemed to reject it because of the prevailing economic recession - although responsibility for this could not be assigned to governments - and also because of Europe's weakness when confronted with situations such as the one in the former Yugoslavia. As for the question as to whether there was too much interference by the European Community, he believed that this was not the case. He stressed that the Maastricht Treaty had not yet been ratified by all the I· '

• - 3 - SUM(93)PV1 member States of the Community and that the text was therefore not yet legally binding. One could not therefore criticise the Treaty itself for failing to settle the existing problems. The Treaty stipulated that the Community was an open entity and hence other States could apply for accession. Several European countries had expressed this wish and he hoped that in the not-too-distant future, namely within a year at the most, these countries, and in particular Austria, the host country to the present Conference, would become members of the Conununity. It could therefore be expected that the European Union would ultimately have 13, 14, 15 or even more members and therefore that this bit of Europe would grow bigger.

One might well wonder, nevertheless, if this would provide the answer to everything and whether it would be acceptable for one enormous economic power to exist on the one hand and on the other, a number of isolated countries condemned to suffer, for a long time to come, from the discredit inherited from a former system. He hoped that the Conununity would not ignore the other democratic countries of Europe and that it would not remain an inward-looking body. In this respect, he recalled the existence of various association agreements concluded between the Community and other countries represented at the present Conference. It would be desirable, moreover, for the member States of the Community to assess their real strength objectively in order to detect where the seeds of their weakness might lie. Above all, everything should de done to avoid a system which would be tantamount to reintroducing relationships of a colonial type. Such a situation would be inacceptable, in view of the fact that every State was recognised as enjoying an equal measure of sovereignty, dignity and power. He recalled, in this respect, that within the Conununity, certain countries were regarded for demographic reasons as small countries, despite their illustrious past. This was the case with Greece, whose history was among the greatest, with Portugal, one of the most ancient European nation states, and with Ireland with its unique culture. But when the European Council met, each State had rights equal to those of the others.

Democratic Europe as a whole needed an organisation which answered to this definition. He himself was not alone qualified to define who should be represented in such an organisation; the existing institutions - and he thought of the Council of Europe - would take it upon themselves to make the distinction between the countries that were democratic and those which were not. He referred in this respect to Russia once democracy had been established there - or perhaps it was already - but he left it to the other participants to make up their minds on that. He also referred to America, which had often proved to be the closest friend for many countries represented at the Summit and which played a useful role, especially with regard to security. He felt that the United States should be able to express its opinion if asked to do so. Paraphrasing the saying coined by the first King of Italy, and adapting it to Europe, he said "Europa fara da se", or in other words "If Europe does not take its own destiny in hand, who will?". He was convinced that if Europe did not take charge of its own destiny, others would not fail to do so.

He declared that he was unable to agree with those who claimed that countries such as Bosnia, Serbia and Croatia were doomed by some sort of destiny or fatality to suffer violence and bloodshed. On the contrary, he felt it was possible to overcome all difficulties, as testified by the reality of Franco-German friendship which existed despite the three wars in which they had been opponents. He recalled that since his own youth, he had been told successively that the hereditary enemy of France was England, then the Austro-Hungarian Empire and then Prussia, and there might well be another one somewhere else. .,

SUM(93)PV1 - 4 -

The European countries which were today not members of the Community, who represented the majority, should not be nx!uced to applying at regular intervals for subsidies from the Community countries. He was convinced that there could be no freedom without institutions - even though there was always the risk that at a certain moment institutions might eventually exert a stranglehold on liberties. He had long believed in the need to create a Confederation of democratic States of Europe; he did not mind what it was called but the concept was dear to him.

Why could the Council of Europe not act as the instrument for building a purely European organisation in which countries would deal with matters of common interest on an equal footing? That was within its sphere of competence. The present meeting was a first, but why could the Heads of State and Government of democratic Europe not meet together at least once a year to discuss matters of general concern to them? A permanent body like the Council of Europe was needed, for exchanging information, organising structures and defining competences in fields such as the environment, transport, communications and culture and many others. Each of the States represented here should be able at any time to seize this institution, which might be the Council of Europe, so that Europe could really begin to exist. This was something for the Summit meeting to decide. The European Community, the European Union was not enough. One day this type of community structure would be open to all, but that would take time. Could they allow themselves to leave the Europe represented at the Conference in limbo for years to come? He was worried about the present vacuum in Europe. Politically, Europe did not exist. Were they at last going to undertake the construction of Europe? That was the wish he expressed for the Conference.

Even as he was speaking, death and suffering held sway in numerous towns of former Yugoslavia. He referred to the endless shooting, the pillaging, the hijacking of relief convoys and the fate of the populations exposed to massacre. He wondered whether the Council of Europe should not launch an appeal to the belligerents to cease this massacre. Sarajevo was a victim in this conflict, even though its territory was not being contested. This was an example of gratuitous crime. Other wars were being prepared. New conflicts of interest were emerging, the fire was going to encircle part of Europe because rules would not have been laid down soon enough.

The question was whether they were going to decide to use the existing institution - the Council of Europe - in order to create an embryo for this pan-European institution which would make it possible to bring together those in authority, to organise their work, to discuss the real problems and not merely have theoretical debates. Without an institution, there could be no liberty. Without an institution, there was no democracy; without an institution, there was no Europe. In the Council of Europe, the goodwill, the skills and the means existed. It was up to the governments; of the member States to do the rest.

---,-_-- -- ...... ~ I - 5 - SUM(93)PV1

3. Mr HA VEL, President of the Czech Republic spoke as follows:

"Presidents and Prime Ministers. participants of the Summit of the Council of Europe

I believe that all of us - whether from the west, the east, the south or the north of Europe - can agree that the common basis of all the efforts to integrate Europe is the wealth of values and ideals we share. Among such values and ideals are respect for the unique human being and his or her freedom, the principle of civic society and the rule of law, democracy and a pluralist political system, the market economy, decentralisation, and the determination to create moulds of coexistence, mutual understanding and creative cooperation between different nations and ethnic, religious and cultural groups and between different spheres of civilization­ all in the spirit of universality, of unity, diversity, and mutual responsibility for peace, security and freedom of everyone. This intellectual and spiritual foundation of European civilization has grown out of thousands of years of history, from its many intellectual and spiritual traditions, and from its vast experience, both good and bad. After the fall of communism, our continent has been presented with a unique opportunity to unite on that foundation and, in the long run, to become - for the first time in a very long time, if not for the first time in history - one of the stabilizing factors in today's world.

Despite general agreement on the values upon which European integration should rest, this process today, four years after the fall of the Iron Curtain, has encountered a number of obstacles. Many people are even beginning to doubt that the process can succeed, that it could lead to the kind of Europe in which everyone will feel comfortable, in which no one will feel repressed or threatened, and no one will have any reason to behave in a confrontational manner.

What are the reasons for this disparity? Why, so soon after the collapse of a bi-polar Europe and at a time when we all appear to want the same things, do we suddenly feel so much doubt? Why does a goal that seemed within reach at the beginning of 1990 now seem so distant?

There are many different reasons for this state of affairs, but I feel strongly that they all have one thing in common: the erroneous belief that the great European task which we are facing is a purely technical, a purely administrative, or a purely systemic matter, and that all we need to do, therefore, is come up with ingenious structures, new institutions and new legal standards and regulations. We believe, in short, that it is enough to endlessly discuss, or more precisely, to argue over technical matters without the negotiating partners attempting to change anything in themselves and in the habitual motives and stereotypes of their behaviour. Thus the very values that were to be secured by systemic changes get completely lost in the network of debates over those changes. In other words, what was to have been merely a means to an end becomes the main theme. This necessarily weakens our very capacity to agree. SUM(93)PV1 - 6 -

Many of the great supranational empires or alliances in history, or at least those that have survived for long periods of time and enriched the human history of their era in some way, not only had strong central ideas and were leaders of intellectual and spiritual advancement; they also were outstanding in their determination to stand behind these ideas and their willingness to make great sacrifices to bring about their practical fulfilment, since it was clear to everyone that these sacrifices were worth it. It was not just a matter, then, of believing in certain values, but of a deep and generally shared feeling that those values carried with them moral obligations.

I fear it is precisely that which is critically lacking in Europe today. We argue about quotas, tariffs and interest rates. We assert our own partial and often very selfish interests, be they geopolitical, ideological, economic or something else. We hope we can solve the problem of minorities by agreeing on how many hours children must learn their mother tongue in school, or which road signs should be bilingual. And so, all too often, we succumb to the notion that should we manage to discover a formula for compromise with which everyone agrees, we will have succeeded. Yet administrative measures, general treaties and high­ sounding declarations - the products of a long series of negotiations among experts and specialists - will scarcely be able to save us if they are not the expression of a common European purpose. Because only that can guarantee that the agreements and measures will not just remain a scrap of paper.

The greatness of the idea of European integration on democratic foundations consists in this: such an integration ought to - and must, if it is to happen at all - overcome the old Herderian idea of the nation-state as the highest expression of national existence, thus enabling all nationalities to realize national autonomy fully within the framework of a civil society constructed by the supranational community. The greatness of this idea lies in its power to suffocate the demons of nationalism, those main instigators of modern wars, and enables nations to live in peace, security, freedom and prosperity by surrendering some of their immediate interests in favour of the far greater benefits accruing from the implementation of their long-range interests.

Succinctly put: The Europe of today lacks an ethos, imagination, generosity, the ability to see beyond the horizon of its particular interests, be they partisan or otherwise, and to resist pressure from various lobbies. Europe lacks a deep identification with the genuine meaning and purpose of integration efforts. It is as though it has simply not achieved a profound sense of responsibility for itself as a whole and thus for the genuine prospects of success for all those who live in it now, and in the future.

Are we really so incorrigible? Twice in the 20th century the whole of Europe has paid a tragic price for the narrow-mindedness and lack of imagination of its democracies. These democracies failed for the first time when confronted with Nazism; they retreated and refused to resist the embryonic form of this evil, only to have to pay a million times more in the struggle against Nazism in its more developed form. The second time, they allowed Stalin to swallow up one half of our continent and bring history there to a halt. Today, this failure is coming back tragically to haunt not only those who have recently escaped from Soviet tyranny, but everyone, the whole world.

.. ------~--- .. •. - 7 - SUM(93)PV1

There is a saying: "Everything good and evil comes in threes." Democratic Europe cannot afford a third failure.

And yet I am afraid a third such failure is threatening us. I am not only thinking of the caution and indecision marking the attitudes of the developed part of Western Europe towards the post-communist countries. I am thinking as well, and above all, of how they have behaved so far in relation to what is going on in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in the whole of former Yugoslavia. The point of those peace talks ought to be a complex defense of precisely those values on which the future Europe should stand - that is, the values of a civic society based on the peaceful coexistence of various ethnic groups and cultures. Instead, they are more and more obviously an occasion to argue over the borders of ethnically purified ministates, as defined by clashes between illegal armies. An internationally recognised multinational State is being parcelled out according to the dictates of fanatical warlords. Such behaviour, regardless of how well-intentioned - and didn't Chamberlain have the best of intentions? - means in its consequences to sanctify the idea of the "ethnically pure State", of ethnic cleansing, and to deny the idea of the civic society. We talk and talk, we drown in compromises, we redraw the maps, we read the lips of the ethnic cleansers and, more critically all the time, we forget the fundamental values upon which we would like to build the future shape of our own continent. We are cutting off the very branch we are sitting on.

The reason for this sad state of affairs is simple: it lies in the belief that we can somehow outwit history and in the ostrich-like belief that the place of generous and dedicated commitment can be taken by appeasing the warring factions and giving in to their demands.

The former Yugoslavia is the first great and, at present, the most visible testing ground for Europe in the era that was initiated by the end of the Cold War. But it is not, of course, its only trial.

Another one consists in how we deal with the temptation to open the back gate and let in the demon of national collectivism with a seemingly innocent emphasis on the rights of minorities and on their right to self-determination. At first sight, this emphasis would seem harmless and beyond reproach. But one of its real consequences could be new unrest and tension, as it inevitably leads to questioning of the integrity of the individual states and the inviolability of their present borders and thus, even the validity of all postwar peace treaties. Attempts of this particular kind are dangerous chiefly because they look not to the future but to the past, for they call into question the very principle of civic society and the indivisible rights of the individual, as well as the certainty that only democracy, individual human rights and freedoms, and the civic principle can guarantee the genuinely full development of even that level of one's identity that is his or her membership in a nationality. SUM(93)PV1 - 8 -

There are countless such tests and pitfalls in Europe today. We cannot expect to do well in the tests, or avoid the pitfalls, if we continue to believe that we need not surrender any of our many particular interests, and that we need not accept the new Europe as a radical moral imperative, if we believe that it is enough within the framework of all the tried and true practices of politics so far to negotiate, argue, appoint commissions and go from conference with attache cases brimming with paper that wraps base and unimaginative interests in noble, high-sounding words.

If various Western States cannot rid themselves of their subconscious drive for a dominant position in their own sphere of interests, if they don't rid themselves of their self-centred protectionism and stop trying to outwit history by reducing the idea of Europe to a noble backdrop against which they continue to defend their own petty interests, and if the post­ communist States do not make radical efforts to come to terms with the ghosts their newly won freedom has turned loose, then Europe will only with great difficulty be able to respond to the challenge of the present and fulfil the opportunities that lie before it.

The Council of Europe, the oldest existing pan-European institution, exists to cultivate the values from which the spirit and ethos of European integration might grow, and to ensure that these values are embodied in iim:ernationallegal standards. If, as I contend, the main task of Europe today is to grasp the spirit of its own unification, to understand the moral obligations that flow from that, to assume - genuinely, and not just ostentatiously - a new type of responsibility, then the Counril of Europe can play a unique and indispensable role in carrying out this difficult task.

The Czech Republic would wef.eome this, and it is prepared to do everything in its power to make it happen.

Thank you for your attention."

4. Mr DEHAENE, Prime Minister of Belgium, spoke as follows:

"Mr Chairman,

First of all, may I offer my cordial thanks to the Austrian Government for its hospitality and also to all those who have contributed to bringing about this unique meeting in Europe.

I congratulate the new members, who now belong to this great European family for the efforts I~, they have made to comply with the democratic principles dear to us. These principles have represented on irreversible achievement for over 40 years.

Belgium unreservedly supports the policy of openness and co-operation towards the countries of Central and Eastern Europe which opt for democracy. As a matter of principle, it is attached to the pan-European dimension of the Council of Europe. It is necessary, however, to reconcile the respect for the conditions for accession to the Organisation with the need to consolidate the still fragile democratic structures of the candidate States.

------••... - 9- SUM(93)PV1

Our main concern is to make sure that the process of democratisation may continue wherever it has not yet reached a sufficient degree of stability. In this context, we are in favour of a system of accompaniment and supervision which would enable us to ensure that all States are continuing to progress along the path of democracy. This would provide us with the means, if and when necessary, to address recommendations to them and to make available our tried and tested expertise and instruments.

Mr Chairman,

It is in my capacity as President-in-Office of the Community that I speak. Indeed, my colleagues wished me to take advantage of this exceptional occasion to describe the work currently being carried out with respect to the Pact on Stability in Europe. At its meeting of 4 October, the European Council adopted a text, already communicated to you in Brussels, on the basis of which informal consultations will be conducted during the coming weeks with interested countries.

The efforts devoted by the Community to devising a Pact on Stability in Europe are obviously crucial. This ambitious project, initially submitted by France and reconsidered at the Copenhagen Council, will concentrate above all on issues relating to minorities and borders. It is inspired by three considerations: firstly, the urgent need to strengthen stability in Europe; secondly, the contribution which the Community can make towards the efforts of countries preparing to apply for accession; lastly, the implementation, in this double perspective, of the new phase consisting in the transition to the European Union.

In launching this process, the Community and its member States intend to operate in close liaison with existing Organisations, in particular the CSCE and the Council of Europe. The intention is therefore to take advantage of the texts, rules and mechanisms which already exist in the Council of Europe framework, or which should be approved on the basis of the guidelines to be adopted at this Summit. I think in particular of the fields of the protection of human rights, democratic development, transfrontier co-operation between regions and minority rights. And if, in the framework of round-table meetings to be organised, the appointment of a moderator were to be felt necessary, it is also foreseen that recourse could be had to the machinery offered by the CSCE or by the Council of Europe, depending on the preferences expressed by the parties concerned.

Mr Chairman,

Democracy is based principally on the pre-eminence of Jaw and respect for human rights. The protection of fundamental freedoms is the most significant achievement of the Council of Europe. For my own country, it is the cornerstone on which every member State should found and build its democracy. In this perspective, the progress achieved in 40 years of experience with the European Convention on Human Rights should enable us to adopt a more efficient organisation of the judicial organs concerned. Reforming the machinery for human rights protection will make it possible to cope with the increasing number of applications while maintaining the high quality of case law specific to Europe. SUM(93)PV1 - 10-

We welcome the agreement which has been reached in the last few days to endorse the creation of a single Court as a better instrument to ensure the effective respect of human rights.

Democracy and stability in Europe are intimately linked with the protection of national minorities. The dramatic situation prevailing in former Yugoslavia is a daily reminder of how fragile the balance still is in this respect. Hence the urgency of drawing up confidence­ building measures to create a climate of tolerance and understanding. Further, the respect of minorities must be based on fundamental principles. To my mind, these principles should be set out in a framework convention and serve as a model for nationallegislations and bilateral agreements concerning minorities.

Belgium welcomes the consensus achieved within the Council of Europe with a view to drawing up instruments for the protection of minorities, including an additional protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights.

Racism and intolerance are a matter of common concern. Xenophobia is enfeebling our societies and eating at the very foundations of democracy. Denouncing the resurgence of these manifestations is one way of combating them, but more is needed. A genuine plan of action must be implemented and this needs to be done before this canker causes the very machinery of democracy to break down. The European Community is also harnessing its energies and it seems to me essential that both European institutions should join forces. They should pay special attention to the need for a reliable statistical system providing full data and a thorough analysis of the nature and scope of racial harassment. Attention should also be paid to promoting a multidisciplinary approach to the problem and, in this context to heightening the awareness of all those engaged in applying the law.

In our work, we should give pride of place to developing the regions. The principle of subsidiarity has frequently been referred to in other circles and it undoubtedly corresponds to a legitimate concern. Accordingly, local and regional authorities have acquired ever-greater influence over recent years. These authorities must be welcomed and allowed to express their views. It is for us to consider how this can be done.

In the face of all the upheavals we are experiencing, the ideals of the Council of Europe acquire ever greater importance. Our Organisation possesses the necessary instruments to help us through this crucial period. We must display our firm determination to use all the means at our disposal.

In so doing, it is obvious that we must collaborate with other international organisations.

I am thinking here of the CSCE, whose complementary role alongside the Council of Europe cannot escape any well-informed observer. We might for example exploit certain parallel efforts in the field of minorities, the human dimension and intergovernmental co-operation in the fields of culture, science and the environment. - 11 - SUM(93)PV1

At a time when Belgium is chairing the Council of Ministers of the European Community and when, in a few weeks, it will take over the chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, it is particularly well placed to help to contribute to seeking interaction between the Council and the Community and the better use of their respective human and financial resources.

Mr Chairman,

In our view, this Vienna Summit marks in solemn fashion the triumph of democracy throughout Europe, and by the same token it sweeps away the division which has blighted our continent for too long. The common attachment of our countries to democratic values and the common commitment to respect them and defend them forges a very strong link between us. Belgium attaches the greatest importance to ensuring that this link may be strengthened for the benefit of all countries.

5. Mr KOHL, Federal Chancellor of Germany stated that whilst the division of Europe had been overcome, for many people questions of peace and stability, employment, and social security remained a source of concern and anxiety. The fundamental mission of the Council of Europe thus remained unfulfilled and indeed just as important as in the early years of the Organisation.

Despite this he wished to express his rejection of the climate of pessimism often to be found in Europe - a pessimism which he regarded as paralysing and foolish. Rather, he wished to express his happiness and indeed gratitude at the peace and freedom that had been gained in Europe, notably in his own country and in that, for example, of a previous speaker, President Have!. This newly-won freedom gave reason for optimism. Now that the walls had fallen, it was up to those present to seize the opportunity to ensure a free, democratic and stable Europe.

The Council of Europe, the oldest European organisation, had a key role to play in this process. With free Europe becoming larger, the demand upon the Council of Europe was all the greater. The human and civil rights advances that had been achieved in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe were in no small measure a tribute to the work of the Council of Europe, which through its binding legal instruments - notably the Convention on Human Rights - demonstrated that freedom was a prerequisite for any democratic and civilised State.

Existing international legal instruments needed to be completed however, by others to covering minority rights in order to overcome the tensions and risks, both internal and external, which inadequate respect for minority rights engendered. The Council of Europe was the guardian of Europe's spiritual heritage of respect for democracy and human rights - which constituted the essential basis of peace and reconciliation - and was, therefore, worthy of the support of those present in its mission to offer assistance to the new democratic States. The Council of Europe's fundamental message required daily reiteration, and not simply an airing at occasions such as this Summit. SUM(93)PV1 - 12 -

The Council of Europe's instruments were well suited to support the construction of the rule of law. Mr Kohl was particularly happy that member States were on the point of agreeing to improve the existing Human Rights structure, notably through the creation of a permanent Court of Human Rights with a view to reducing delay in the settlement of cases and thus furthering protection of hul11lllll rights. The 1950 Convention represented an enormous achievement in international law and a veritable safeguard for the Continent, but it was now necessary to develop it further_ The awful scenes of conflict, some of it not further than some two hundred kilometres from Vienna, were testimony to the need for mechanism for the protection of minority rights. Confidence-building measures and bilateral co-operation treaties such as those concluded by Gemnany with Eastern neighbours played an important role. But these were not sufficient. The Council of Europe had an important contribution to make in improving multilateral guarantees for the protection of minority rights. Building on the high political standards already pll1t in place by the CSCE, national minority rights should be further assured, both by an Oiltline Convention and an Additional Protocol to the existing Convention including a clear definition of the term national minority.

The work started on this matlla" should be rapidly concluded. If such binding international legal instruments would have existed at the beginning of this century, a lot of misery and bloodshed could have been a'roirled.

In conclusion, Mr Kohl affmomcd that this Summit represented an intermediate step in the process of improvement of ilUIC:mational guarantees, but an important step nonetheless. The Summit signalled for him prollllliise and hope. Those present now needed to face the common task and prove their capacity 1l.\JJ take appropriate action.

6. The CHAIRMAN agra:cl that concrete proposals for action would be welcome.

7. Mr CIAMPI, Prime "MlUrister of Italy, thanked Federal Chancellor Vranitzky for his invitation to the Summit and Pllesident Mitterrand for taking the original initiative. He felt that the expectations of unity, stability, peace and economic progress raised by the fall of the Berlin Wall required of European leaders to show courage, determination, and imagination. After the collapse of the totalil!arian regimes and at a time when, in other parts of the world, surprising signs of reconcilia1!ion were appearing, Europe had to be able to avoid the explosion of nationalism and the resurgence of phenomena of intolerance and racial hatred, and of irrational instincts such a those which had led to the tragedy in former Yugoslavia. Events there, he stated, were proof of the lack of attention on the part of the international community - and Europe primallidy: the speed of change had caused a series of hesitations and contradictions in terms of primtiples, rules of conduct and the reaction to adopt in the face of the phenomena of widespread aggression.

~------~- - ..~--- ' - 13 - SUM(93)PV1

He was convinced that, owing to its experience of more than 40 years and its legal and institutional achievements, the Council of Europe could and ought to make its contribution to solving the problems which Europe had to face. This should be done at every possible level, whether intergovernmental or interparliamentary, or that of local democracy. He stressed that the protection of human rights, the defence of democracy, the fight against intolerance, xenophobia and racism, were questions which governments should urgently examine. These issues had to be addressed by all members of the Organisation, old and new. It was in daily life, at grassroots level, that progress had to be made by giving citizens the possibility of taking part in joint discussions of questions concerning the whole of Europe. Everyone should take part in this discussion both as an individual and as a member of the community. In this context he thought also of national minorities. It was by involving them in this joint discussion that democracy could be boosted in the old member States of the Council of Europe and the choice of democracy by its new members could be made irreversible.

The Council of Europe, in co-operation with other European institutions had to play its part in this action; but it should take care to avoid possible overlaps between the actions of different institutions. In this way it would be able to accomplish the tasks eiUrusted. tp it by the Heads of State and Government meeting at the Vienna Summit, in pursuance of the Declaration to be adopted at the end of the proceedings. As for co-operation with the CSCE, Italy which was taking over the presidency, would continue to work for better co-operation between the two institutions.

With its long tradition of European intergovernmental co-operation the Council of Europe was being called upon to safeguard human rights, including those of minorities, to promote democratic institutions and to combat phenomena such as intolerance. European co-operation of this kind, in particular with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, would help to build a broad area of democratic security. He mentioned, as an obvious example of the Council of Europe's prolific action to reform democratic institutions in Central and Eastern Europe, the work done by the European Commission for Democracy through Law - the Venice Commission. He stressed that the Council of Europe should broaden this European co-operation and not limit its assistence to the new member countries of the Organisation, but extend it to non-member States too. Special visits organised to dispense institutional advice and monitoring assistance in the field of civil rights, electoral procedures and the conditions in which elections are held. On this score he welcomed the fact that Russia, which benefited from special assistance programmes, had succeeded in ending media censorship. Important progress had been made in this country, and it should be encouraged to continue with these reforms.

He said that Italy welcomed the impending completion of the work on reform of the control mechanism for human rights. He recalled that, since the beginning of this work, his country had stressed the need to strengthen the supervisory system, without however prejudicing the case-law of the organs of the European Convention on Human Rights. Referring to the third theme of the Summit, the protection of national minorities, he hoped that solutions might be found throughout Europe to eliminate various factors of instability. In this respect, he SUM(93)PV1 - 14- supported the declaration by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe which refused to accept the prospect of minorities becoming cut off and inward-looking. He also agreed with her over the need to encourage co-habitation and understanding in societies by reminding everyone of their rights and duties. The exercise of these rights could not, however, call into question the integrity of the territory concerned. Given the specificity of minorities, he favoured a legal instrument in the form of a framework convention for the effective protection of their rights, and underlined that this instrument should be fairly flexible owing to the different situations of minorities in Europe. Italy had militated in various European political frameworks, in particular that of the Central European Initiative, for legal solutions concerning the protection of minorities. He deplored the fact that consensus had not been reached in this connection, but work on a legal instrument was continuing at several levels.

As for the fight against racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and intolerance, these dangerous phenomena were re-appearing in Europe. In order that the factors fostering these phenomena might be controlled, he made a plea for amongst other things, rational migration policies and other policies on the organisation of social work. He viewed current migration policies in Europe as being guided by duties in terms of social responsibility and solidarity. He recalled that, following these manifestations of racism and intolerance, Italy had adopted national legislative measures to deal with those kinds of behaviour which undermined one of the fundamental values of European society, ie that of equality between all human beings, and Italy supported the declaration to be adopted on this subject by the Summit. He hoped that governments would take measures to ensure the respect of citizens' rights and duties. These measures should also include practical actions to educate young people in order to prevent the emergence of phenomena of intolerance. Finally, he thanked Chancellor Vranitzky for the way Austria was hosting this Summit and expressed his wish that the Council of Europe might meet the challenges of the Third Millennium.

8. Mr KOIVISTO, President of Finland, said that over the last 40 years the Council of Europe had seen the beginning and the end of the Cold War, and was participating in building the new Europe. The principles of the rule of law, human rights, and fundamental freedoms still constituted the cornerstones on which the Organisation had been built.

He said that a State could not only be built on values of external security, but that in order to survive it must also embrace the values of the Council of Europe. It was appropriate in this sense that the Council of Europe had been called upon to assist in establishing its values throughout the new Europe. It was in the interest of all nations to assist the Organisation, and in their interest to embrace democratic security.

Today, he added, representatives of several States which had applied for membership had been present. Pursuing a policy of openness towards these countries which were seeking co­ operation with the Council was the best way to support them in their reforms; one should ensure that no new barriers would divide Europe again.

- --·-·- ...... ,_. ___ ...... - 15 - SUM(93)PV1

The recent events in Russia, he continued, demonstrated the importance of democratic security in Europe as a whole. He expressed his personal hope that Russia's reforms would make headway so that it could soon join the Organisation. He looked forward to the multi-party elections announced for December.

He noted that the Council co-operated with and complemented the work of other international organisations. This Summit had been convened in order to give a new impetus to the Council for it to meet new European challenges.

He said that it had been a pleasure for him last year to host in Helsinki the CSCE Summit, at which a number of new member countries of the CSCE not yet members of the Council had been present. Efforts had been made at that meeting to place an emphasis on human rights. He had pointed out to these countries that their membership brought obligations, as well as rights. Subsequently, he wondered what additional security membership had brought to these countries.

He ended by saying that in the coming years much tolerance and patience would be needed, and that while credit should be given for achievement, it should also be given for good intentions.

9. Mr GONZALEZ, President of the Spanish Government, thanked Federal Chancellor Vranitzky for his invitation to the Vienna Summit and said that new responses must be made to the new reality of the European continent. He stressed that history had vindicated the fundamental values of the Council of Europe, proclaiming the triumph of democracy and freedom. It had probably occurred to the founders of the Council of Europe to assemble the democratic countries of all Europe at such a Conference one day, even though this might have been hard to envisage in the situation which prevailed in the Iberian Peninsula during that year of 1948 or in the divided post-war Europe.

Europe today was facing a period of profound political, economic and social transformations foreshadowing new realities. This historic moment called for daring and imagination to overcome the consequences of a certain disorder and to build lasting European relations on firm foundations.

He stressed that a new common identity was now in the making, founded on common cultural roots and embodying new types of international co-operation and a form of genuine European democratic awareness. This should be the strength of the Council of Europe, whose prestige and moral authority were increasing daily, as demonstrated by the constant interest of potential new member countries. The Council of Europe represented the ideal frame of reference for this common democratic identity, characterised by two special, and more than ever necessary, functions. The Organisation's prime responsibility was to establish the main principles of law and to consolidate the paramount values forming the nucleus for co­ existence between European nations, and which constituted the foundation of their societies. 1 SUM(93)PV1 - 16 - I' I' li, -<1 He also recalled its role in guaranteeing respect for these principles and the implementation I~ of the undertakings arising fr001 ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights. He considered this a fundamental feature of the Council of Europe, giving it unique status in I,' 11 the international sphere. Spain had long considered it necessary to strengthen the Convention by improving the workings of its judicial bodies.

He was convinced that the co111rept of democratic security took material form in the Council of Europe itself. The Council embodied two concepts crucial to Europe's common future: security and democracy. At present, security was inseparable from the deepening of democracy. Only within a democracy could the complex problems of the new Europe be addressed in order to neutralise potential for destabilisation. In so far as disagreements could be resolved by dialogue, the CCilUncil of Europe's moral authority exerted increasing influence on the conduct of Europerum affairs. Harmonious co-operation with other European organisations, in particular the CSCE, stemmed from the Council's effort to increase its h' effectiveness and from its grO'Wiling adaptation to day-to-day reality.

Europe's stability and security would be commensurate with the development of democratic values. Democratic nations bamm!ed together to develop the concepts of integration or regional co-operation and to promote llm:!man rights, legal guarantees and civil liberties among its members were building a peaceful future for their peoples. In a democratic Europe, citizens 11, had to be able to avail themsel'Ks of these rights, irrespective of origin, race or religion. The O

Since attaining democracy, Spaiim had regarded respect for minorities as an essential ingredient of democracy. He mentioned several principles which, in his opinion, typified a democratic society: the individual as the :!C!Jle subject of human rights; inadmissibility of any form of either negative or positive discrimination on the ground of belonging to a minority; certain 'HI restrictions placed by the autlluorities on the exercise of rights by persons belonging to h'I· minorities could be justified fmr reasons of public security. I~·

'HI H'i· I~· '~} • . ~ . .. - 17 - SUM(93)PV1

The basic question was to establish the limits within which the concept of an individual's membership of a minority could be applied independently of other considerations in political affairs, having regard to its enormous potential as a destabilising element.

In a democratic society, ways of ensuring greater respect for the rights of neighbours and persons belonging to another culture could always be found.

In the present state of uncertainty, he resolutely supported the adoption by the Council of Europe of a plan of action to promote both the democratic development of each member country and democratic co-operation in the context of their relations with each other.

He also recommended decisive action to uphold common values and to make the Organisation a permanent stronghold of peace and democracy. For this purpose, he felt that it was indispensable for the future European Union created by the Treaty of Maastricht to offer its means of action for defending democracy at times of peril to all Council of Europe member countries; the CSCE must extend its conflict prevention mechanisms to the problems of intolerance and discrimination; the Council of Europe must perfect the control mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights, emphasising the judicial aspect; finally, .the · Council of Europe must examine the possibility of embodying in its own structures the essentials of European citizenship, included in the Treaty establishing the European Union of the Twelve.

In conclusion, he said that the Organisation should be a fundamental cornerstone for the protection and consolidation of democracy in Europe, and the guardian of individual and collective freedom and mutual tolerance and respect among European citizens wishing to live in peace under the rule of law.

10. Mr V AN DEN BROEK, Member of the Commission of the European Communities, spoke as follows:

"The meeting of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe member States has brought us together at the invitation of the Federal Chancellor of the Austrian Republic, whom we sincerely thank for acting on the initiative of the President of the French Republic.

This first Summit is being held at a time when the Council of Europe has achieved roughly three-quarters of its membership potential within the geographical limits of the European continent. With 32 member States, following the accession of Romania, to which the Commission of the European Communities offers its welcome, an ever-clearer picture of the evolutive structure of the European architecture emerges from each successive meeting. A future Summit meeting may enable us to observe the continuation and proper functioning of the process, and perhaps even its completion.

Europe's new identity is taking shape; the Treaty establishing the European Union, whose entry into force can be hoped for fairly shortly, is helping to define Europe and constitutes a major factor in its construction. SUM(93)PV1 - 18 -

The political declaration which we are to adopt at the end of our proceedings sums up the questions which will hold our attention in the immediate future; the Commission of the European Communities participated in drawing up this European agenda and is gratified by the role assigned to it and by the approaches adopted; the Commission of the European Communities is able to endorse without reservation all the themes set forth in the political declaration. The themes, which range from protection of minorities to operational decisions affecting the various activities of the Council of Europe and the Community itself, generally reflect the challenges which must be faced by European society as a whole.

It is now quite plain that the same issues arise in both Strasbourg and Brussels: these come down to two questions:

Will the Council of Europe prove its ability to defme the criteria for and foster the development of democratic security throughout the continent?

Will the European Union be capable of mustering the political resolve needed to frame a common foreign policy which will ensure the goal of progress and security on the European continent?

The objectives of the Summit can already direct the replies towards the affrrmative if its conclusions are faithfully carried into effect.

This being so, it is plain that the present Community and the future European Union have many aims in common with the Council of Europe. What has hitherto been termed "necessary complementarity to avoid duplication between the two Organisations" will increasingly develop into actions carried out jointly wherever usefulness requires and, I hope, results achieved by common endeavour.

Relations between the two Organisations will reflect this trend; even now, in support of the numerous co-operation and assistance actions on behalf of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, the Community and the Council of Europe will eo-sponsor the G-24 Conference on 6 and 7 December 1993 in Strasbourg to improve co­ operation and assistance in constructing democratic institutions in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe.

Similarly, as the President-in-Office of the Council of the European Communities, Mr Dehaene, has just pointed out, current work on the implementation of a Pact on Stability in Europe will make it possible to centre the initiative taken by the Community and its member States in relation to existing organisations, including the Council of Europe and the CSCE.

'n'I·"' I~~

' I . ,., :. •I ' I - 19 - SUM(93)PV1

This interpenetration of activities by the various European organisations, in particular the Community and the Council of Europe, shows that the time has come to establish a new basis for relations between Brussels and Strasbourg, which continue to be founded on the exchange of letters of 1987 now overtaken by practice and historical events. As the Commission sees it, the entry into force of the Treaty establishing the European Union should provide for the continuation of the objectives defined at the Venice quadripartite meeting in October 1990 and for carrying out the study requested by the President of the Commission, Mr Delors, on the Community's possible accession to the Statute of the Council of Europe. This possible accession of the Community to the Council of Europe would be a positive contribution firstly in consolidating the new European balance and secondly in achieving the two Organisation's respective goals.

Our responsibility is to select and propose, from all the solutions and possibilities before us, those which will place us in the most advantageous position for organising tomorrow's Europe, an overriding need impressed upon us by recent events."

11. Mr OGI, President of the Swiss Confederation, congratulated the Austrian Government for organising this first Summit meeting in response to the proposal by President Mitterrand, whose address had offered an impressive review of the values of and challenges to present­ day Europe. He had provided a valuable lead committing the Council of Europe to the only possible course for the future of the continent.

He viewed the Vienna Declaration as the foundation for tomorrow's Europe. Some points of the Declaration were of very special importance: the political upheavals in Europe had resulted in a new situation characterised by dangers of instability and the proliferation of bitter and intolerable conflicts. Events in the former Yugoslavia were a disgrace to the European family. The progressive enlargement of the Council of Europe on a Europe-wide scale was one of the necessary answers to these challenges in guaranteeing greater stability through respect for human rights and democratic principles.

Chancellor Kohl had clearly indicated the central task of the Council of Europe. It should firstly maintain the high standard of its principles and secondly ensure good co-operation among an increasing number of member States on that basis. In this context, cultural co­ operation formed a fine example, by allowing the diversity of traditions in pursuit of a common objective to be blended. The Council of Europe would be equal to this ambitious task if the will was there, and if all member countries made their own contribution. Switzerland, a country of four cultures and four languages, was ready to do so.

In addition, contacts and co-operation programmes with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe needed to be developed. It was also essential to seek synergies with other institutions and organisations. In this respect, an agreement between the Council of Europe and the CSCE might further enhance co-operation and co-ordination of their respective activities.

He welcomed the fruitful co-operation with the European Community, particularly as regarded programmes of assistance to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, as underlined by the previous speaker, Commissioner V an den Broek. SUM(93)PV1 - 20-

In the new European home, the Council of Europe would play an ever more important role, especially as a political forum and a setting for dialogue bringing together parliamentarians and governments of all Europe's democratic countries on equal terms. Switzerland for its part was ready to support the advancement of this political design.

12. The CHAIRMAN referred to the draft Declaration on Russia which had been prepared by the special Working Party for the preparation of the Summit. As this text should be adopted during the present sining, the Prime Minister of Sweden had asked for the floor to present an amendment to the text.

13. Mr Car! BILDT, Prinne Minister of Sweden, suggested to delete the fust sentence of the second paragraph of the draft. He felt that the general reference to the difficulties of transition could lead to negative conclusions. Its deletion would certainly make the Declaration clearer and stroDJger.

14. The CHAIRMAN realled that the draft text had received the approval of the preparatory Working Party. He suggested, however, to accept the Swedish amendment so that the text be adopted today by wnsensus. If there was no more comment, he would consider the text adopted as amended:..

15. The Declaration on Russia was adopted as amended (see Appendix 3).

16. Mrs SUCHOCKA, Pmione Minister of Poland made the following statement:

"Mr Chairman,

The Council of Europe came iim.to being in response to the desire to have our continent united and committed to constructive co-operation. Now the chances to turn this desire into reality are greater than ever.

The Autumn of Nations in 193>9, has given the Council of Europe a chance to accomplish its pan-European mission. Howewer, the implementation of our ambitious vision of a united and co-operative Europe requires oor bold answers to a number of questions. With the greatest attention we have listened to tfue ideas presented by President Mitterand, Chancellor Kohl and other distinguished speakers. Let me add some Polish considerations.

The first question concerns the limits of the Council of Europe, and in reality the borders of Europe as such. With the abolition of the political and military barriers, Europe must be re­ defined in a different way than we are used to. And the basic criterium should be, above all, the awareness and the will of nations to belong to that historical and cultural community which all of us know as Europe.

The present opening of the Council of Europe to the East means in effect discovering the actual borders of Europe. It should not lead us, however, to lowering those standards which the Council stands for and to the limitation of the standard-setting function of the Council. Keeping these standards we shculd seize all opportunities to bring European peoples into co­ operative projects. Therefore we welcome the possibility of the extension of the Council of Europe activities to all the CSCE states in the form of enlarged agreements. - 21 - SUM(93)PV1

The activities of the Council of Europe, as well as its growing membership, should become an important element of support to the great transformation of Central and Eastern Europe. The success of this transition is of fundamental importance not merely to the nations of that part of Europe.

It is the principle of solidarity that ought to be guiding us. That principle is particularly close to us, Poles. We perceive it as the will to provide joint support to the nations engaged in the rebuilding of their own statehood and in the process of democratic reforms. Solidarity means also the authorization and the duty to take action against those who violate the basic rights of nations and individuals.

Supporting the political and economic reforms in Central and Eastern Europe serves the cause of security of the whole continent. If the reforms fail, we shall face the same risks. In the contemporary world of growing interdependence it is impossible to see the areas of unrest and conflicts sealed off by some new impermeable barriers. Recent developments in Moscow have reminded all of us about this. Thus it is in the common interest of all the European countries to support and promote the democratic and peaceful changes in Russia, as it is in the common interest of the European political, economic and security structures to stabilize the situation in Central and Eastern Europe by broadening the EC, NATO and Western European Union.

Second, the Council of Europe is faced with the question of how to adjust its activities, structures and mechanisms to the international environment that has changed so dramatically. I hope that this meeting will give a meaningful impulse to this process of adjustment.

Poland welcomes and supports the work designed to reform the control system of the European Convention on Human Rights, to re-organise the representation oflocal and regional authorities in the Council and to draw up a document that would comprehensively deal with the rights of national minorities.

We also believe that it is advisable to reconsider the scope of activities carried on by the Council of Europe. Attention ought to be given to those fields in which the Council can demonstrate its comparative superiority. This applies in particular to such fields as the protection of human rights and the rights of national minorities, organisation of societies and construction of democratic legal systems, culture and education and selected social problems.

Poland undertakes a great effort reforming both the administration on the national level and the local structures which were recreated in the form of autonomous self-government in 1989. The decentralisation of the communal sphere will decisively contribute to the success of Polish reforms. In 1994 Poland will be the organiser of the Conference of European Ministers responsible for Local Government. It will be for us not only an honour and a sign of recognition of our efforts in this area but also an obligation to continue the reform of our state structures. 1 t' •.;J :d SUM(93)PV1 - 22- 'j I, 11 The third question that we are putting to the Council of Europe is about the character of its relations with the other European and Trans-Atlantic institutions. Once the division of responsibilities between those institutions becomes clearer and more rational, it will prevent any further duplication of activities and will ensure their better co-operation. The kind of order we should be striving for is that of mutually interlocking and supporting institutions.

In this context, let me stress two questions. First, Poland noted with great attention the improvement in relations between the Council of Europe and the European Communities. We would like to see those contacts more intensive, in particular we would welcome a greater support and encouragement on the part of the Communities to transfrontier co-operation schemes between regional and local authorities.

Second, it is of particular importance to provide a framework of close co-operation between the Council of Europe and the CSCE in the field of the human dimension. There is a need for more effective co-ordination of activities of those two institutions. In our view, this could be achieved by establishing close co-operation between the Secretariat of the Council of Europe and the CSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, based in Warsaw.

With this in mind, we propose to set up a regional or representative office of the Council of Europe in Warsaw to work together with the ODIHR, with special reference to the needs of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The proposed office would have a special role to play with the Council of Europe's opening to the new states established after the disintegration of the USSR. It could serve in the intended enlargement of the Council's educational and advisory functions.

The location of this new office in Warsaw would help to get a better knowledge of needs in this part of Europe. It would assist in more efficient promotion of European standards all over Europe. We also believe that our own experience can be of use to other nations in their difficult transition to democracy.

Mr Chairman,

We all believe that today we are beginning to build a new Europe of tomorrow. And I am convinced we will succeed in achieving this goal. This Europe must be, however, created not only in Vienna, Strasbourg and Bruxelles, but likewise in Warsaw, Prague, Budapest, Moscow and Kiev.

Thank you for your attention."

17. Mr REYNOLDS T.D., Prime Minister of Ireland, made the following statement:

"The preamble to the Statute of the Council of Europe, adopted in 1949 promises "to create an organisation which will bring European States into closer association". For forty years the division of Europe ensured that this association was limited to the States of the western part of Europe only.

'f - 23- SUM(93)PV1

History has now offered us the opportunity to make a reality of that promise. We can construct a genuine organisation of all European States, based on the Council of Europe's fundamental values of individual freedom, political liberty and the rule of law.

We must not miss this opportunity.

The Council of Europe belongs to all the democratic peoples of Europe.

It is therefore fitting that the first ever meeting of Heads of State and Government of Europe's oldest organisation should be taking place now, when the countries of Central and Eastern Europe are finally able to take their place around this table as full members.

For forty years we in the western part of the continent have held their inheritance in trust. Today we mark the return of that inheritance and commit ourselves to build a common future together.

Last weekend our hopes for building that common future were threatened by events in Russia. Ireland and other members of the European Community have reiterated their support for President Y eltsin and for the process of political and economic reform that he launched. I welcome our declaration here today affirming our common determination to give effective support to the reform process. Success in Russia is essential for long term stability on our Continent.

Europe has passed from the springtime of liberated nations to a climate of tension and uncertainty. Old enmities and conflicts, frozen under communism, have reemerged to endanger stability and threaten newly-won freedoms.

We must use all means at our disposal to resist this. We must strive to ensure that democracy, human rights and the rule of law are firmly established.

The war in former Yugoslavia negates these principles.

For over two years the war and its associated brutalities - the ethnic cleansing, the gross ~- abuses of human rights, the use of rape as a weapon of war, the detention camps - have represented an affront to all civilised values. It is a challenge to everything that the Council of Europe stands for. Ireland believes that the peace process sponsored by the UN and the European Community offers the only way forward. It is an opportunity that must be seized by all the parties if another winter of savagery is to be avoided.

Yugoslavia is an immediate crisis and an immediate challenge.

But we must also lay the political and legal foundations for the future that will help us to avoid other Yugoslavias. • t li SUM(93)PV1 - 24-

The Council of Europe was one of the first European organisations to lend its experience to the task of building democratic infrastructures in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. It has now become a substantiail: participant in the effort to create the conditions of stability in this region. The Council's strong presence in this endeavour owes much to the foresight and vigour of its Secretary General whose commitment has done much to advance the Council's work.

The central challenge now is to accomplish successfully the immense programme of enlargement upon which the G>uncil is engaged. And we must do this without lowering those standards for which it has, for more than forty years, been so justly renowned.

Today a quarter of the Council (l)f Europe's membership is made up of the democratic states that have emerged from the colllapse of communism. The two parts of Europe will not be I· grafted together easily after an enforced separation of over forty years. loll ~l The Council is now engaged lilll'l'n the task of creating a common political and legal culture throughout the whole of Euri!IJe. This will require the resources and experience of all Ii I European organisations. •

It will also require the strongest possible commitment, especially on the part of .the older members of the Council, to talre the measures necessary to facilitate the integration of the new States into the Organisation. , ;;, The stability of Europe demandS this. The survival of the Council of Europe's standards depends on it. !l"' We should be frank and open about the unprecedented challenge which enlargement poses I~~ for the Council's institutions.

It is not enough merely to tell new member States or applicant states what the Organisation's accession requirements are. We cannot be content with repeating the formula that the Council's standards should not be allowed to slip. We must do what is necessary to ensure they do not. ,;, For that reason it has been a nmajor concern of my delegation to ensure that our Political '"' !'I Declaration should lay stress on two essential points. I ~I First, to insist on safeguarding the Council's standards.

Second to affirm our willingness to take the measures and to initiate the reforms, required to absorb the massive changes which enlargement will bring to the functioning of this Organisation.

This is not merely a matter of designing programmes specially for the immediate needs of the 1;. new States. It entails also bringing the new States fully into the central activities of the '"' Council - on human rights, on culture, on youth, on social affairs. We must begin this now. !f I ~I

.:i· •• 0 0 '!

It is my pleasure to conclude this part of my intervention by congratulating you, Mr Chairman and the Austrian government, for the leadership you have demonstrated in taking up President Mitterrand' s proposal to hold this meeting. In doing so you have provided the opportunity to renew the mandate of Europe's oldest organisation. And you have thereby advanced the cause of peace and stability in Europe."

18. Mrs (:ILLER, Prime Minister of Turkey said that it was a pleasure and a privilege for her to attend this meeting and thanked the Chairman for his invitation to come to Vienna and for the hospitality she had been shown.

The political upheaval in Europe four years ago had ended a division in our continent and opened up, for the first time, the opportunity to unite all European countries around the Western values of democracy and the rule of law.

But the jubilation of 1989 had given way to disillusion prompted by the resurgence of aggressive nationalism, racism, intolerance, antisemitism and xenophobia. These problems, together with increasing migratory flows, gave rise to threats to Europe's stability. There was confusion in the new landscape.

In the clash between communism and democracy, there had certainly been a victory for the latter but this victory gave rise to new threats which the Council of Europe had a key role in combating. The Organisation should have three main priorities: first, the strengthening of its traditional function of defending human rights, democracy and the rule of law, and secondly the enlargement of its membership. The Council of Europe was Europe's most advanced safeguard of rights through its work on the normative and judicial framework for the protection of those rights. It must implant and consolidate, but in order to do this it must become a pan-European organisation with greater responsibilities for the promotion of democratic security. Thirdly, it must go beyond its traditional role and play a part in the maintenance of peace and security in Europe by establishing a political dialogue enabling member States to harmonise their views on security issues.

The World Conference on Human Rights ·held recently in Vienna had established that terrorism was aimed at the destruction of human rights and fundamental freedoms and of democracy. Since these are the basic values of the Council of Europe, the Organisation was best placed to deal with the legal aspects of the fight against terrorism.

Existing legal instruments against terrorism suffered from two major flaws: there were gaps in international law, and the law was not vigorously implemented. For this reason, it was time to draw up within the Council of Europe a new Convention making it possible to define all aspects of terrorism and to stipulate concrete measures against it.

Mrs <;iller assumed that all those present agreed that innocent people, including tourists, were entitled to be protected and asked whether the study of terrorists' "motivation" should take precedence over the fight against terrorism. It could not be the aim to "make the world safe for terrorism". SUM(93)PV1 - 26-

The winds of intolerance, neo-racism and aggressive nationalism were sweeping the Continent and brought human rights issues into even greater focus. It was true that ethnic tensions had been suppressed during the Cold War. Now they had arisen with unprecedented ferocity. There must be no more Bosnias in Europe. Racism was a particularly difficult problem in relation to migrant workers but human life was precious irrespective of any differences of ethnic origin, religion or political ideals.

The fight against racism should be conducted through education and the media. Through education, a climate of tolerance and mutual understanding should be created and the Council of Europe was the ideal platform.

19. Mr CA V ACO SIL V A, Prime Minister of Portugal said that respect for human rights, the rule of law and fundamental freedoms were the basic principles underlying the Council of Europe and that a new impetus to these principles had been given following the collapse of the former regimes of Eastern Europe.

The path was therefore open to the consolidation of the new democratic space in Europe, and yet one was witnessing acts of violence which were tearing Europe apart. Intolerance, racism and nationalism were worrying symptoms which must be faced. Democracy had as its basis both tolerance and the recognition of differences, both of which needed to be built on in order to promote a common European identity. The Organisation should focus on its fundamental values and, as the defender of democracy, should seek to create a political, cultural and legal area covering all of Europe.

However, he noted, in order to achieve these aims it was essential to develop co-operation with other European and international institutions. Greater use of co-operation between the Council of Europe and the European Communities could thus be used to help support the democratisation process in Central and Eastern Europe; he added that co-operation with the CSCE in the field of the Human Dimension was also important.

The priority of the Council of Europe should be to support the newly emerging democracies, notably by helping them to build new institutions and to train administrative personnel. The recent events in Russia underlined the urgency and importance of these objectives. He added that further enlargement should be based on full consideration of the Organisation's principles and on insisting that the candidate countries must be in a position to fulfil these principles before joining; a two-speed Europe was unacceptable. People must be free to choose their leaders, and candidates for Council of Europe membership must put the principles which they accepted into practice.

He stressed the universal dimension of Europe. The continent should not become a fortress, but should co-operate with other parts of an increasingly interdependent world. He stressed the importance of democracy in the interrelationship with other parts of the world and stated that the North-South dimension should not be forgotten.

The Chairman agreed that an important point had been added about the universal dimension of Europe. I~~

. . 1.' - 27 - SUM(93)PV1

20. Mr JELEV, President of Bulgaria, thanked Federal President Klestil and Federal Chancellor Vranitzky for their very warm welcome. He declared that the first Council of Europe Summit was a highly ambitious and very noble undertaking. The Council of Europe was the first pan-European Organisation to have taken into consideration the changes which had occurred on the continent, in order to adapt its activities to the new situation, and to have tried to define its fields of activity in relation to those of other institutions, while respecting the fundamental principle of complementarity. He added that the decline of communism, the transition from totalitarianism to democracy and the change from a planned economy to a market economy in certain European countries had not diminished the importance of the Council of Europe; on the contrary, these changes had highlighted its competences since the countries concerned needed its help and the Council of Europe was the most effective institution and the one most able to act. It was also the symbol and guardian of democracy in Europe.

Far from being a "luxury", democratic institutions were a vital prerequisite for the following stage, that of setting up a market economy.

The dramatic events in Russia were proof that, without legitimate institutions set up through free and democratic elections, economic progress was not possible. He thus understood President Yeltsin's decision to call elections as soon as possible. In a changing Europe, inter­ ethnic problems had taken a distressing turn and the collapse of communism had given free rein to the upsurge of ethnocentrism and nationalism. He woundered as to whether a moment might come when international military intervention would be required to tackle ethnic or religious conflicts. He stressed that the harmful effects of these conflicts and their implications in the international order for their neighbouring countries must not be forgotten. In this connection, Bulgaria had respected all its international undertakings, including those in the framework of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia, which were having very serious economic consequences for his country. He therefore requested that Bulgaria ought to be shown understanding so that it might benefit from direct or indirect compensation measures. He added that his country had considerable experience in restoring the rights of ethnic minorities in an atmosphere of tolerance. During the Second World War his country had given its Jews a safe haven. His country supported the proposed plan of action to fight racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and intolerance and was considering the initiatives it might take on this matter. Recalling that the number of member States of the Council of Europe had increased from 27 to 32 in six months, he felt that the countries of Central and Eastern Europe deserved more than mere encouraging applause; they should be given political and economic support which would be a long-term investment for security and stability in Europe. He concluded by stressing that now was the time to decide on the political concept which would prevail at the dawning of the 21st century.

21. Mr NYRUP RASMUSSEN, Prime Minister of Denmark, referred to the principal vocation of the Council of Europe, namely its work in the fields of Human Rights and democracy and to the Council's pivotal position in the individual endeavours of member States in these fields. He paid tribute to the role of the Parliamentary Assembly which might be seen to be a modern equivalent of the Agora in ancient Athens: a forum for free exchange of political ideas and a source of political initiatives. The Council of Europe played a vital role in the democratic security of the Continent of Europe. SUM(93)PV1 - 28-

The recent events in Moscow however had showed just how hard the road to democracy was, and had underlined the historical mission of the Council in the process of democratic reform.

In the light of the informal exchange of views that had taken place with States candidate for membership, and mindful of what had been said by President Mitterrand, Mr NYRUP RASMUSSEN made a series of specific points. First, he proposed that when enlargement of the Council was completed, the Heads of State and Government should again meet at a Summit to evaluate the consequences of enlargement: what had been achieved, and what remained to be done. Secondly, he warned against any watering down of the Council of Europe's standards. The effectiveness of this unique democratic Organisation was due to the scrupulous respect of its high democratic ideals, which were its raison d'etre. Member States shared a common responsibility to uphold its standards. Thirdly, the political changes begun in 1989 had had a large impa£t upon the Council. The demands made on it had increased dramatically and its resources had become strained. As a consequence, the priorities of the Organisation needed to be clearly and openly defined, with emphasis being placed upon Human Rights and democracy, even if at the cost of other activities. Furthermore, it was necessary to achieve an appropiate division of responsibilities between the various European Organisations - especially the European Community and CSCE - in order to avoid overlap and duplication. He complimem.ted the Secretary General on her efforts to adapt the structures of the Organisation and pledged the full support of his country for such changes.

In the field of Human Rights. and legal reform, the priority for the Council had to be the protection of ethnic and national minorities. He believed that the Council could play a valuable role in the elaboration of bilateral treaties and transfrontier co-operation agreements, I~~ and the Council of Europe 0111tliine Convention would be very useful in this respect. He cited the reciprocal arrangements between his country and its neighbour, the Federal Republic of Germany, as an example of how such bilateral arrangements could avert ethnic and national minority difficulties and foster an enriching rather than antagonistic relationships.

Member States also needed to address the issues of intolerance, hatred and distrust unleashed by the recent upheavals in Europe and which were manifested by the outbreaks of racism and xenophobia in a number of countries. Not only though did the fundamental attitudes of member States need to be patently clear, but member States also needed to review their national policies, for example on housing and social issues, in order to alleviate the conditions which sometimes provided the catalyst for the outbreak of racial tension. Where refugee • issues were concerned, a comprehensive approach and notably coordination between the various Organisations involved was required.

In this year, the fortieth anniversary of the entry into force of the Human Rights Convention, it was fitting that a decision to create a new permanent Court to succeed the present control organs would enable the Council of Europe to continue its remarkable work in safeguarding human rights continent-wide.

h' ~~~

I~~ - 29- SUM(93)PV1

22. Lord MACKA Y of Clashfern, Lord Chancellor, United Kingdom made the following declaration:

"It is a privilege for me to speak to you on behalf of the government of the United Kingdom. Our Prime Minister, Mr Major, would have preferred to do so himself, but he has been prevented from attending by his domestic political duties.

The United Kingdom was one of the ten founder members of the Council of Europe, and I am proud to represent the British Government on this unique occasion in the Organisation's history. Our support for the work of this remarkable Organisation has not wavered over some 45 years. Much of the drafting of the European Convention on Human Rights was done by one of my distinguished predecessors, Lord Kilmuir, an ardent European - and a fellow Scot.

The Council of Europe's record of defending and promoting human rights, pluralist democracy and the mle of law is unique, and it is in these areas above all to which my government attaches the greatest importance for the present and future of the Council of Europe and for the growing democracies of Europe itself.

Earlier today we exchanged views with those states seeking membership of this august Organisation. It is clear that membership is seen as a prize and as a badge of honour for those countries which have attained the standards set by the Council. These standards should not be devalued to meet short term objectives, however worthwhile: to do so would put at risk the reputation of the Organisation itself. That is why my government welcomes the clear statement on membership proposed in the Political Declaration. Over the next few years, the Council of Europe must ensure that its standards are anchored in the new democracies. To this end, we support the commitment to provide suitable, properly directed programmes of assistance to meet the special needs of new and applicant member States. That is the way forward: ensuring that new states are given the maximum amount of assistance to bring their standards up to those of the Council - we should not lower those standards to ensure that membership is granted more quickly.

The challenge of this Summit is to show our peoples both within the existing member States and in those applying to join, that the Council of Europe is the organisation most suited to the democratic needs of the wider, newly enfranchised Europe. This means adapting our institutions to meet this challenge in order that the primary role of the Council of Europe may be fulfilled - that of working for democracy, human rights and the rule of law. In this regard, we need a dialogue at all levels. My colleague Douglas Hurd set an excellent example by initiating an informal political dialogue with colleagues of member States in May. We should continue this practise, and include also the applicant states when appropriate. SUM(93)PV1 - 30-

The main items for discussion today are those concerning human rights. The length of time taken to obtain justice at the Court in Strasbourg must be reduced. But the reforms which we are all striving to complete, which fundamentally change the present system, must be able to stand the test of time. The high standard of jurisprudence must be maintained. We must therefore be careful that our solutions are the right ones, even if they take a little longer to negotiate. On one thing we are agreed, that we must move forward on the basis of a single tier. This was not originally the United Kingdom's position, but we and others accepted the mandate in May in order to secure the basis of a complete agreement. And that is how things should be in the Council of Europe - a group of states negotiating in good faith, and always searching for consensus. Since the central consensus was achieved, rapid progress has been made in the drafting of the new Protocol.

At this point, I would like to pay tribute to the dedicated work of the officials of our governments, supported by the Secretary General and the Council Secretariat who have been wrestling with this problem and who have brought us close to an agreement based on the mandate which governments agreed in May. Their attention has rightly been on the text of the draft Protocol itself; but it will also be important to ensure that the procedures of the Court are fully efficient, and that the best use is made of the Secretariat. Only in this way will we realise fully the potential of these far-reaching reforms. My government is ready and willing to offer whatever advice and help may be necessary in these practical matters, so that no time is lost in putting the new system into operation.

On the equally important question of minority rights, I also commend the hard work and the political skills which Mme Lalumiere has brought to bear in order to secure agreement on an approach to the question which we can all accept. The problems of defining exactly what constitutes a minority have defeated lawyers for decades - and I speak as a lawyer myself. The latest proposals for a framework Convention and an additional protocol to the Human Rights Convention show what can be achieved when common-sense is applied to a question, and they have the British Government's full support, as do those in the proposed Action Plan on Racism, Xenophobia, Antisemitism and Intolerance.

Chairman, I am aware that time is against us, and that others will wish to speak. May I once again reiterate our support for the Council of Europe and for its Secretary General and her staff. May I also warmly congratulate our Austrian hosts for their work in organising this unique event. I hope that the work carried out during our period as Chairman of the Committee of Ministers also played no small part in the success of this historic event."

23. Mr DRNOVSEK, Prime Minister of Slovenia, expressed his thanks for the excellent organisation of the Summit, an exceptional meeting which could bring the member countries closer to the fulfilment of aims which even a few years ago would have seemed impossible.

~· ' ..- ...,.. l' . - 31 - SUM(93)PVI

The task of building Europe was not an easy one, but he felt that the participants - unlike their biblical predecessors at the Tower of Babe! - did have a common language. He noted that if participants at the Summit agreed on only a minimum of the texts presented to them, this in itself would constitute great progress by comparison with the lack of co-operation in the divided Europe of previous years.

The protection of human rights was the main task of the Organisation and its member countries, though this task was not facilitated by the fact that, as the concept grew broader, it became increasingly difficult to define it. He noted that it had always been easier to give expression to human rights in the negative sense, i.e. when they were violated. It was an irony of history that the great changes in Europe which had led to similar levels of human rights across the continent had, at the same time, in one sense triggered abuse of these same rights where ethnic groups were concerned.

Now was the time to put an end to negative definition of human rights. Even some of the great democracies were faced with the aberrations brought about by intolerance, racism and xenophobia. This situation required an immediate response, one that could be given, inter alia, through the strengthening of institutional mechanisms.

The various problems faced by member countries - social and economic, and with regard to refugees and migrations - presented new challenges for the European view of life. Everything that the Council of Europe had achieved contributed to consolidating mutual understanding in Europe.

He added that in the view of his Government the question of national minorities was crucial; the protection of such minorities could contribute to stability in Europe and to the loyalty of national minorities to their States. The rights of minorities were not covered in all their aspects by general human rights protection, and whilst defining the problem of human rights was even more difficult with regard to national minorities, he felt that consensus on this issue should be sought. His Government welcomed the idea of an additional Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights as well as that of a framework convention on national minorities. It also welcomed reform of the control mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights as well as the institution of a single court which, he added, would by accelerating the processing of cases enhance the viability of the institution.

Past experience had shown that the creation of sovereign national States could lead to a flowering, but could also lead to tragedy, as was the case with Yugoslavia after the political collapse in Eastern Europe. Once the violence had come to an end the Organisation's expertise should be used to transform hatred into co-operation.

He ended by saying that candidate countries for membership of the Council of Europe must be encouraged to satisfy all necessary conditions for membership.

24. The CHAIRMAN welcomed the various contributions to the debate which bore more signs of optimism and commitment than frustration and resignation. He referred in particular to the expression used by the President of the Spanish Government when he spoke of the "harbingers of new realities". The sitting was closed at 7 pm. Proceedings would resume on Saturday 9 October 1993 at 9 am. Ii 11. il ..l b'

~I

h

~I

h

h

I~

h

------~------,- --: - -=~.=-c~,~-, -- ~. ~ - al - SUM(93)PV1

APPENDIX 1

List of Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs

AUSTRIA

Mr F. Vranitzky Federal Chancellor

Mr A. Mock Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs

BELGIUM

Mr J-L. Dehaene Prime Minister

Mr W. Claes Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs

BULGARIA

Mr J. Jelev President

Mr S. Daskalov Minister for Foreign Affairs

CYPRUS

Mr G. Clerides President

Mr A.P. Michaelides Minister for Foreign Affairs SUM(93)PV1 - a2- Appendix I

CZECH REPUBLIC

Mr V. Have! President

Mr A. Vondra First Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs

DENMARK

Mr P. Nyrup Rasmussen Prime Minister

Mr N. Helveg Petersen Minister for Foreign Affairs

ESTONIA

Mr M. Laar Prime Minister

Mr A. Olljum Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs

FINLAND

Mr M. Koivisto President

Mr H. Haavisto Minister for Foreign Affairs

FRANCE

Mr F. Mitterrand President

Mr A. Juppe Minister for Foreign Affairs

GERMANY

Mr H. Kohl Federal Chancellor

Mr H. Schafer Minister of State for Foreign Affairs ' - a3 - SUM(93)PV1 Appendix 1 GREECE

Mrs V. Tsouderou Minister of State for Foreign Affairs

HUNGARY

Mr G.Jeszenszky Minister for Foreign Affairs

ICELAND

Mr D. Oddsson Prime Minister

IRELAND

Mr A. Reynolds Taoiseach (Prime Minister)

Mr T. Kitt Minister of State, Department of Foreign Affairs

ITALY

Mr C.A. Ciampi Prime Minister

Mr B. Andreatta Minister for Foreign Affairs

LIECHTENSTEIN

Mr M. Biichel Head of Government, Minister for Foreign Affairs

LITHUANIA

Mr A.M. Brazauskas President

Mr P. Gylys Minister for Foreign Affairs SUM(93)PV1 - a4- Appendix 1

LUXEMBOURG

Mr J. Santer Prime Minister

Mr J. Poos Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Foreign Affairs

MALTA

Mr E. Fenech Adami Prime Minister

Mr G. de Marco Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs

NETHERLANDS

Mr R.F.M. Lubbers Prime Minister ~'

h<1 Mr P .H. Kooijmans Minister for Foreign Affairs '1 J I~, NORWAY

Mrs G. Harlem Brundtliand Prime Minister

Mrs S. Bjerke State Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

POLAND

Mrs H. Suchocka Prime Minister

Mr I. Byczewski Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs

PORTUGAL

Mr A. Cavaco Silva Prime Minister

Mr J .M. Durao Barroso Minister for Foreign Affairs - aS - SUM(93)PV1 Appendix 1

ROMANIA

Mr I. Iliescu President

Mr T. Mele~canu Minister of State, Minister for Foreign Affairs

SAN MARINO

Mr G .L. Berti Captain Regent

Mr P. Andreoli Captain Regent

Mr G. Gatti Secretary of State for Foreign and Political Affairs

SLOVAKIA

Mr V. Meciar Prime Minister

Mr J. Moravcik Minister for Foreign Affairs

SLOVENIA

Mr J. Dmovsek Prime Minister

Mr L. Peterle Minister for Foreign Affairs

SPAIN

Mr F. Gonzalez President of Government

Mr J. Solana Minister for Foreign Affairs

SWEDEN

Mr C. Bildt Prime Minister SUM(93)PV1 - a6 Appendix 1

SWI1ZERLAND

Mr A. Ogi President of the Confederation

Mr F. Cotti Head of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs

TURKEY

Mrs T. <;iller Prime Minister

Mr H. <;etin Minister for Foreign Affairs

UNITED KINGDOM

Lord Mackay of Clashfem Lord Chancellor

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry Lord Advocate * * *

HOLY-SEE

S.E.M. Cardinal Angelo Sodano Secretary of State for His Holiness • * * * PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY

Mr M. A. Martinez President * * *

• - a7 - SUM(93)PV1 Appendix 1

EUROPEAN COMMUNITY

Mr H. van den Broek European Commissioner for External Political Relations

CSCE

Mr. W. Hoynck Secretary General

* * *

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Mr R. Ryssdal President

EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Mr C. A. Ns;;rgaard President

STANDING CONFERENCE OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL AUTHORITIES OF EUROPE (CLRAE)

Mr B. Mollstedt President

* * * SUM(93)PVI - a8 - Appendix I

AT THE OPENING SITTING OF THE CONFERENCE

ALBANIA

MrS. Berisha President of the Republic

BELARUS

MrS. Shushkevitch President of the Supreme Soviet of the Republic h'' CROATIA ,, J Mr F. Tudjman President of the Republic I~ I LATVIA

Mr G. Ulmanis President of the Republic ,·

MOLDOVA h

RUSSIA

Mr Adamishin First Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs

UKRAINE

Mr A. Zlenko Minister for Foreign Affairs * * *

- ==.::..:-·7.;~ : ••• - a9- SUM(93)PVI Appendix 1

CANADA

Mr. J. Roy Ambassador

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Mr. R. Schifter Ambassador, Special advisor to the President

* * *

UNITED NATIONS

Mr. V. Petrovsky Director General of the United Nations Office in Geneva * * * SECRETARIAT

Mrs C. LALUMIERE Secretary General

Mr P. LEUPRECHT Deputy Secretary General

Mr H. KLEBES Clerk of the Parliamentary Assembly

Mr. H.-P. FURRER Director of Political Affairs

Mr. G. DE VEL Director responsible for the Secretariat of the Committee of Ministers ' h

I~,

• - all - SUM(93)PV1

APPENDIX 2

AGENDA

1. Opening of the Summit [SUM(93)1]

2. Election of the Chairman

3. Discussion of subjects proposed by the Committee of Ministers

4. Adoption of the Vienna Declaration and its three Appendices on:

improvement of the effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights protection of national minorities declaration and plan of action for combating racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance

[SUM(93)2, SUM(93)3]

5. Other business ;~ li'

! h ';I J li'

! '·I·;I J I~, •

.: h ';I J li'

h'' ';I J

I~ I

t' h ';I J li'

;;, ~-·· ., ';I - al3- SUM(93)PV1

APPENDIX 3

Vienna, 8 October 1993

DECLARATION ON RUSSIA

We, Heads of State and Government of Council of Europe member States, meeting in Vienna on 8 October 1993, express our deep concern over recent events in the Russian Federation. We deplore the heavy loss of life which resulted from the resort to violence, provoked by the opponents of reform.

We declare our solidarity with the supporters of the reforms under the leadership of President Boris Yeltsin and express the hope that the process of democratisation will be continued with determination.

In this connection we attach the utmost importance to the earliest possible holding of free and fair elections which will give the Russian people the possibility to express themselves clearly on their future and create conditions for the adoption of the required new Constitution.

Stressing the need for democratic development, we reaffurn our determination to give effective support to the reform process, among other measures, by intensifying, in the framework of the Council of Europe's co-operation programmes with Russia, assistance for the development of democratic institutions and legal systems, respecting human rights and the rule of law.

We welcome the message from the President of the Russian Federation reaffuming the irreversible policy of reforms and democratic transformation, conducive to the approachment of Russia with the Council of Europe. J ;' lt, {) J I 1'

• h '{) J I1'

I 'h,, J I1'

• 'lt,,, J I1'

• h '"' ~l li'

'h,, :d li' '

~-- J . ~). - al5 - SUM(93)PV1

APPENDIX 4

Address by Mr Thomas KLESTIL Austrian Federal President

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is with great pleasure that I welcome you today on behalf of the Republic of Austria for the first summit meeting of the member States of the Council of Europe. My greetings go to the Heads of State and Heads of Government and to their delegations. They go to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and her staff who prepared this important meeting. And they go to the media, without whose interest and information work the good cause of Europe would be a forlorn hope.

Our meeting today and the participation of 32 States reflects the entirely new role of the Council of Europe at the level of Europe as a whole. After all the decades in which the work towards European unification has been submerged in the deep shadows of ideological division and military confrontation, this summit underlines our newly strengthened belief in the need for and the irreplaceability of this oldest institution of democratic Europe.

But today's meeting is also a signal of hope for greater Europe. Today, for the first time, the old and the new democracies of this Continent have assembled on a broad front in order to strengthen jointly the consciousness of a European identity - and to contribute actively to the creation of an entirely new area of democratic security.

The fact that this meeting is taking place in Vienna - in the centre of Europe with its old and now revived links and associations - impressively underlines this new consciousness. At the same time we are reminded of the special role which this city has played in the historical development of our Continent.

When Europe's leading statesmen met here in the years 1814 and 1815 for the Congress of Vienna, their aim was to stabilise a Europe disjointed by revolutions and wars. Today, almost 180 years later, Europe again stands at a historic turning point in its history - and still the spectres of war and violence have not yet been banished forever from Europe.

And yet- what a difference there is between then and today. At the Congress of Vienna, the object was primarily the restoration of the old relationships of power and hegemony; what we are aiming for today is an entirely new system - a future order embracing the whole of Europe, an order in which, for the first time equal partners take the place of old hegemonies. I·~' SUM(93)PV1 - al6 - Appendix 4

I History has taught us Europeans many lessons - most of them at the price of enormous h sacrifices. The price of nationalism was war and xenophobia. The price of dictatorships was '~ injustice and tyranny. The price of intolerance was racism and mass murder. J ' Many of us have understood the experience of history: never have freedom, democracy and if' the rule of law - the great objectives of the Council of Europe - been so beyond dispute as they are today.

Others have misunderstood thd experience of history. As a poet wrote recently, it is, as if the monstrous spectre of the past has split up into a hundred small spectres which have made their way back into our house through every crack and crevice. h' '

Many of the gravest violations, of human rights which we see today are the consequence of ethnic conflicts. The impotemre with which the international community faces these crimes underlines the lack of rules and norms in the field of minority rights. Even where there are '' rules, they often prove too weak in practice to prevent catastrophes. Hence steps to ensure h

We have all come here today to represent our countries, our government. But each of us not only carries an imprint in himself, a mental image of where his home is. To be Europeans means to live in the awareness. of the richness and diversity of Europe's many national, ethnic and religious identities. ,. tl,

,. h '~ J I,·

' h' ~ ',f - al7 - SUM(93)PV1 Appendix 4

Thus, after the profound changes of the past few years, the key to the creation of a new, peaceful and stable Europe lies essentially in the protection of minorities. The European Idea will assume its full radiance for our citizens only, if it is built on the unquestioned interaction of small and large, equality and difference, unity and variety.

In this context, it seems to me important to counter a widespread misconception. For the protection of ethnic groups and minorities, the process of European integration is not a looming threat but on the contrary a hopeful prospect For ultimately both of them - European integration and the ethnic groups - are fighting the same enemy - unbridled nationalism.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

From its very beginning, the Council of Europe has perceived human dignity as the real foundation of European unity, History has proved the Council right. Much has already been achieved - and much still remains to be done. Our commitments to human rights and to the rights of minorities as well as the stabilisation and involvement of the young democracies are the crucial tests to which we are being put - not least at this meeting in Vienna.

Expectations are great. It is high time, especially on the issue of minority protection, at long last to leave the stage of discussion behind us and to act quickly. For every additional instance of our impotence in the face of genocide and violent displacements of people will, I fear, lead to new displacements and new genocide - not only in Bosnia but in many other regions of the world.

I therefore ask you to act with united strength to turn this summit into a real step forward towards humanity and peace. In this spirit, I wish the Summit Conference of the Council of Europe every success! V ' h

tl,' '

h' '

h' '

h•• '

h' '

{ ,. 6, t - al9 - SUM(93)PV1

APPENDIX 5

Address by Mr Miguel Angel MARTINEZ President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe

Ladies and gentlemen, Dear friends,

I am very pleased to be speaking to you on behalf of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe at the opening of this summit meeting. In so doing, I am conscious of my responsibility as the spokesman for the democratically elected parliamentarians representing the peoples of our 32 member states.

The Assembly is, of course, satisfied that this meeting at the highest level can at last be held, as the Assembly was the first to perceive its desirability and propose its convocation.

I wish to express our gratitude to President Franc,;ois Mitterrand, who in May 1992 took up our proposal, enhanced it with his own vision of Europe and reinforced it with all his personal weight; in short, transformed it into a genuine political project. Probably no one was in a better position in that respect than you, Mr President, who were a Minister of State delegated to the Council of Europe back in 1953.

Our thanks are also due to the Austrian Government, which put the project into effect and invited the Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe's member states to meet today in Vienna, a city which for many years experienced at first hand the division of Europe and witnessed more closely than anyone the recent reunification of the continent.

Without any doubt this summit meeting is an event for the Council of Europe, for it is the first meeting of its kind in the history of an organisation that has been in existence for more than 40 years. However, we should not forget that our Institution's inaugural period was marked by many meetings at the highest level. In a way, the Heads of State and Government meeting today are taking over the task of such illustrious Europeans as Winston Churchill, Robert Schuman, Paul-Henri Spaak, Joseph Bech and others.

However, the summit meeting's importance would be very limited if it were to concern only our Organisation and did not also constitute, above all, an event for Europe itself. The meeting is taking place at a crucial stage in European history, at a time when new challenges are emerging on the continent's political scene: the implementation of the Maastricht Treaty and the enlargement of the Community, the integration of the new democracies of Central and Eastern Europe into the process of European construction, the development of the values of SUM(93)PV1 - a20- Appendix 5 democracy and human rights that underlie our project, the protection of minorities, the mobilisation of resistance to racism, xenophobia and social exclusion, the combating of resurgent nationalism of an aggressive and divisive nature, and the stimulation of our economies in order to ensure further progress in terms of prosperity as well as social justice.

We can gauge the headway made since 1949 in the unification of our continent by comparing the very first Council of Europe family photograph with the one we are going to take today. For me, as a Spaniard, the contrast is all the more striking as I come from a country which - like so many others, not only in Eastern Europe - was for a long time excluded from the process of European construction by a dictatorship. Today the great majority of European countries belong to our Organisation. All the others wish to join it. Europe, which was still divided only a few years ago, has now recovered its natural dimension, the one referred to in old history and geography books.

This is a new situation which entails special responsibilities for our Institution. For that reason it is essential, in my view, that around this table we should all recognise the pan­ European dimension of the Council of Europe and affirm its new role as an organ of political co-operation where all the Eumpean states can be partners on an equal footing.

The debate that took place at the Parliamentary Assembly's session in Strasbourg last week showed that the Assembly's melilllbers are expecting this summit meeting to result in precise commitments on two levels.

First of all, a solemn proclamati0n of the Council of Europe's political role in the structuring process at continental level, which implies an institutional reform of the Organisation on the basis of a revision of its 1949 Statute. Secondly, a strengthening of its specific role as an institution specialising in the protection of human rights, which implies the establishment of more effective machinery for supervising the application of the European Convention on Human Rights as well as the updating of the very concept of protected rights and its extension to include the rights of persons belonging to minorities.

For the Assembly, this summit should be one of hope, one of reactivation of the process of European construction as a whole, a process that should make full use of the Council of Europe in order to promote democratic values and politically integrate all the European states.

Our Assembly is counting on concrete decisions and precise political guidelines. Let us therefore treat this summit as a commitment and a challenge for preparing the future, rather than as a formality. I am convinced that in Vienna we shall all prove equal to our responsibilities and make every endeavour to avoid dashing our peoples' expectations. It is, in fact, as a direct representative of those peoples that the President of the Assembly salutes you and urges you, Ladies and Gentlemen, to give Europe a fresh start.

------••" - a21 - SUM(93)PV1

APPENDIX 6

Address by Mrs Catherine LALUMIERE Secretary General of the Council of Europe

We have come here to talk about Europe, Peace, and Democracy at a tragic moment in our history: thousands of dead in former Yugoslavia and, in Moscow, scores of dead in a struggle for or against reform, for or against democracy.

Forty-five years ago at the close of a terrible war, a Congress took place in The Hague which was to provide the impetus for the process of building Europe. On that occasion, men and women marked by the horrors of war laid the foundations of the future Europe. It was a hazardous, even utopian, undertaking but ultimately it proved realistic and is in part already a success.

In this autumn of 1993, four years after the fall of the Berlin Wall which we welcomed so enthusiastically, we are now confronted with a different Europe full of both promise and turmoil. But are we really conscious of what this New Europe, this Greater Europe represents? Have we not continued since 1989 to think almost exclusively in terms of Western Europe, in the interests of Western Europe?

As in 1948, the task before us calls for boldness and vision. By 1990 some of us already had a vision of Europe stretching from the "Atlantic to the Urals" or beyond ... President Mitterrand was one of these and thanks to the Charter of Paris of 1991 new guidelines were laid down. But today we have to go another stage forward in a more practical and pragmatic way- and yet with modesty, for the challenges are tremendous. We have to rebuild -or more exactly to build - our continent in such a way as to ensure peace, and if possible prosperity. And we must do so despite the many and varied economic and moral crises, the upsurge of nationalism, the horrifying tragedy of Yugoslavia and the disturbances in Russia.

What contribution can the Council of Europe make to the organisation of the New Europe?

The Council of Europe is an instrument created by the countries of Western Europe in 1949. The Organisation has operated satisfactorily for over 40 years although its member states have not actually made great use of it.

But the last four years have shown how useful this instrument can be in helping to ensure stability and peace, as the work of building the New Europe progresses.

Admittedly, the Council of Europe cannot do everything. Its Statute bars it from dealing with military questions. Nor obviously can it be the pivot for economic aid and co-operation. There are other institutions which are active in these sectors. jl

SUM(93)PV1 - a22- Appendix 6

What the Council of Europe can do, however, in helping to organise our continent is to provide the foundations for the New Europe and the instruments for political and technical co-operation.

In short - and this is no mean achievement - it can contribute to what I would call the "democratic security" of Europe-in-the-making, by means of preventive and supportive action.

First of all, the foundations. Every house needs foundations. The New Europe is no exception. These foundations are the values shared by all its member states. Values without which any construction will remain fragile (the Yugoslav example is there to prove the point, without forgetting the case of Russia). We have been endeavouring to keep these values alive for the last 45 years: pluralist democracy with free elections, the rights of the individual, the rule of law, to which can be added respect for minorities, a spirit of tolerance, solidarity and peaceful cohabitation.

These values are the rock on which Europe builds its house. They are not merely adornments which it is fashionable to admire.

But these values cannot be taken for granted. They require clear choices and must, if necessary, be protected by force. They call for political pressure and for legal supervision of the kind provided by the European Court of Human Rights, whose reform you are about to decide in order to increase its effectiveness on a continental scale; since its inception, the Council of Europe has forged a whole arsenal of legal or practical means to ensure that its principles do not remain pious hopes but are rooted in reality. Lastly, these values depend on a climate of confidence and a never-ending battle against intolerance, racism, xenophobia, anti-semitism and ethnic cleansing.

Performing all these tasks calls for resources. Regulations have to be worked out and enforced and people have to be trained. All this requires time and money. A portion of Western financial aid to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe should - to a much greater extent than at present - be devoted to such action.

Secondly, our Organisation is already capable, acting in full complementarity with the CSCE and within a more homogeneous framework, of providing a permanent political structure which the New Europe needs. The instruments for political dialogue and co-operation exist; they simply have to be used.

The Committee of Ministers of Foreign Affairs and the various conferences of specialised ministers already provide opportunities for ministers representing the 32 member states to collaborate on an equal footing, and they are more and more often accompanied by the ministers of applicant countries. I would add that our friends from across the Atlantic, the United States and Canada, are also represented when they have an interest in the activities concerned.

These activities relate to every aspect of the workings of Democracy. This covers not only legal co-operation, cultural co-operation and nature conservation but also the major problems of society such as social protection, youth affairs, bioethics, drug abuse and so on .

.- - a23 - SUM(93)PV1 Appendix 6

Our Parliamentary Assembly, which pioneered our opening up to the East, has become a forum for regular meetings of all the political forces represented in the national parliaments throughout Europe. This leads to a pooling of ideas and countless contacts taking place several times a year between the parliamentarians of some 40 countries.

This Summit meeting also has the task of strengthening the position and role of what was hitherto the Conference of Local and Regional Authorities and which is to become the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, comprising one chamber for the elected representatives of regional authorities and another chamber for their local counterparts. This decision will help to strengthen local democracy in the various countries, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe.

Over the last four years, both in Strasbourg and in all the countries visited by our delegations, we have witnessed the gradual development of networks of co-operation, the forging of friendships: in terms of human relations therefore, we can see the emergence of the New Europe.

But this work of laying foundations, building bridges and forging links today needs the political support and the material support of the highest authorities of our member states, namely yourselves.

You are faced with some difficult choices on the following:

the expansion of the Council of Europe: How far can we go? At what pace? We all have Russia on our minds;

the institutional reforms required to adapt the Organisation to its new role;

the material and financial means to enable it to act more powerfully and swiftly;

the architecture of Europe so that the different organisations can be used to the best effect;

and further, the practical answers to be given to certain questions. I shall refer to only one, for it is explosive: the question of national minorities. There are few issues which are as sensitive and complex. There are few to which the Council of Europe has devoted so much work.

Despite these difficulties and thanks to the efforts of the Preparatory Committee, various political and legal instruments are being submitted to you today to help resolve the problem of minorities. For the fact is: the Council of Europe cannot restrict itself to declarations of intent. As an organisation for intergovernmental and interparliamentary co-operation it must show concrete results.

* I·

SUM(93)PV1 - a24- Appendix 6

The task is immense and our resources are limited.

But you have gathered here thanks to the hospitality and political commitment of Austria whose leaders I wish to thank. This meeting in itself is an encouragement for us and a mark of recognition for the New Euwpe.

Amidst the difficulties - and sometimes the chaos and tragedies - of the transitional phase, we must build the New Europe, stone after stone, organise the networks and weave the bonds which will keep it together. This is our constant hope.

I

·i·;I J h'

I h ';I .-.. J ,.._ . - a25 - SUM(93)PV1

APPENDIX 7

Statement by Mr Franz VRANITZKY Federal Chancellor of Austria

Madam Secretary General, Heads of State and Government, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

I am happy to accept my election to the Chair of this summit meeting, and I thank you for the confidence you have shown in Austria, the host country.

We meet here in Vienna for the first Summit of Heads of State and Government in the history of the Council of Europe, and in doing so we are very conscious of the enormous progress that has been made in our continent in bringing about democracy and human rights - indeed, and above all, with the Council of Europe playing a leading role.

But all of us too are very conscious of the dramatic events in Moscow which have shown, with frightening immediacy, how difficult and contradictory the process of building up democratic structures in eastern Europe is proving.

In the meantime, the war in Yugoslavia - pushed out of the headlines by the events in Russia - is entering its third year; a dirty war which faces us every day afresh with the fact that, only a few hundred kilometres away from here fundamental human rights are being trampled underfoot.

In many fields of political relations the Council of Europe has in the past done outstanding work. It will now be for us to set the political guidelines in such a way that it can also meet these challenges in the future, in the undoubtedly more difficult circumstances of an enlarged Europe.

Four years have elapsed since the fall of the Berlin Wall. A great deal has been achieved in our common struggle for stability and democracy, but a great deal remains to be done and time is pressing.

We have to realise that the Vienna Summit will be measured by the extent to which it sends out the necessary political impetus for real solutions to be found to the burning issues confronting us. What we need is concrete progress towards the construction of a democratic system of security embracing the whole of Europe, towards the genuine protection of minorities, and towards the combating of intolerance, racism and anti-Semitism in all the member states.

For nothing would be more dangerous than to allow a generation to grow up in Europe that would be lost to tolerance and democracy, to the "principle of hope". SUM(93)PV1 - a26 - Appendix 7

If our efforts to preserve and extend democracy are to succeed, we must also be ready to make still greater efforts to construct the necessary economic framework rapidly, efficiently and above all together.

And democracy, stability and security are indivisible - as indivisible as Europe. We are called upon to do everything possible to safeguard and to shape that unity and indivisibility for the future.

I thank you all for having come here to Vienna and invite you to help each other so that this Summit may achieve maximum success. CONFIDENTIAL

- 1 - SUM(93)PV2

SUMMARY

Minutes of the Second Sitting held on Saturday 9 October 1993 (morning) at the Austria Center Vienna (SUM(93)PV2) ...... 1

APPENDIX Vienna Declaration ...... a!

Appendix 1: Reform of the Control Mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights ...... a5

Appendix II: National Minorities ...... a7

Appendix Ill: Declaration and Plan of Action on combating racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance ...... a9 ,.

' '·I·<) J I1'

.,.I '<) J I1'

I '·I·;I J I1'

I '·I·;I J I1'

,,,I ';I J I1' , 1,.I :..j,l "' .. J &..~ . ' - 1 - SUM(93)PV2

SECOND SITTING

1. The CHAIRMAN drew attention to two aspects which would perhaps have to be taken into account during the morning's deliberations. He first mentioned a document circulating in the meeting room which dealt with the subject of social partnership institutions. He suggested that the contents of this document should be borne in mind, as he was convinced that genuine democracy should also be based on a sound social partnership.

He also referred to a document by the International Red Cross referring to the creation of a permanent tribunal to judge all forms of human rights violations. He suggested that, on the basis of this document, the Council of Europe should draw up a list and undertake an analysis of all existing international legal instruments on this subject and, if appropriate, make proposals on the matter. If there were no objections, he would inform the International Red Cross accordinagly.

2. Mr CLERIDES, President of the Republic of Cyprus, began by paying tribute to the excellent quality of the contributions to the debate ~f the previous day which had confirmed the value of President Mitterrand' s initiative in proposing this meeting.

Not long ago, such a meeting would have been dominated by the negative considerations of the Cold War and arms race: now with the move in Central and Eastern Europe towards pluralism and a market economy the atmosphere could be much more positive. But the newly-won freedom had revived old enmities and given rise to manifestations of chauvinism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, terrorism, violation of the Rule of Law and the abominable practice of ethnic cleansing. In this, he shared Chancellor Kohl's optimism with regard to the positive developments resulting from the collapse of the former communist regimes. He similarly shared the views of President Have! concerning feelings and attitudes towards fellow Europeans and that whilst time was what was needed, it was time that was at a premium. What was required was a unified approach to the problems confronting Europe today and an awareness of the complexities of an inter-related and inter-dependent Europe.

Concerning the fundamental standards of the Council of Europe, he felt that it was not enough simply to agree that standards should not be lowered. On the contrary, member States needed to reconfrrm their commitment to the principles of democratic security, the rule of law and human rights and at the same time to remain vigilant and be aware that the reemergence of all kinds of extremism and agressive nationalism cannot be remedied by admonitions. Furthermore, it was no longer acceptable upholding human rights in one situation and closing our eyes to their violation in another. There was a clear obligation to preserve and strengthen the institutions that underpinned democracy, particularly the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights. He welcomed the decisions in this respect before this meeting and urged that the decisions of the Court should be made public and without any right of the Committee of Ministers when and if, they should be published. SUM(93)PV2 - 2-

Turning to the question of national and ethnic minorities, he could not accept recognition of these rights to the extent that they might amount to secession rights. Quoting the Secretary General of the United Nations speaking recently at the Institute of International Law, he averred that full recognition of what might be termed micro-nationalism was a perverse interpretation, indeed, of the right of self-determination.

i With regards to terrorism, which had been the subject of some discussion the previous day, h there were indeed gaps in international and national law which should be closed. At the same •• time though it was necessary to respect the rights of detained persons, freedom of speech and J other freedorns possibly threatened by the fight against terrorism. I,· At the same time the fight against terrorism should not be used as an excuse for abuses of human rights during arrest, interrogation and detention of suspects or for suppressing political rights as the freedom of speech without due process of law.

In closing, he wished to welcome Romania to the Council of Europe and looked forward also I to welcoming those other states currently walking the road to democracy. The road to h freedom was not easy and all member States had to be prepared to help establish and •• consolidate the institutions necessary for democracy. J

3. Mr LUBBERS, Prime Minister of the Netherlands, said that the end of the Communist I,· system had raised a number of expectations and hopes which had been fulfilled to a certain extent. He noted that the Council of Europe had helped to draw up a number of institutional and social reforms designed to protect the individual citizen, and had assisted with the introduction in former Communist countries of pluralist democracy, the rule of law, human rights and the social market economy.

The Organisation now included nine member States from Central and Eastern Europe. This achievement was due chiefly to the Governments and Parliaments of these countries themselves, but was also due to the readiness of these countries to submit themselves to scrutiny by the Parliamentary Assembly, as well as to sign the European Convention on Human Rights and other legally-binding conventions.

Unfortunately, the expectations of 1989 had not been fulfilled everywhere. The tragedy in former Yugoslavia was a reminder of the continued existence of intolerance, racism and xenophobia; all extremism of this kind had to be combated. In this respect, he was pleased .. that the Summit would adopt a Political Declaration and a Plan of Action containing concrete h proposals with regard to combating these scourges. •• J He noted that the Council of Europe could help improve prosperity and well-being in Europe. However, it was important to do this in a spirit of complementarity and to avoid duplication I,· of efforts; each multilateral Organisation should do that which it was best equipped to do. - 3 - SUM(93)PV2

The strengths of the Council of Europe lay in its body of legally-binding Conventions and in its ability to provide assistance in the drawing up and application of legislation. Its reputation was second to none in the field of Human Rights, not only with regard to the European Convention on Human Rights but also with regard to the European Social Charter and the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. He added that he thus expected a great deal as far as drawing up legislation on the protection of national minorities was concerned. The Council of Europe also played a valuable role in international consultations on cultural policies, particularly with regard to cultural co-operation and the cultural heritage, and could play a pilot role in this area.

It was important that member States fulfil the commitments that they entered into on joining the Organisation. He supported moves undertaken by the Parliamentary Assembly with regard to the monitoring of commitments, and suggested that one might consider undertaking country studies along the lines of those undertaken by the OECD and NATO; the aim of this would be to ensure that the Organisation's principles and norms were being upheld by all member States.

It was essential to strengthen the control mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights, and to reduce the length of proceedings, despite the increase in petitions that would result from the increase in the number of member States. It was vital to provide the necessary safeguards; the Strasbourg Court system should both be tailored to the individual citizen and be exemplary in a general sense. He was confident that efficiency and due care could be combined in the legal texts currently being studied by experts with regard to this question of reform.

As far as the protection of national minorities was concerned, the Netherlands Government took it for granted that it should be embodied in an additional Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. Although no conclusion had been reached as yet on this text, he felt that the proposal of the Secretary General on this issue could act as a basis for finding a consensus concerning the rights of national minorities.

The Council of Europe had done much for Europe; European citizens were eager to put into practice ideas of solidarity and social responsibility, out of which he hoped would emerge a responsible Europe. It was important that the policies of the Council of Europe took due account of the citizens of the member States, since every human being deserved equal respect.

4. The CHAIRMAN expressed his gratitude to Prime Minister Lubbers for having stressed the importance of the Plan of Action on combatting racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance. This initiative has not yet received sufficient publicity, because it has obviously been considered as a self-evident action. To be successful, the campaign needs, however, general support and a large mobilisation of the public.

He then expressed his congratulations to the 32nd member State of the Council of Europe and wished a warm welcome to the President of Romania, Mr Iliescu. SUM(93)PV2 - 4 -

5. Mr ILIESCU, President of Romania, made the following statement:

"This Council of Europe Summit Conference, the first of its kind since the Organisation was founded, marks a historic moment and consecrates the reunification of the European continent in the recognition of the fumdamental values of democracy, the Rule of Law and human rights.

The integration of Romania into the democratic structures of Europe was a priority objective of the December 1989 Revolution. Our presence at this meeting marks a decisive step towards achieving that objective. We hope that this will provide new impetus for political life in our country, thereby contributing to the institutional and legal consolidation of the Rule of Law. We wish to thank the member States and the politicians who have supported us in this endeavour.

We are happy that the resurmption of our traditional relations with Europe at this level is taking place in the capital of Austria, a city where famous representatives of the Romanian nation have lived and worked. I should like in this respect to express to our hosts our gratitude for their hospitality a111d the excellent organisation which guarantees the success of this historic meeting.

This is a critical moment in 1Jfue development of Europe on the eve of the third millennium. The revolutions in the Eastem and Central parts of the continent have opened up prospects for a continental community united in the respect for democratic values, human rights and political pluralism. With its general European vocation, the Council is best placed to understand this perspective and give it practical expression, by creating the conditions for a peaceful, stable and prosper01118 Europe. It can and must make a major contribution towards creating a new mentality, to replace the logic created during several decades by the division of the continent and to eliminate the ideological after-effects which severely hamper the achievement of this new perspective.

The 50 years or so during which our continent was divided by an "iron curtain" have undoubtedly led to divergent developments in the countries of Eastern and Western Europe and accentuated the strong differences between them. Now that real prospects have opened up for uniting our destinies, these circumstances should not prompt behaviour which accentuates our discrepancies tJut should help us to identify the best ways of reducing them. The problems of our continent, whether they exist in the East or the West, are the responsibility of all Europeans in equal measure. We must therefore work out solutions by means of sustained dialogue and close co-operation between all States.

In this connection, we are concerned at the real danger that the former ideological iron curtain may be replaced by new economic barriers between a poor East and a rich West. - 5 - SUM(93)PV2

The Europe of the future cannot be other than a Europe of partnership, of authentic democratic relations between States and peoples. The support provided to the efforts of countries in transition in order to help them become true partners of the developed European countries and achieve democratic progress, and to move towards a market economy despite rather difficult conditions, while consolidating democratic institutions and the Rule of Law, will be of benefit to Europe as a whole. This is the only means of guaranteeing fundamental human rights and freedoms, and eliminating and preventing inter-ethnic conflicts which seem today to pose a major threat to the peace and security of our continent.

It is necessary to devise a new vision for Europe in new historical conditions. Thanks to its open attitude towards those States where the totalitarian communist regimes have collapsed, and thanks to its way of acting during recent years, the Council of Europe has demonstrated its ability to become the institution most capable of catalysing energies with a view to achieving a new unity of our continent, by fostering awareness of all the needs expressed by political forces and public opinion. This idea was also mooted by President Mitterrand yesterday and I think that we can and must give an affirmative response.

Mr Chairman,

Romania's strategy for social development is based on respect for human dignity. Currently, Romania is party to all significant international agreements for the protection and the promotion of human rights. We have both the intention and the obligation, embodied in our new Constitution, to align our legislation constantly on international human rights standards and norms. It is stated in our Constitution that if discrepancies are found to exist between covenants and treaties on fundamental human rights to which Romania is a party and domestic laws, precedence shall be given to the international rules.

We must realise that progress, especially in the sphere of human rights, is not merely a question of adopting new laws and regulations. These also have to be applied in practice, taking account of the particular features of the social environment and of the real possibilities, particularly in economic terms. Similarly, standards of living and quality of life have a considerable impact on the effective exercise of human rights. It is precisely for this reason that we are endeavouring to transform social protection into a fundamental dimension of our reform programme.

As part of our efforts to ensure the conditions for the respect of human rights, great stress is laid on the concern for ensuring the protection of people belonging to minorities. In Romania, 14 national and ethnic minorities live together, each with their own representative organisations. Together they make up some 10% of the total population. In accordance with our Constitution, measures have been taken in Romania to ensure the necessary conditions for the protection of the interests of ethnic minorities, ranging from their representation in the SUM(93)PV2 - 6-

national parliament to their proportional representation in local government bodies, and including the existence of a network of State-subsidised schools where subjects are taught in minority languages, as well as access to the media and to cultural establishments for minorities in their mother-tongues. The creation this year of a Council for National Minorities, under the authority of the government, has expanded the institutional framework enabling each national minority in Romania to take part in the decision-making process concerning measures for the protection of their ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity.

Admittedly, the effective exercise of all these rights contributing to the protection and development of the identity of ethnic minorities is a process subject to many economic and social factors. If there are still aspects which have not yet been resolved or which are hampered by practical difficulties, this applies equally to all the citizens of the country and may be explained first of all by the precarious economic conditions and the high social cost of the transition to a market economy, phenoma which are moreover experienced by other countries undergoing a similar process of change.

We are determined to do our best to identify solutions, complying with European standards, to the problems concerning the protection of the identity of national minorities. Moreover, we consider that real danger exists if these problems, which can be solved only in a social climate of confidence, calm and good-will, are seized upon by nationalist ideologies and political forces or are excessively politicised. If this happens, they will be exploited for certain narrow interests which are profoundly harmful to the true interests of Europe and which will become new sources of insecurity thereby threatening peace and stability.

The national minorities living in almost all European countries can and should constitute links between the States of our continent thanks to the wealth of their culture and civilisation, while ensuring respect for both the principle of loyalty towards the State of residence and the need to protect their linguistic, cultural and religious identity.

By virtue of their traditions, culture and religion, the Romanians are a tolerant nation. Romania will always be a country where all its citizens can live in harmony, whatever their ethnic or religious origins, an island of stability in this extremely troubled region of our continent.

Mr Chairman,

Romania unreservedly endorses the documents submitted for adoption at this meeting. We fully share the conviction expressed in the draft Vienna Declaration that "this Europe is a source of immense hope which must in no event be destroyed by territorial ambitions, the resurgence of aggressive nationalism, the perpetuation of spheres of influence, intolerance or totalitarian ideologies".

- - 7 - SUM(93)PV2

I wish to reassert Romania's determination to combat with resolve all manifestations of racism, xenophobia, anti-semitism and intolerance and all forms of religious discrimination.

Through its membership of the Council of Europe, Romania wishes to contribute with its own experience to the joint efforts of the member States in order to create the conditions necessary for the true exercise of democracy and fundamental human rights. It is prepared to learn from the rich experience of the other member States how to defend its own convictions within a democratic framework, while remaining a partner that is open to dialogue and understanding."

6. The CHAIRMAN thanked President Iliescu for his firm engagement towards the respect of the principles of the Council of Europe and the support he has expressed for the Vienna Declaration and appended texts.

7. Mrs HARLEM BRUNDTLAND, Prime Minister of Norway, made the following statement:

"It is a source of concern for any organisation to be taken for granted. If an organisation is seen as a custodian of past achievements rather than as an engine of change, it risks being met with indifference and lack of compassion.

We should admit that there have been times in the recent past when the core functions of the Council of Europe did not attract great political attention. This has changed.

There were times when many believed that threats to democracy and human rights had become a residual problem in the countries of concern to the Council of Europe. This has changed too.

New tragedies are unfolding in Europe. In parts of former Yugoslavia and in several of the Caucasian republics we are witnessing brutal warfare and untold human suffering at our own doorstep. There seems to be no limit to the brutality that human beings are capable of mobilising in the service of a nationalistic goal, committed in the name of doctrine - the doctrine of the ethnic State - and as such prolong the sinister path of doctrine as a source of war and contention in this century.

The violence in Moscow was instigated by a national assembly without legitimacy. The whole of the Russian people are the victims of this tragedy. More than anything they need to build representative democracy, accelerate economic reform, and pursue social reconstruction and healing.

In Western European countries, more than 20 million people are out of work. We cannot afford, nor allow our people to go idle. Unless we struggle relentlessly against unemployment, and lack of security and opportunity, we risk creating new victims to the seductive voice of populist, undemocratic, irresponsible demagogy. What can ensue is more racism, more extreme nationalism, xenophobia and intolerance which we see in too many countries in Europe today, including my own. SUM(93)PV2 - 8 -

It is therefore timely that we gather here in Vienna to pledge our commitment to the purposes and principles of the Council of Europe and to decide how we could best use the organisation, its potential, its competence and its structures, to meet these new challenges.

The Vienna Declaration mus.t emphasise the vital role the Council of Europe can play in promoting democratic securiny throughout the whole of Europe. The development and consolidation of democracy, human rights and the rule of law constitutes an essential foundation for the further development of European co-operation. It will link our countries together in a common vision of the fundamental objectives of a humane society.

The new democracies in Europe have turned to the Council of Europe in their process of fully integrating into European co-Qperation. This underlines the importance they attach to the development of democracy and the rule of law as a basis for the further political, social and economic development of their societies. We must give priority to meeting the needs of the new and potential members. To ensure a successful integration we must continue to provide assistance within the key areas of competence of the Council of Europe. In this way, we will confirm the importance of tbe Council in today's and tomorrow's Europe.

In the preparations for this Summit, Norway has proposed the elaboration of a plan of action to combat racism, xenophobia. antisemitism and intolerance. We appreciate that agreement has been reached on this issue ..

The fight against racism must be fought in many different arenas. The Council of Europe, founded on legally binding instruments in the field of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, is particularly well suited as a forum for joint efforts in this fight. We appreciate that agreement has been reached on the main elements of the action plan. Its adoption will be an expression of our will to take concrete, co-operative action in this field of great and common concern.

A main feature will be the mobilisation of the strength, support and imagination of the young people of Europe in the fight against racism and in favour of a tolerant society based on the equal dignity of all its members. The European Youth Organisations have already made clear that they are ready to engage in the European Youth Campaign which we now will launch. It is essential that we and our governments are willing to do our part and to follow up the commitments we undertake here today, not least by making available the necessary financial resources for the campaign through additional, voluntary contributions. - 9 - SUM(93)PV2

Another tangible element in the plan of action will be the establishment of a new and permanent expert committee, with a mandate to include the review of legislation and policies in member States, and the formulation of policy recommendations. It will allow us to learn from each other's success stories as well as our failures, and underline the long term perspective of our commitment.

Indeed such policy reviews and country examinations must be made an integral part of our work in the Council of Europe, as also stated just now by Prime Minister Lubbers.

Together with the younger generation, we must all build a coalition for tolerance and dignity. Let us forge a community of purpose so that the world can look to the whole of Europe as a beacon of hope, a source of leadership and a model for other countries and regions where today the roots of democracy are growing on the thinnest soil. Let us use the Council of Europe to pursue the democratic ideals to which this continent gave birth."

8. Mrs TSOUDEROU, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Greece, offered her congratulations to the Secretary General for the organisation of this Summit and to the Austrian authorities for their hospitality, and made the following statement:

"On behalf of the Prime Minister of Greece I would like to congratulate you for the excellent organisation of this unique and historic Summit and to thank you for the traditional Austrian hospitality.

The outcome of our deliberations will influence the future course of the Council of Europe and indeed that of Europe. We cannot allow ourselves any longer to delay the construction of the pan-European society based on democratic institutions, the respect of human rights, the achievement of social justice and prosperity and last but not least, recognition of the ethnic, cultural and religious diversity throughout Europe. In our societies, racism, xenophobia and antisemitism have no place. But time is of utmost importance. Promises only raise hopes, which if not fulfilled will bring on disappointment, insecurity, fear and hate. As Chancellor Kohl underlined, we need action now.

To this end, emphasis must be given to the endorsement of long-term guidelines and instructions to the Council institutions, which will enhance its effectiveness in view of the new political and economic challenges of the European Continent.

Already in this Conference we have heard some answers to the above-mentioned challenges which could remove the principal source of regional conflicts and of the fragmentation of Europe. Any attempts to solve these conflicts will fail, if immediate, radical and realistic solutions are not found to the problems that cause them. The tragedy in the Balkans must be overcome and the mistakes which led to it cannot be repeated. Fragmentation based on chauvinism is no solution. Respect of ethnic identity is the answer. SUM(93)PV2 - 10 -

The family of the Council of Europe which has now grown to 32 members, thus acquiring an almost pan-European character, can play a leading and decisive role in this field, since it possesses the necessary know-how and enjoys a well-deserved reputation, deriving from its considerable contribution to the defense of Democracy and Human Rights during the last 42 years.

The need for political stability and social tranquillity renders imperative the need for reforms in the mechanisms and structures of the Council of Europe and for re-orientation of its policies. Thus the initiative of the President of the French Republic was warmly welcomed by everyone.

Greece wishes to stress its appreciation for the task the Permanent Delegations in Strasbourg have assumed under the Chairmanship of Austria, during the last six months. We also wish to congratulate the Secretary General, the Parliamentary Assembly and other organs of the Council of Europe for their very constructive role and suggestions.

We consider the Political Declaration particularly important. We support in particular:

the further enlargement of the Organisation with new European member States, without reduction of our standards;

the reinforcement of its action centred on democracy and Human Rights through an institutionalised political dialogue;

the ad hoc revision of the Statute of the Council of Europe;

the reinforcement of co-operation with other European institutions and the definition of their complementary roles on issues of common interest.

Nevertheless, the endorsement of a political dialogue should not derail the Council of Europe from its main objective, which is the consolidation of democracy throughout Europe and the protection of human rights. We do not think that it will be useful for the Council of Europe to actively involve itself in regional conflicts or to mediate in differences between member States. On the enlargement of the Council of Europe we believe that the same principles and criteria should be applied for all applicants. We cannot accept double standards. We cannot allow what is called "Realpolitik" to close our eyes to serious infringements of our principles either by old members or new applicants. We cannot allow the bending of these principles to serve narrow nationalistic self-interest. I

• i • - 11 - SUM(93)PV2

Before ending, we also would like to welcome Romania.

The Greek Government and the Greek people will continue tirelessly to provide their support and assistance to the Council of Europe, so that the aim to make it a pan-European, pluralistic Organisation in a pan-European, multicultural and prosperous society be achieved."

9. The CHAIRMAN thanked Mrs Tsouderou for her intervention and expressed his interest in subsequently receiving more detailed information on those applicants where the Council of Europe, in a spirit of "Realpolitik", had not applied the same principles and criteria.

10. Mr BILDT, Prime Minister of Sweden, referring to earlier discussions on the respective roles of the various European institutions. stressed the unique role of the Council of Europe in safeguarding democracy and in ensuring respect of Human Rights in Europe. He felt that as far as the Council of Europe's standards were concerned, there was no room for compromise or dilution. Moreover, there was a need to review the records on respect for Human Rights and democracy not only of the new, but also of the old member States, and there was no other European organisation empowered to do this.

The task of building democracy was not easy. The older democracies of Western Europe had developed their democratic institutions progressively over a long period of time, a luxury not open to the new democracies. Furthermore, the notion of Human Rights required real content and not simply empty slogans. The Council of Europe played a vital role in this by translating into international legal instruments the values of a common European culture.

Sweden was proud of its record on Human Rights but was conscious of the imperfections that had existed hitherto and to some extent remained. In the past, majority rule alone had been seen as a sufficient guarantee of democratic rights, but the wider European tradition, as manifested in the European Convention on Human Rights pointed to the need for constitutional guarantees against an omnipotent state. To this end, Sweden will incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into its domestic law and he regarded this step as being of particular importance in the constitutional development of his country. Turning .- to the question of national and minority rights, whilst these were clearly very important, he felt that respect for individual human rights was more so. Individual human rights represented the very core of European civilisation and the cornerstone of European values. It was not sufficient, however, simply to embody these values into legal instruments: mechanisms for implementation and guarantee of human rights were also required. In this respect the reform of the Council's Human Rights organs was now pressing. Expansion of the Council of Europe and an increasing public awareness of the legal recourse at their disposal had placed an increasing burden on the control mechanisms of the Human Rights Convention, and he hoped that the strengthening of these mechanisms would take place as soon as possible. SUM(93)PV2 - 12 -

The challenges of the 1990s for Europe were very great indeed: the reunification of a continent divided for too long was a complex and difficult task. This Summit meeting was taking place some 200 kilometres from the carnage taking place in the former Yugoslavia. The concomitant refugee problem bred ethnic and social tensions, tensions which were evident even in countries where there was no such open conflict. It was likely that the conflicts of the future would not be conflicts of ideologies but would stem rather from what he termed the fault-line of civilisations. Events in the mountains of Bosnia - the old frontier between Eastern and Western European churches, between Rome and Byzantium, the Roman and Ottoman Empires - were ample witness to the existence of such fault-lines.

The conflict in the former Yugoslavia had produced some one million refugees, ninety percent of which had been accepted into five countries only Austria, Denmark, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. His own country had welcomed many for humanitarian reasons and was proposing to grant most of them permanent residence. Sweden's conviction was that there were no longer any "faraway countries of which we know little" in Europe and that all European States were under an obligation to offer support and help. If Sweden was proud of its contribution to the humanitarian effort, including its military contribution to UN peacekeeping, it was also consdous that there was an unequal burden-sharing which was no longer acceptable. The closing of borders, for example, was to turn one's back upon the joint responsibility that all European States shared.

He referred to the letter addressed to the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Austria by Mrs Sadako Ogata, UNHCR High Commissioner, in which she had stressed the need for dialogue on the current European situation and for a strategy that should cover global refugee and migratory issues, in particular safe return and reintegration, and preventive and information policies. '

In sum, emphasis should now firmly be placed on the rights of the individual as a means to avert conflict, and more equitable burden-sharing arrangements should be put in place. Dialogue on these issues should no longer be delayed either at the European level of the Council of Europe or that of national governments.

11. The CHAIRMAN concurred with Prime Minister Bildt's remark on the conflictual situations which arise amongst individuals or groups within the Western European societies, for example as a result of the increasing flow of refugees from areas of conflict. There existed, indeed, theories analysing the behaviour of society after the nuclear threat had disappeared. The revival of oldcrooted patterns of the enemy was one of the consequences, ie, the neighbour became again the favourite enemy. This also explained the increasing conflictual situations within Ew:opean cities.

t' - 13 - SUM(93)PV2

12. Mr S.E. Cardinal SODANO, Secretary of State of His Holiness (Holy See), made the following statement:

"You have been pleased to invite the Pope's Representative to your meeting. On behalf of His Holiness John Paul II, I cordially thank you. I also express my sincere gratitude to the Austrian Government for its warm hospitality and for its excellent organisation of the meeting.

For my part, I assure the Heads of State and Government who took part in the discussion that I followed their interesting proposals for the Council of Europe's future activity with great attention. In turn, I would like to limit myself to expressing three goals.

The first goal concerns, promoting the values of the organisation. I have been pleased to hear from various sources that such a need has been clearly perceived. I read with satisfaction that in the draft of the final declaration such values are often mentioned, speaking of a "European framework based on the values of our organisation" and again of the "values that define our identity", as well as of new States that "share the same values". These are three very noble signs, which do honour to the Council of Europe.

In reality, these values constitute the common cultural heritage of Europe, and can never be forgotten. Europe does not only have a common market. Europe has a soul! The President of the French Republic has rightly said that Europe is not only a geographical reality, that Europe is a culture. I should also like to say that Europe is a faith. To summarise, we all agree that Europe has values which we must respect and promote.

The second goal concerns the protection of the rights of individuals and peoples. The Council of Europe has already accomplished much in the field of protecting the rights of individuals. For 40 years, it has had a system to safeguard human rights which of its kind is unique in the world. There is now a desire to strengthen the well-known 1950 Convention by reforming the existing verification mechanisms.

This is very important. But in agreement with the CSCE, the rights of peoples will also be examined, as well as the nature and limits of these rights. This is the challenge of the present time. His Holiness John Paul II spoke of this recently in Tallinn, at the end of his Pastoral Visit to Estonia. The Pope spoke of the duty to respect the "Menschenrechte" as much as the "Viilkerrechte", individual rights as much as the rights of peoples.

Certainly, the nature of these "Viilkerrechte" should be clearly defined in order not to foment an unhealthy and aggressive nationalism. Peoples have rights but at the same time they have duties toward other peoples. Duties of co-operation and solidarity. Duties of mutual respect and assistance. SUM(93)PV2 - 14 -

For its part, the Holy See wishes to contribute to building a new Europe and to demolishing the barriers of blind and irrational nationalism, reminding everyone that if love for one's homeland is sacred, nationalism is anti-human and anti-Christian. To love one's own country does not mean fighting with others. On the contrary, it means co-operating with others, for this enhances the greatness of one's own nation.

Furthermore, the Holy See continues to insist that the various forms of religion should not foment nationalism. The Pope recalled this in Assisi, last January, in speaking to the Islamic community: "Genuine religious belief is a source of mutual understanding and harmony and only the perversion of religious sentiments leads to discrimination and conflict. To use religion as an excuse for injustice and violence is a terrible abuse, and it must be condemned by all true believers in God" (Address to the Muslim Community, Assisi, 10 January 1993).

The third goal concerns reconciliation among peoples. The Council of Europe still has much work to do in this regard, and the Holy See, in conformity with its mission, as well as the Church in Europe in general, is promising its broadest co-operation in this area. Recalling the tragedies in the Balkans and the Caucasus, recalling the hotbeds of strife between the different ethnic groups in the heart of Europe one inevitably notes: there is still much to be done for reconciliation between peoples! This work of reconciliation can be advanced by the Council of Europe, inviting each people to have the courage to be truthful about themselves and their past and to recognise their own responsibilities and even their own errors in the sight of other peoples.

To this end, I can assure all the member countries of the Council of Europe that the Holy See is close to them and, together with all the Christian communities in Europe, will co-operate in reconciling hearts that are still so divided.

In particular, the Catholic Church's contributions to peace in Europe are numerous. In addition to the work of conscience formation, there is the whole ecumenical dialogue with the other Christian denominations; there is interreligious dialogue with other communities of believers; there is co-operation with the authorities of various States and international organisations on concrete plans for peace and solidarity.

Thus reconciliation is now a vast, open field thanks to the Council of Europe. The Holy See will be very pleased to co-operate in this task, insofar as it is able. All the Churches in Europe will work with the Holy See, carrying out their role of educating the new generations. • We will strive to make young Europeans aware of the moral, social and political responsibilities that are incumbent on everyone for the future. We shall try to educate youth in the common good and the duty to respect others.

This is the help that the Church can give the European States. The Council of Europe rights realises that the most serious problem is that of the member countries commitment to respecting the interpretation and spirit of the Conventions adopted so far. Some noble commitments have been made over the years of its history by the Council of Europe. There have been more than a hundred Conventions, but everyone knows that the problem is the practical application of these commitments. In educating consciences, the Church will be able to help ensure that each individual is aware of his or her social responsibility and will make his or her own contribution to the common good.

---~-.~. • - 15 - SUM(93)PV2

This was also the commitment made by the Bishops of Europe who gathered at the European Synod of December 1991. This is the commitment undertaken by the Council of European Episcopal Conferences whose President is currently the Archbishop of Prague. This is the commitment of the various Christian organisations that wish to build a better Europe.

Your Excellencies, these are three goals I wished to express in order to strengthen the Council of Europe, as I invoke the most abundant blessings of Almighty God on the work of this Summit."

13. Mr JESZENSZKY, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Hungary, spoke as follows:

"The first Summit meeting of the Council of Europe represents an important step toward realising an old universalist dream: the establishment of a Europe, united by common ideals, where justice and peace prevails. Pax Romana replaced by Pax Democratica. I would like to express my most sincere thanks to our hosts for arranging and preparing this meeting.

Hungary was the first country from the former communist bloc which was able to meet the strict requirements for membership of the Council. It was three years ago and how much has changed since then. Tempora mutantur nos et mutamur in illis. Today we live in a different Europe and in a different Council of Europe. Hungary appreciates its expansion and welcomes the new obligations which were assumed as a result. Our expanded new community has ceased to be the club of impeccable political gentlemen. Thus the Council has become closely involved with the challenges and dangers of the new Europe. It cannot face them alone, we will have to seek the support of other institutions to consolidate the gains won with the ending of the Cold War and to ensure security in the new frontier zone, moving swiftly eastward.

Recently my country expressed some reservations concerning the latest admissions. My government is satisfied that the Parliamentary Assembly and the Committee of Ministers, by making some recommendations and provisions, has assumed a most welcome responsibility over the fulfilment of the pledges made by the countries concerned. I am confident that the governments of these countries will be able to pass the necessary legislation and will not be prevented by extremist, "red-brown" forces from honouring the recommendations of the Council of Europe.

The legacy of communism has proved to be very difficult to overcome. The younger generations have been most seriously affected. Prejudice, hostility and even brutality, which have become so frequent in the formerly communist countries, have a lot to do with the artificial separation of the peoples, with the existence of so many Iron Curtains dividing them. SUM(93)PV2 - 16 -

To cure the disease of intolerance and hostile nationalism personal contacts between people, especially between the young, should be facilitated. The Council of Europe has long offered projects and programmes with this end in view. The establishment of a second European Youth Centre in Budapest was therefore an important contribution to better mutual knowledge, understanding and respect between the new generations growing up in the post­ communist Europe. I am pleased that the Prime Minister of Norway emphasised this issue.

In Central and Eastern Europe the countries must embark upon the same road that the founders of the Council of Europe took some forty years ago. Inter-state confidence must grow and sources of tension or bias must be removed. One of the best ways to do so is encouraging and facilitating regional and transfrontier co-operation. This was started four years ago by Italy, Austria, Hungary and then Yugoslavia, and it has developed into the Central European Initiative (CEI). This association has been also following with utmost interest and sympathy the activities of the Council of Europe aimed at the protection of national minorities, including the elaboration of a legally binding document. Upon the decision of the Prime Ministers, the CEI member countries embarked on working out an instrument for the protection «

As of this year the Central European Initiative is chaired by my country, let me draw your kind attention to a document which we have distributed to the Delegations. It is called "CEI Communication", a kind of message illustrating and summing up the co-operation among CEI member States in this special field. I hope that the drafting of the instrument mentioned yesterday by the Prime Minister of Italy will be finished soon and a ministerial conference for its adoption could be convened. On this occasion let me extend my invitation to the Council of Europe to attend this conference.

That brings me to my ceterum censeo, the problem of national minorities:

In Central and Eastern Europe the ethnic composition of existing States and the history of the present frontiers is substantially different from that in Western Europe. The eastern half of Europe has remained a colourful ethnic mosaic, despite brutal ethnic cleansing by Hitler and Stalin and more recently in other countries. This should remain so. h'' The ethnic or national tensions which can be noticed in Central and Eastern Europe are not ,, as serious as they are often described by the media. In my opinion, the former Yugoslavia J is an exception and not a rule. I~, Tensions are caused not by t!he existence of minorities, or by their claims, but by their disadvantageous position. By satisfying their basic wish, to be left alone to preserve their identity, ethnic tensions would be reduced, even eliminated.

i.. - 17 - SUM(93)PV2

It is often argued that there is no such thing as collective rights. But hardly anyone denies that there exists xenophobia, racial and national discrimination. The latter is always the result of somebody belonging to a collective group or community. If the denial of rights can take place on a collective basis, then legal guarantees should be also available for a whole community.

Lately some governments started to proclaim that the members of the national minorites should be obliged to show loyalty to the State. Since loyalty is nothing else than obedience to the laws, loyalty presents no problem where the State is nationally neutral (as President Have! spoke about yesterday), where the State respects the rights of the minorities, like the right to run their own cultural affairs, to use the place-names their ancestors have been using for centuries, and so on. Citizens, whether belonging to the majority or the minority, will be loyal only to a government which, in turn, is loyal to them.

A few days ago in a remarkably lucid speech NATO Secretary-General Wtirner expressed very much the same thoughts which I used in ending my speech to the UN General Assembly. Allow me to quote him rather than myself: "Following a period in which international relationships were virtually frozen, the world has suddenly become full of possibilities, both good and bad. The question is whether we will demonstrate the vision, courage and leadership of the generation of Truman, Adenauer and Monnet, or whether instead we will succumb to the risk avoidance and selfish nationalism which so disastrously characterised Western leadership following World War I. This is the task before us, and history will judge our generation by how we respond to it"."

14. Mr MOCK, Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs of Austria, stated that he was happy to see the Eastern European countries already within or in the process of rejoining the circle of the democratic States after so many decades of oppression. In spite of the worldwide historical significance of political events in recent years, there remained a number of problems inherited from communist dictatorship which had to be faced. In this context, the European Convention on Human Rights offered an effective instrument for dealing with the situation. The ordinary citizen's position would be strengthened in the fundamental area of human rights by providing access to a permanent Court of Human Rights. But the system of protection of Human Rights had to remain efficient especially as far as delays were concerned.

There appeared to be agreement on the reform of the control mechanisms of the European Convention on Human Rights involving the establishment of a single permanent Court and there was also a broad consensus among the Council of Europe's member States concerning the protection of minorities. In this context Austria had always been in favour of establishing a system of international legal instruments, independent of any political constraint and accessible to to all. SUM(93)PV2 - 18 -

The Council of Europe's credibility depended largely on the political protection it could provide and its ability to assure full respect of rights.

Three points should be stressed:

First, a multiplicity of protection mechanisms, in particular the Framework Convention and the Additional Protocol, which would provide flexible and responsive machinery. Secondly, the protection mechanisms had to be complementary and interlocking. Thirdly, the degree of legal protection afforded by an individual State to its minorities should, whilst respecting international norms, be defined by that State.

Summing up, he said that democracy and the protection of human rights should remain the Council of Europe's main tasks. The Austrian Government would lend its full support to this. If this resulted in more work for the Council of Europe, Austria would be ready to contribute to an increased budget. It had already made a voluntary contribution to the assistance programs aimed at supporting democratic reforms in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. It would during the next months provide a further five million Schillings for the same purpose.

Human Rights and democracy remained paramount priorities, especially the more important as when certain political developments were contrary to those principles. He recalled the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina. He agreed with President Mitterrand that Europe was still too weak for the full implementation of its principles.

15. Mr BRAZAUSKAS, President of Lithuania, spoke as follows:

"It is a great honour for me to represent Lithuania at this first Council of Europe Summit Meeting for Heads of State. The task with which we are faced today is to find and consolidate a place for the Council of Europe in a continent that is changing as the countries of Eastern and Central Europe make their way into the political, economic, cultural and defence arena of Europe.

I think that it is possible to overcome these problems on the basis of common values: peace, democracy, human and national minorities' rights, fostering our cultural heritage. The • integration of Europe is not possible, and will not be accomplished, unless we clearly understand that every European nation that grounds its development in mutually recognised values has the right to be an indelible part of Europe. The most important basis for European unification is a determination to create a continent void of territorial claims, void of divisions into spheres of influence, void of aggressive nationalism.

I have raised before the idea of a conference of Eastern European Heads of State under the flag of the Council of Europe. At such a forum it would be possible to discuss, how to overcome quickly and effectively the maladies of egoism and ethno-centrism, how to take advantage of Europe's experience in the processes of integration, and how to take part in those processes.

• ..t - 19 - SUM(93)PV2

The vision of a new Europe can not be reconciled with the presence of a foreign army on the territory of another State without its consent. The continuing uncertainty regarding the withdrawal of the Russian Army from Latvia and Estonia poses a threat to the security and stability of the entire region.

I would like to mention a victory for mankind that Lithuania and Russia have achieved. It is, at the same time, a victory for all of the forces of justice and peace in the world. For the first time in the territory of the former USSR, without any prior conditions, Russian military forces have been peacefully withdrawn from Lithuania. It is obvious that the world now lives in an era of new opportunities.

A week ago, however, all of us watched the tragic events in Moscow with our breath held. The victory was won by the forces of the future, not the forces of the past. Yet, Russia will still have to cover a long and difficult road before stable democracy is consolidated there. Living in the neighbouring of this huge State, we are vitally interested in seeing this road lead to success, in Russia feeling the support of European institutions.

The wide-ranging enterprise of creating a New Europe will come to nought, if the rights of every individual and every national minority are not universally respected and protected. Lithuania expresses her position that the specialised structures of the Council of Europe as defender of human rights should now be modernised, that the mechanism for supervising compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights should be reinforced. This could be served by a supplementary protocol to the Human Rights Convention about the situation of national minorities.

In Lithuania, we have essentially solved the problems of national minorities by adopting appropriate laws, improving them, and putting them into effect. I would like to note that the law on citizenship that is now in effect was passed as early as 1989. We can be pleased with the continuity in policy since 1990, when independence was declared. The law on citizenship has not changed much since that time, even though the government in our country has changed democratically. The fine, centuries-old traditions of the Lithuanian state regarding the problems of nationalities contribute to this. At the same time, we expect that the Lithuanian national minority in neighbouring states will be granted guarantees similar to those that national minorities in Lithuania enjoy.

However, we understand that the situation of national minorities in every country is unique, with its own historical backdrop and current factors. We were able to adopt a more liberal law on citizenship in Lithuania due to a favourable ethnic composition which, to a large extent, was determined by the position that leadership of Lithuania maintained in prior decades, and by the resistance to a policy of ethnic dilution. The situation that developed in Latvia and Estonia is entirely different. For them, a threat to their very survival as nations arose. As a consequence, one can look for solutions only by taking into account the realities in each concrete country. SUM(93)PV2 - 20-

Regrettably, I must point out 1lbat we sometimes feel isolationist tendencies on the part of industrialised states, an attempt to distance themselves from Eastern and Central Europeans. I dare to say that the concept of "Western Europe" is now obsolete. The future belongs to just "Europe". That is why we wish that the Council of Europe expand its programmes for consolidating democracy. That would also be served by the anticipated reforms of the Council of Europe Statutes.

We are building Lithuania as a free and democratic State with a civic, pluralistic society. After the historical changes in ou;r country, there should no longer be those who feel defeated, people who feel rejected because of their nationality, religion or political convictions. We believe in the idea of pan-European unification, in the co-operation on an equal footing among large and small state in the creation of a more equitable world. It is only in that kind of Europe, and in that kind of world, that the contours of the third millennium should begin to emerge. "

16. Mr ODDSSON, Prime Minister of Iceland, made the following declaration:

"Respect for human rights, delll!lOcracy and the rule of law is increasingly accepted as the foundation of freedom, justice and peace, which together characterise the aspirations of the new Europe.

Meanwhile, the post-Cold War era, particularly the tragic events in former Yugoslavia and the former Soviet Union, demonstrates the dangerous consequences of a lack of democratic traditions, not only on a national level but on local and regional levels as well.

The new challenges in European security require co-operation between different organisations to make use of the experience and resources unique to each. It is therefore necessary to clearly define the role of the Council of Europe vis-a-vis other organisations and strengthen its unique contribution.

I therefore welcomed the proposal by the President of the French Republic, Mr. Fran~ois Mitterrand, to convene a summit meeting on the future role of the Council of Europe in the new Europe, now that the Council is reaching its main aim of bringing all European States into closer co-operation. I woukl also like to thank the Government of Austria for hosting the Summit. In this connection I furthermore find it appropriate to pay tribute to the splendid work of the Parliamentary Assembly of our Council with regard to preparing the Summit.

The Council of Europe was originally based on the hope that the European countries might, by establishing firmer ties, preserve democracy, human rights and world peace. No less importantly the Council was and remains an exclusive organisation. In order to become a member of the Council a State must recognise the basic principles of the rule of law, and that human rights and fundamental freedoms must be secured for every individual within its jurisdiction.

' h:..j,l ','~· • 1,'

;'· ,I ' .. _ .:. .~ I - 21 - SUM(93)PV2

Due to this unique characteristic of the Council of Europe, full participation by a State in the Council may be regarded as a recognition of a democratic constitution. The Council thus acts like an "eye of a needle" which States must be able to pass through in order to be eligible for full participation in European co-operation.

A further condition for membership is a pledge to effective collaboration in the realisation of the aim of the Council. Special attention must be given to the ability of States to fulfil the conditions of membership. I have taken very positive note of an Order adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly on the honouring of commitments entered into by new member States. The monitoring of these commitments is a new and important task shouldered by the Assembly. Apart from this the most important is, of course, the examination, conducted under the auspices of the Council, of methods of government and of public rights within States requesting membership.

The end of the division of Europe revealed new instabilities. A deteriorating economic situation threatens the cohesion of European societies, which has led to social tension and manifestations of xenophobia. The resurgence of extreme nationalist movements, which is one of the most complicated issues of the new Europe, could challenge democratic reforms and the peaceful and friendly relations of States.

The elimination of the ideological barriers between East and West notwithstanding, we are confronted with serious challenges and threats to the human rights ideals of the Council of Europe.

These developments demonstrate the need for member States to recommit themselves to the Council of Europe's objectives. We must also respond to present and future requirements. I want to single out two issues of grave concern.

One of these, and a particularly urgent issue, is the protection of national minorities. The whole human rights edifice is founded on the principle of equal dignity of all human beings. No individual nor group of individuals should be denied human rights. It is the duty of the international community to define the rights of national minorities and find ways of .- effectively protecting their rights. This must be our aim .

Another issue, which is of paramount importance, is the plan of action to combat racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance, which cast an ugly shadow over efforts to consolidate peace and freedom in Europe. This plan is probably the most important result of the Summit meeting. It is also of utmost significance to mobilise the young in building a tolerant society based on the equal dignity of all people.

Allow me also to mention the issue of the control mechanism. The European Convention on Human Rights has, with the European Social Charter and the Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, played a crucial role in the protection of human rights and fundamental liberties. I•' SUM(93)PV2 - 22-

Human rights must be regarded as universal and absolute values. That was the conclusion in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. This is also the essence of the • European Convention on Human Rights, which moreover, and uniquely, entails a binding h commitment by the members of the Council of Europe. '" J I therefore Mr Chairman, welcome the revision foreseen in the control mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is necessary, following the expansion of the If' membership of the Council, and will better enable the Court to fulfil its crucial task of protecting the rights of individuals against government. It is vital for individuals of all walks of life to enjoy equal rights and opportunities based on the principles of the rule of law."

17. Mr SANTER, Prime Minister of Luxembourg, spoke as follows: I

"What contribution can our Organisation make towards the construction of the united Europe h; ..d which we all desire? It must be acknowledged that the oldest European institution of the ' J post-war period has undergone a great change: today we represent 32 pluralist democracies attached to the Rule of Law and the respect for human rights. Since 1989, the Council of If' Europe has welcomed into its midst the democracies which have thrown off communist • oppression and are in a position to satisfy the criteria for joining the Organisation. We must confirm this policy of openness towards all European countties which opt for democracy.

But as well as enlarging its membership, the Council of Europe must maintain its high standards with regard to democracy, the Rule of Law, and respect for human rights. I h,, In order to integrate the new members successfully and facilitate the transition to democracy ' J for candidate States, we must reinforce our co-operation programmes in all sectors - legal, institutional, or judicial - in which the Council of Europe has shown proof of its competence If I and efficiency. This should be done in collaboration with the other European organisations, above all the European Community.

By gradually becoming a pan-European Organisation, the Council of Europe has necessarily acquired a political dimension. It has become a forum for discussion which we should use J to the full in order to deal with all the questions which come within the scope of the ' Organisation. h:.ol ~·J The enlargement of the Council of Europe has provided it with new impetus. It must now be given the means to operate effectively with its enlarged membership. In this respect, I If I particularly welcome the reform of the control mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights. The creation of a single and permanent Court should make it possible to preserve in the future the high level of human rights protection.

• h,, . ~· ''• • If' ~ ••.. lr,, . - 23 - SUM(93)PV2

The Council of Europe therefore has a specific role to play as a centre for intergovernmental co-operation and a political forum in the context of its specific competences. It must contribute to better democratic monitoring of the member States and to helping strengthen democracy in non-member countries. It must actively participate in combating intolerance in all its forms and in solving the problem of national minorities in Europe.

With regard to this last point, we must respond to the legitimate aspirations of national minorities and enable them to express their specific identity, above all in the field of culture, language and religion. These aspirations must obviously remain compatible with the rights of the majority and with the constitutional provisions of the States harbouring the minorities concerned.

As the guarantor of pluralist democracy, the Rule of Law and respect for human rights, the Council of Europe should furnish a major contribution, indeed an essential one, to the solution of this delicate matter of national minorities.

Without further ado, we can undertake politically to take measures which will enable national minorities to express their identity more fully. We can set up confidence-building measures designed to alleviate conflictual situations. On the legal plane, we can also draw up a framework convention defining the principles which member States undertake to observe in order to guarantee the protection of national minorities. Such a convention could also incorporate model bilateral agreements concerning the protection of national minorities. It is indeed of great importance that the countries most concerned should be able, through bilateral agreements, to be concluded if necessary with the co-operation and under the aegis of the Council of Europe, to respond to the main concerns of the minority groups living in several of our member States.

These progressive measures should allow the creation of a climate of confidence between the peoples of Europe. They could be set up in parallel to the work under way on an additional Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. We would thus have at our disposal several complementary instruments which together would allow conditions of peace and stability to be created on our continent.

The resurgence of racism, xenophobia and intolerance in our countries is an evil which must be dealt with at the roots. All too often, programmes, seminars and conferences on these issues are directed at a public which is already informed and convinced of the need to take action against intolerance. We must therefore launch a major campaign in order to reach all sectors of the population, and in particular those groups attracted to extremist political movements.

I share the views of our Norwegian colleague, Mrs Brundtland, on the primordial role which must be accorded to young people and to youth organisations. They must be the driving force through which we can launch a message of tolerance to the widest possible public. SUM(93)PV2 - 24-

Each member State should examine its legislation in order to make sure that the maximum is done to combat these discriminations effectively. But it will also be necessary to establish a follow-up mechanism to ensure the effective implementation of legislation.

The Council of Europe has a specific role to play in this field and should, in the implementation of its co-operation programmes, take special account of the aims of our Declaration and Plan of Action."

Mr SANTER concluded by thanking the Austrian Government for its warm welcome and for taking the initiative to hold this Vienna Summit Conference, which he hoped would mark the beginning of a new development for the Council of Europe.

18. The CHAIRMAN thanked Prime Minister Santer for his contribution and the fact that he had particularly stressed the necessity of initiating a large campaign of mobilisation of the public in support of the action plan on combating racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance.

Referring to President Mitterrand' s contribution to the first working session and Prime Minister Dehaene's reference to the Pact on Stability in Europe under discussion within the European Community on the: initiative of the French Prime Minister, Mr Balladur, he informed the meeting that Mr Juppe, the French Minister for Foreign Affairs, will provide further information on this initfutive.

19. Mr LAAR, Prime Minister of Estonia, spoke as follows:

"I am very pleased to address cmr fust Summit meeting at a moment when we are together moving towards taking new, decisive steps in the process of building a new European architecture based on democracy and the market economy. I would like to use the opportunity to thank our host Austria, for this wonderful meeting as well as the brilliant organisation of this meeting.

Today, we are adopting a draft declaration outlining the ways and means at our disposal for further constructive action. This document successfully highlights the challenges facing us all in the process of European integration. It is important to stress here, that, as Chancellor Helmut Kohl said, we have to act immediately. Europe has to give up its golden isolation at once. It has to take a step towards creating a unified Europe. The "emerging democracies" of Eastern and Central Europe need trade instead of aid. They wish to offer real partnership and co-operation. h' '"'' Estonia has been successful in its economic and political reforms. We have been able to J follow the economic policy which has been tougher than the one suggested by the IMF and we have learned from the experience of the radical East European States, like Poland. I~· - 25 - SUM(93)PV2

At the same time, it is evident that successful economic reforms cannot be carried out without democratic reforms, without entering a civil society and the rule of law. The Council of Europe's role in supporting this process and developing it has been immense during the last years. The Estonian new constitution for example, was elaborated with the help of the Council experts and the quick adoption of it made the first post-war democratic elections in Estonia possible.

The unconditional support of minority rights plays an important role in stabilising society. Central and Eastern Europe inherited a heavy burden from the Soviet dictatorship in this field. Whole nations were killed and deported. Millions of people were resettled, some national groups were turned against the others. Unfortunately, this has created favourable conditions for the conflicts that can presently be seen both in Europe as well as in the former Soviet Union.

The only possibility to peacefully solve those conflicts, is to be subjected to European norms. Estonia is a good example of that.

This summer, Estonia sent its relevant laws to the Council of Europe and CSCE for expert opinion, and our parliament made the suggested changes. Yesterday, we received the Council's experts' opinion on the law of cultural autonomy of the minorities. With the help of the Council we have made rapid progress in supporting the rights of minorities. Here, I would like to thank the Council of Europe once again.

I also dare to hope that the example Estonia sets in subordinating its legislation to the expert opinion of the Council of Europe would be a good example for other States. The result would always be well-being and an avoidance of conflict. In this context, we welcome the engagement by Latvia of Council of Europe experts in drafting its legislation. Just as for Estonia, we are convinced that this engagement will help ensure an early accession of Latvia as a full member of the Council.

Estonia welcomes the reform of the Human Rights Court system as well as the new initiative on national minorities.

Very soon, we will adopt the Vienna Declaration which will become the basis of great changes. It will help us to preserve stability and democratic development on the continent, but will also oblige us to take further steps in the improvement of the fate of our fellow countrymen and national minorities.

Democracy and economic development in our region are very important in moving towards real European integration. We, as a small nation, are prepared to make our contribution to approach this goal, but the ongoing illegal presence of foreign troops on Estonian and Latvian soil is hampering our full integration into world society, and discouraging foreign investments. It is also detrimental to the process of integration among the different nationalities. The recent events in Moscow have even more clearly shown us the danger connected to the presence of these troops. SUM(93)PV2 - 26-

We express our hope that, in the aftermath of these dramatic events, Russia will enjoy new opportunities for stable democratic development, in particular, through the coming elections in December. The process of reform and democracy in Russia is, we hope, irreversible. Still, the attempts to recreate reshaped spheres of influence through the policy of "near abroad" should not belong to the present Europe.

Estonia fully understands that the delays and difficulties in withdrawing the Russian troops, which have prevented, to date, a full adherence by the Russian Federation to its commitments made in the 1992 CSCE Helsinki final document and in the UN 47th General Assembly resolution, were, in large part, due to the destructive influence of backward-looking forces represented in the old Russian Parliament. We are convinced that the renewed commitment to reform expressed in President Yeltsin' s letter to our Council will also pave the way to the peaceful completion of the withdrawal of the remaining Russian armed forces still present on Estonian territory in the next few months.

In 1949, when Winston Churchill suggested creating the Council of Europe, he had a vision of a united and democratic world outside the realm of communism. He succeeded, because he had vision, because he was willing to invest in the long-term interest of his country. Today, at this meeting, Central and Eastern European countries are asking to be included - to be re-included- in our common European home. We are willing to work and we are eager to work with you. Are you here? Is Europe willing to accept the vision of a united Europe, are you willing to accept your long-lost brothers and sisters as equals."

20. Mr JUPPE, Minister for Foreign Affairs of France, thanked the Chairman for giving him the opportunity, after the President of the French Republic, to say how greatly the French Government appreciated the kind welcome given by the Austrian Government to all participants and to offer his congratulations on the success of what was indeed an unprecedented meeting.

He said that security and stability in Europe today represented the most important challenge facing the continent. There were, it was true, conflicts in which fighting had already broken out, and here the CSCE and the United Nations had a prominent role to play. However, one should not belittle the role of preventive diplomacy, and in this respect action by the Council of Europe could be decisive. The Council was an outstanding forum of political debate, and the present Conference was evidence of this. It was also an area of democratic security. Just as in the past the European Community was essentially concerned with economic security and NATO with questions of military security, the vocation of the Council of Europe was to strengthen democratic security and to help build a Europe in which the Rule of Law prevailed. Preventive diplomacy aimed particularly at dealing with such very sensitive issues as minorities and nationalities. In addressing these issues it was important to avoid exacerbating tensions and, rather, to endeavour to ease it. This should be done through a legal approach based on the universal rights of every human being. The creation of ghettos must be avoided at all cost, and clearly, universal rights must apply to every individual, whether part of a minority or a majority. - 27 - SUM(93)PV2

Stressing the need for pragmatism, he referred in this respect to the educative action of the Council of Europe to help those countries that were accomplishing the transition to democracy to draft their Constitutions and their legislation, to offer assistance in the form of pilot projects, especially on democracy, education, culture and the promotion of free media, to co­ operate with the CSCE High Commissioner for National Minorities, and to encourage the conclusion of bilateral agreements. These elements were central to Mr Balladur's initiative on a "Conference on Stability in Europe". The French Government had had occasion to discuss this initiative at some length with the European Community, and so he himself was in a position to give the present Conference a clearer idea of what it implied. The purpose of preventive diplomacy was to promote stability in Europe and would not apply to areas such as the former Yugoslavia or the Caucasus, where there was already open conflict. The Conference would be addressing, first and foremost, the question of minorities in Central and Eastern Europe, and chiefly in those countries which had expressed a desire for rapprochement with the Community. It would also be considering the Baltic countries and Slovenia in the light of the results of forthcoming consultations. A further topic to be covered was the question of consolidation of frontiers which - to dispel earlier misunderstandings - meant the consolidation and perpetuation of frontiers, and nothing else. The USA, Canada and Russia would also be invited to attend the Conference. At the opening session, all participating countries would be invited to conclude good-neighbour agreements. The Conference would not seek to impose a rigid framework of negotiation; negotiations could, for instance, take the form of bilateral or enlarged round tables, possibly chaired by a moderator appointed by the Parties concerned. This initiative would retain its own specific identity, but it had been agreed that the CSCE would be the depository of the content of the bilateral agreements and the conclusions of the final Conference. He noted moreover that, there being a sufficient number of institutions in Europe already, it was not proposed to create any new ones. The principles underlying this initiative were those upheld by the United Nations, the CSCE and the Council of Europe. The Stability Pact drawn up at the final session would be a political document enshrining all of the good-neighbour agreements concluded in the course of the Conference.

The objective was to submit to the European Council, at its meeting in December 1993, the results of the work being done within the European Community on the initiative presented by the Prime Minister of France, so that concerted action could then be started with the partners directly concerned.

There was no element of competition between this initiative and others which might be undertaken by other organisations, in particular the Council of Europe; on the contrary, the work on which the present Summit Conference had decided to embark, not least the preparation of a framework convention and a protocol on minorities, would provide a basis for very close complementarity between all that the Council of Europe had decided to do and the initiative regarding the Stability Pact. This was a further example of how the various European institutions could work harmoniously together, with the Council of Europe assuming, as it had always done, a role of major importance for stability and peace in Europe. SUM(93)PV2 - 28 -

21. The CHAIRMAN referred with particular gratitude to Mr Juppe's very constructive final remarks on the complernentarity between the initiative for a pact on European stability and the action of the Council of Europe. These remarks stressed the necessity for co­ operation and coordination within the network of existing European institutions and organisations.

22. Mr MECIAR, Prime Minister of Slovakia, began by extending his gratitude to the Austrian authorities for the quality and warmth of their hospitality of the Austrian authorities at this Summit, which was taking place as the political map and structures of Europe, drawn up in the aftermath of World War 11, were being superceded. The new Europe called for a new architecture. The task now was to decide on the shape of this new architecture, and appoint the architects. Would the future Europe be a Europe of states, nations or regions?

Europe existed as a continent with common values but it was also a place of conflicts. Paramount among the common interests of Europe was the notion of security for all. Events in the former Yugoslavia had lilighlighted the fragilities of the existing CSCE system and the absence of an institutional nmechanism for mediation in and resolution of conflict. He therefore urged the creation llli such an institutional security mechanism.

The tensions surfacing in Emope were not simply the product of nationalism, they had their roots also in social and ecom:>mic problems: hunger, unemployment, lack of security and economic recession. The disintegration of former markets and the existence of trade barriers presented significant obstacles to full and successful democratisation in Central and Eastern Europe. The pressing question was whether Western European States were capable of simultaneous action at three levels. First, intensification of the process of European integration. Secondly, a rapid enlargement of the European Community and thirdly the establishment of a pan-European economic market. This latter could take the form of a common trade area along the lines of the former Marshal! Plan.

Just as there was an obligation upon new states to adapt their institutions, so there was an obligation upon the existing European institutions to adapt also. The existing western European institutions were still based upon the geography of a divided Europe. There was therefore a need for a new and effective collective security and co-operation conference.

On the issue of ethnic and minority rights it was clear that only the freedom of the individual could guarantee a free state. The presence of minorities could add to the richness of a country but minority policy had to be established within specific and defined limits. Over­ emphasis on the collective rights of minorities would lead to ethnocentric and closed territories, with their consequent animosities. This was why concentration on individual rights was essential. The problem of minorities was not new and revolved around Peace and Territory. Some fifty five years ago, Europe had sought to resolve its difficulties by swapping territory for peace and the result had been war. There could be no question of this error being repeated.

. . li' ..• ' ...... ,...... or.;.. ,.....,.. • ···o.o~aiil:r•··;.. ~::..;.... 4 • • ·' • '~-~ ...... r - . •• - 29- SUM(93)PV2

The Balladur Plan contained many excellent ideas but Mr MECIAR could not accept the notion of preventive change of borders. It was the stability of borders that provided the guarantee of peace, not their fluidity. Furthermore, it was inconceivable that minorities should have rights extending beyond those of the majority. This said, he was in favour of adopting a Document embodying principles for minority rights applicable in all countries: the minority issue was not a phenomenon limited to the States of Central and Eastern Europe but was a cause for concern to Western European States also.

Priority should be accorded to the establishment of a legally binding instrument and of a mechanism for the resolution of conflict, the strength of such an instrument lying in its primacy over national legislation which in the case of Slovakia would lead automatically to the bringing into line of Slovak legislation. Resolution of the minority rights' issue was an essential part of the process of democratisation. Success in this was the aim of Slovakia as it was the aim of this Summit.

23. After expressing his thanks to the Chair for the excellent hospitality at the Summit, Mr FENECH-ADAMI, Prime Minister of Malta, made the following statement:

"The Council of Europe is one of the institutional pillars of the post-war Europe. Together with the European Community, CSCE and NATO it has shaped the modern European consciousness and safeguarded Europe's most essential, creative and positive values.

Its particular quality has been an exclusivity based on positive values - adherence to essential principles and objectives and the utilisation of democratic means of social and political management - the strengthening of "democratic security in Europe". As a result the Council has avoided a confrontational attitude with respect to other parts of Europe during the Cold War period and is well placed at the present juncture to assist and progressively incorporate the emerging democracies of the East.

Its particular vocation towards the protection of individual rights, social justice and democratic institutions and the promotion of cultural co-operation has been translated into a number of useful instruments for action and co-operation over a wide range of related fields - primary among these instruments are the Convention on Human Rights, the Social Charter and the - Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In addition to their intrinsic merit and sometimes pioneering scope in their respective areas these instruments collectively also constitute a further element of bonding between individual European states.

Its own internal institutional structure has ensured a wide-ranging participation by member States at different levels - administrative, political and parliamentarian. As a result its methods of work permit continuity of contacts between and within member States, generating the necessary interaction to ensure effective application of its decisions. SUM(93)PV2 - 30 -

Despite its inherent institutional and conceptual strengths, if the Council is to maintain its political as well as its functional relevance it needs to find ways to respond meaningfully to the dramatic changes which are taking place in Europe and the world at large.

Within Europe the fundamental question is the role which the established institutions can and should play in the birth pangs of democracy unfolding in the East. On the one hand there is a need to ensure a balance between the initial elation at the process which has been initiated so forcefully and so dramatically and the subsequent concerns and disappointments which erupt as the complexities of this process unravel. On the other hand the established democracies, in seeking to assist this liberalising process in the desired direction must ensure that while being helpful they do not become obtrusive.

For democratic values and principles to take root in the countries concerned they must be, and be seen as, essentially home grown products, responding to individual historical, cultural, social and economic realities. In this context the question of new membership is relevant. Events in Europe have themselves been a major factor of change at the international level.

One of the most noticeable features of the Council of Europe, traditionally both a source of strength as well as a noted weakness, has been its essentially European-centred focus. At the present time the Council could usefully look into the question of how it could reach out to the wider international issues, primarily in its own traditional areas of activity - human rights, cultural co-operation and democratic institutions - and generate levels of co-operation based on its own experience in these areas. In this connection the question of ensuring applicability of existing or new instruments beyond Europe itself has relevance.

The Council is not the only European institution engaged in a fundamental review of its role and function in the emerging new international order. This process of redefinition goes to the roots of these institutions - their membership, their terms of reference, their internal structures. There is some risk that different institutions will compete for the same ground in the process of this redefinition. This calls for both discipline, in terms of a voluntary demarcation of where a particular institution's terms of reference should lie, as well as co­ operation in terms of open and extensive consultations among the various institutions themselves.

There are real risks not only in the generation of excessive competition over the same ground, • but also in the attempt to resolve the matter through an undue burden of co-operation on over­ lapping initiatives.

• - 31 - SUM(93)PV2

The original purpose and objectives of the Summit have inevitably been affected by the events which continue to unfold in Europe. One obvious realisation is that the process of change in Eastern Europe is not yet firmly launched on a single and determined course. At this stage it is therefore necessary to lay stress on the role which an institution like the Council of Europe could play in reinforcing the progressive and democratic elements in Eastern Europe.

As Europeans so deeply committed to the protection of human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rights of minorities we cannot ignore the disconcerting reality that what is happening in parts of our continent today constitutes a most abhorrent violation of the principles we proclaim and cherish. Nor can we be immune to the concern that present economic conditions are contributing to a resurgence of intolerance in areas where we genuinely believed that these had been effectively eradicated.

Malta therefore gives particular importance to the decision of the European Community to examine the proposal for a Pact on Stability in Europe. I believe that it is timely and appropriate to assure in practice the application of the principles agreed by European countries with regard to the respect for borders and the rights of minorities. I also noted the recent statement by Prime Minister Edouard Balladur, that the French proposal was for "the elaboration of a pact on stability and security for the whole of Europe."

These concerns must therefore feature as a perhaps unwritten, but nevertheless vital aspect of the Council's agenda.

There is special relevance in the consideration that this is the first summit being organised by the Council. The fact that the need for summits was not felt in the past is in certain respects a reflection of the innate strength and relevance of the institution. While the events of today are of sufficient uniqueness and importance to explain the need for a special event such as a summit, we must nevertheless seek to avoid attempting to institutionalise a practice which, in the modern world, is being perhaps debased through over-use. The value of such meetings can only reside in their rarity."

24. M. BERTI, Capitaine Regent of San-Marino, made the following declaration:

"Mr Chairman, Madam Secretary General, Heads of State and Government,

We, the Captains Regent of the Republic of San Marino, have the honour of expressing our appreciation and satisfaction at this meeting of representatives of Council of Europe member States in this truly hospitable and splendid city.

We speak on behalf of a small people which has taken part in no attacks or wars for five hundred years, so we should like our words to serve as moral testimony: if a small people has managed to survive for half a millennium without recourse to arms, this shows that peace is always possible for all who fervently desire it. This we say not only in humility, but also with pride. Ours is a voice of optimism in the face of the doubts and scepticism which at times rise like a dangerous and insidious wind. SUM(93)PV2 - 32-

Today's summit meeting, held at President Mitterrand's suggestion, and enthusiastically nurtured by Mrs Lalumiere, Secretary General, and Mr Martinez, President of the Parliamentary Assembly, is a summit of the greatest historical and political importance, that brings some considerations to our attention: on the one hand the lessons learned from the birth of the Council of Europe out of the sorrows, deaths and rubble of the Second World War, a creation desired by the peoples of Europe, at last persuaded that they ought to live in peace with each other, and on the other hand the realisation that, forty years on, the peoples of Europe are still in need of peace, for which they are making strong appeals in the face of the terrible outbreaks of war, violence and intolerance now rising out of blind left and right-wing extremism. Hence our present yearning for that truth which is the certainty of law, ' respect for people individually and collectively, that truth which is justice, assistance and solidarity, love and freedom.

Such a truth - we are sure - rests on two foundations: the territorial one of Europe and that of its instruments and institutiuns, two fields in which the Council of Europe works and excels.

We agree that this valuable international organisation is, with the CSCE, maybe the sole meeting point for East and WttSt, North and South, and we are certain that without genuine dialogue democracy will not at:Wance, truth will not prevail, and the progress that should be ' the same for all will falter.

This is why the planned strengthening of the Council of Europe's operational organs appears to be necessary.

Mr Chairman,

The Republic of San Marino, through us, expresses its approval of the "Vienna Declaration", together with all the appended and incorporated documents.

We should now like to voice ene final thought. We are convinced that the technique of always striving for factors which unite, rather than those which divide, is essential and effective: well, there used to be· a law in the Europe of centuries gone by which was, in every field, the same for virtually all the peoples of Europe, bringing all of them under the same rules. This was the "common law", from which substantive and formal rights of the European States are derived. It will be very difficult to draw up new legislation satisfactory to all the states, but it would certainly be easier to revive that common law which belonged to Europe, regulated the life of its society and is now conspicuous as Europe's legal culture, as "law of the Europeans". We should like in this forum to put forward the idea of recovering it, at least as one of several sources of law. It could also provide a sound and useful pillar for the building of the "common European home" which we wish to see constructed as speedily as possible. This is just an idea, but an attractive one, since it involves the peoples of Europe meeting each other again, in a new unity or in circumstances which inspire and foster unity.

Finally, we extend a welcome to, Romania, which has only just joined the Council of Europe.

Thank you."

:. I t • - 33- SUM(93)PV2

25. Mr OGI, President of the Swiss Confederation, referred to the first statement by Chancellor Vranitzky that morning on the subject of the request by the International Committee of the Red Cross regarding questions linked to human rights violations of various kinds, and said that his country, where the ICRC had its headquarters, supported the follow-up proposal. He paid tribute to the Parliamentary Assembly, its initiatives and political drive, and to the essential contribution it made to the realisation of the objectives set by the Council of Europe.

He then made the following statement:

"The question of minorities is one of the gravest problems of our times. It is also one of the hardest to solve. But that is no excuse for inaction. We consider that various parallel approaches are necessary. Firstly, tensions must be eased by confidence-building measures. For this, we are prepared to make a voluntary contribution very rapidly. Secondly, bilateral and transfrontier treaties on issues affecting national minorities are of the greatest benefit. We support all proposals along these lines, such as the plan of the French Prime Minister.

But the protection of national minorities must also be guaranteed by law. The Council of Europe is the organisation best placed to provide a legal framework to guarantee the protection of national minorities. The drawing-up of an additional protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights is, in our view, of prime importance here.

We hope, too, that a framework convention can be drafted in the very near future. This would enshrine the objectives that must be attained, and could set out positive measures for States to take in favour of national minorities. It would have the advantage of being open to accession by non-member States. In our view, all these measures are complementary and should be put in hand concurrently.

As a country made up of minorities, Switzerland has some experience in this matter. We are particularly alert to the problem of minorities. Switzerland therefore wishes to express its willingness to co-operate."

Mr Ogi went on briefly to discuss a further important question. In 1985 at the first Ministerial Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, Switzerland had prompted a debate on the human rights control mechanism and emphasised the need for reform by the creation of a single Court. Such a reform would meet a threefold need: a practical need, a legal need and, not least, a political need. It was essential that the mechanism instituted by the Convention continue to guarantee human rights efficiently throughout the continent of Europe. The credibility of the Council of Europe was at issue at a time when new States were acceding to the Convention.

He welcomed the decision by the Committee of Ministers to undertake substantial reforms by establishing a single permanent Court, and the solutions formulated by the member States as set out in the draft Protocol. jJ

SUM(93)PV2 - 34-

He welcomed in advance the appreciable progress that would no doubt be made. The right of individual appeal to the Court could not in future remain discretionary. It was to be hoped that this fundamental right would be recognised as an integral part of the European Convention and thus rendered binding on all States.

It was urgent that this work be completed as soon as possible, and Mr Ogi was convinced that the Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights could be opened for signature by May 1994, and could thus enter into force soon afterwards.

He welcomed the progress accomplished by the Council of Europe in contributing to the construction of the new Europe. The Vienna Summit was a decisive step towards a better future.

26. Mr REYNOLDS, T.D., Prime Minister of Ireland, spoke as follows:

"The Council of Europe was founded on the belief that individual freedom, political liberty and the rule of law are the principles which form the basis of all genuine democracy. These principles have long been cherished by my country because they represent an aspiration to a society based on values. This shared aspiration on the part of its membership is what makes the Council of Europe a collective guarantee of human rights and democracy in our countries.

The Council's strong human rights vocation over the years ensured it a major role in defining the norms and standards which are the basis of the interaction between citizen and State. At a time when the cohesion of our societies is threatened by unemployment, racism, intolerance, aggressive nationalism, and drugs, we need the resources of the Council of Europe as never before.

The decisions we are taking today address some of the problems I have just mentioned. They testify to the Council of Europe's enduring capacity to adapt its action in response to changing political and social conditions.

The phenomenon of racism and xenophobia, and that of national minorities, are interlinked. In many of our countries fanatical elements seek to exploit irrational resentment in order to promote the view that minorities are responsible for worsening social and economic conditions. The adoption of the Declaration on Racism, Xenophobia, Antisemitism and Intolerance is a collective recognition of responsibility. And it is a call to action on phenomena which the history of this century forbids us ever to treat lightly.

As the sound of guns is heard again in Europe, we take warning that the peace and stability of our continent is threatened by the precarious situation of national minorities in many States of Central and Eastern Europe. Protecting the rights of these peoples is complex and urgent, and requires a balancing of conflicting interests.

--- -- ~---c-- ~• ..' - 35 - SUM(93)PV2

But stability is jeopardised, and this Organisation's values are set aside, wherever these minorities are forced to be strangers in their own land, reluctantly consenting to authority.

Because of the Council of Europe's long experience in the enforcement of individual rights, and the protection of cultural and religious pluralism, Ireland considers that this Organisation can play an expert and effective part in the common effort to resolve this problem. We endorse with optimism the new role in the protection of national minorities which we are assigning to it today.

We in Ireland have experience of these problems, which have contributed to the difficult situation in the North of Ireland, where violence has now lasted for a quarter of a century, at a cost of over 3,000 lives. My Government is working, as a matter of the highest priority, to establish the basis for a just and lasting peace, based on the mutual recognition and protection of the rights and identities of both the Unionist and Nationalist communities, within a 'framework of close co-operation between the British and Irish Governments, if it is to be viable, must earn the allegiance of both traditions.

The European Convention on Human Rights is one of Europe's finest achievements. Its control system - the Commission and Court of Human Rights - was Europe's first, and remains one of its greatest supra-national institutions - because of the unique right it confers on individuals to seek legal redress against their own States for violations of the Convention.

For my Delegation, enhancing the rights of individuals has been a vital consideration in discussions about reform of the Convention's control system. Over forty years ago, Ireland became the first country to accept, in perpetuity, both the right of individual petition, and the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court- a situation that remained unique for twenty-five years, and opened the way for the newly-founded Commission and the Court of Human Rights, to establish their jurisprudence and subsequent authority.

In pursuit of these traditional concerns, Ireland has proposed that all member States should agree to grant individuals the unconditional right to petition the new Court, rather than restrict this right - as many countries do under the present system - to specific time periods which are regularly renewed. We strongly appeal to delegations to accept this principle in the Protocol establishing the new Court.

I feel that acceptance, without time conditions, of the right of individual access to the new Court, would greatly reinforce the, already strong, public endorsement of the control system of the Human Rights Convention. And it would further underline the pre-eminent role of the Council of Europe, in the preservation and development of democracy.

I conclude by thanking you, Mr. Chairman, for the friendly welcome you have extended to us in Vienna, and for your wonderful hospitality over these two days." I·

SUM(93)PV2 - 36-

27. Mr MARTINEZ, President of the Parliamentary Assembly, made the following statement: ' "Having listened with great attention to so many important statements, let me please contribute a few ideas expressed on behalf of our Parliamentary Assembly, and following what I had the opportunity to tell you in a more formal way at the opening of our meeting yesterday.

Actually, the Assembly expected from the Summit firm commitments and a clear orientation for our future work, and this at the two levels where we do believe the Council of Europe has to develop its action: that is, as a platform for political pan-European co-operation, and, on the other hand, as a specialised institution in the field of human rights. ' Concerning the first, I may just say that we agree with President Mitterand: such a pan­ European political co-operation is more and more necessary and desired by practically all countries and peoples in our continent. That co-operation may well be conducted at the Council of Europe, or we shall' have to invent something else. The choice is quite obvious and a pure matter of commonsense. Our concern is perhaps that too few among you have really emphasised this part of our work and nevertheless, in our opinion, it cannot be left aside or disregarded as a second priority.

In any case, and according to the Assembly, if that is our choice, and if this is a top priority, we must clearly state it, and treat the question accordingly. And that means to urgently revise ' the Statute of our Organisation in order to make it fully suitable for our ambitious task; and the sooner, the better.

In this respect; and when we are stating that the Council of Europe should be the adequate platform for political co-operation all over the continent, one should stress that this includes very much being the place and body where cities and regions from all over Europe may come and meet and talk and agree and co-operate. The Council of Europe should thus provide the structures for local and regional authorities to actively participate in the European construction process.

Dear friends,

More attention has been paid by most speakers to the role of the Council of Europe in the field of human rights. While agreeing with most of what has been said, and therefore not feeling obliged to repeat all of it, I believe that the Assembly will be satisfied with the ideas expressed and the commitments taken, first of all with what refers to the reform and improvement of the protection mechanisms contained in our European Convention for Human Rights.

I do also find that the consensus which seems to have been reached on the issue of national minorities and the protection of their rights is a serious progress and may be welcome, even if some of you and certainly our Parliamentary Assembly were far more ambitious on this essential, but certainly also quite controversial, question. - 37 - SUM(93)PV2

While talking of human rights, I should like to introduce a couple of supplementary concerns, which have been, I am afraid, a bit too absent in most of your addresses. We do believe that necessary emphasis should be put also on social and economic rights, to make them more and more understood as basic and human rights, precisely at a moment in which much of what has been achieved in this field is questioned and perhaps even threatened, in the East by the reforms, and in the West by the economic crisis. Let me stress definitely that the Social Charter of the Council of Europe should be regarded as a basic instrument, not only for our Organisation, but also for the European project at large. Most of us do believe that social justice cannot be forgotten as an identifying feature of the Europe we are endeavouring to build.

Let me add that the implementation of our Social Charter, the deepening of European cultural co-operation and the permanent concern and protection of human rights, including those of the different minorities, should be instrumental in opposing the dangerous revival of racism, xenophobia and intolerance. The Assembly is fully backing the initiatives of the Norwegian Prime Minister, which will be seconded by the Summit in order to launch a large and deep mobilisation with essential protagonists of the youth organisations, as a means to defeat those tendencies which are the absolute negation of the values which the Council of Europe, and our European project at large, should be identified by.

Ladies and Gentlemen

Your Parliamentarians have been very much involved with everything concerning this Summit, since the very beginning. I sincerely and modestly believe that we have done reasonably our part of the job, by the way in a close and pleasant co-operation with the Committee of Ministers and Deputies. It was a sound and fruitful experience and a precedent that should become a rule from now on.

We have been speaking about the new Statute, about the new protection mechanism of our Convention for Human Rights; we have talked about the protection of the rights of national minorities. But in none of those issues we have dared come here just with a few slogans or improvised brilliant ideas. We have come with more than a year of serious and responsible debate and work, and with the resulting elaborated drafts, which by the way have been in the hands of all of you well in time, and have certainly been taken into consideration for your reflection.

Dear friends,

On behalf of the Assembly, I want to assure you that we are also going to assume our part and our effort for the tasks which will follow as a result of this Summit.

We are going to actively work and contribute to the preparation of the new Statute which is to provide the Council of Europe with an appropriate framework for an enlarged territory, for a much higher number of European citizens and for increased competences. SUM(93)PV2 - 38 -

We shall also take part with full responsibility in the elaboration of such important instruments like the additional protocol and the frame convention announced for the protection of national minorities rights.

Ladies and gentlemen

Our Assembly expected from you in Vienna what our peoples probably expect and require from us: imagination, political courage, consistance with the principles which we stand for.

To meet here was already a success, an extraordinary success. Many people are to be credited and thanked for it - the Austrian hosts above all.

But the success will be complete only if the Summit does provide the necessary impulse, as well as with the political and financial means, which the Council of Europe requires in order to face in a responsible way our share - our essential share - in the project for a free; democratic, solid, prosperous and positively influential Europe.

28. Mr HOYNCK, Secretary General of the CSCE, stated that there existed close links between the Council of Europe and the CSCE, and he confirmed the intention to extend co­ operation, as expressed on various occasions during the present Summit. Since the adoption of the Paris Charter for a New Europe (November 1990), Council of Europe members and CSCE members had subscribed to the same basic principles of human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The political declaration of the Vienna Summit constituted substantial progress towards more democratic security on the European continent. The CSCE at its Helsinki Summit (June 1992) had adopted a security concept linking peace and prosperity with the respect of human rights and basic freedoms. These two texts represented a solid common ground for increased co-operation between two Organisations in the human dimension field.

The CSCE followed closely the Council of Europe's work on the difficult and complex subjects of national minorities. Its further development would help to de-fuse possible conflicts and the results of the present Summit would give considerable impetus to the CSCE's work. Considering the difficulty of keeping the balance between the CSCE's principles of territorial integrity and the right of self-determination, this Summit's work constituted a valuable contribution to Europe's stability.

Mr Htiynck drew attention to the fact that the Council of Europe had to avoid becoming an exclusive club. Its rigorous Human Rights system had proved that no nation could win absolute protection of Human Rights once and for all. A certain modesty was needed; however, a continued dialogue on human rights matters should be maintained between all countries concerned. There had to be a common effort towards improved protection. - 39- SUM(93)PV2

The notion of security was a genuinely universal, but also complex matter; the CSCE participating States were looking with particular hope to the Council of Europe. Comprehensive security could only be implemented by comprehensive co-operation.

29. The CHAIRMAN suggested adopting, if there was no opposition, the Vienna Declaration as a whole, including the three appendices concerning ( 1) the reform of the control mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights, (2) National Minorities and (3) the Declaration and Plan of Action on combating racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance.

30. The Vienna Declaration (with Appendices I, II and III) was adopted (see Appendix). * * * 31. The CHAIRMAN concluded the Summit meeting by saying that the Heads of State and Government had achieved excellent work over the last few days thanks to their own efforts and those of others involved in the preparation of the meeting. He invited participants to return to their countries and to send out a signal throughout Europe affirming their personal commitment to a peace-loving Europe founded on democracy, the rule of law and respect for Human Rights. The strengthening, deepening and enlargement of the process of European construction was at stake.

During this ongoing process, active support had to be given to those who wanted to participate in the process. The participants in the Summit counted on the Council of Europe's contribution to their democratic and legal reforms. One promising signal had already been received this very morning in the form of the Declaration of the Youth Summit being held in Vienna in parallel with the Summit of Heads of State and Government. The Youth Organisations represented were already working on the implementation of the Plan of Action on combating racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance. He reminded participants that they would have the opportunity if they so wished of visiting the Youth Summit in the afternoon, with the Secretary General, the Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs, himself and others.

The exchanges of views at the Summit had opened a new chapter of contacts between Heads of State and Government, and with other institutions, and had given rise to a host of interesting ideas. A new chapter of official and personal contacts had been opened. There had been agreement on the following:

I. questions of international law and the principles of the rule of law needed a social component, in order to come closer to the needs and wishes of citizens;

2. many ideas of the ideas presented would be helpful in developing the dynamism of the Council's future work. The content of the Political Declaration and the various action plans adopted by the Summit would help to give life to these ideas; SUM(93)PV2 - 40-

3. it was of the utmost importance that clear links be established between the adopted texts and their own personal commitment towards their practical implementation. Declarations were worthless unless they were accompanied by such commitment on the part of those respomsible to the electorate.

Some media might contend that the Heads of State and Government "had met, discussed, and taken decisions, whilst a few !Uandred kilometres away atrocities and the loss of innocent life continued." What was the real contribution of this Summit? It was to be hoped that its results would enable its partiCipants to mobilise and motivate their populations, and to convince their media that their collegiate consensus was a fact.

Austria, in the Chair of the Committee of Ministers would do the maximum to implement the Summit decisions, wherever possible before the next Ministerial meeting in November. He was confident that Belgium, taking over the Chairmanship, would ensure that further measures were implemented during the· following months.

The Summit of Heads of Sta~ and Government had been kind enough to invite him to take the Chair and he would like to thank his colleagues. He recalled that at the outset, there had been some scepticism about tiDie holding of the Summit and about the ability of the member States to reach a consensus OJllthe major issues proposed for it. That the Summit had even taken place was in itself alreallily a measure of success; that it had reached such far-reaching decisions was a major achie"KKlllent, due in no small part to the personal commitment and dynamism of the Secretary General, over several months of preparation, for which he extended his sincere gratitude.

32. Mr HA VEL, Presidellt of the Czech Republic, spoke as follows:

"At this historic time, the Cbwncil of Europe is faced with the challenge to complete its efforts aimed at European integnation based on the principles of civic society with full respect for the rights of all.

This Summit has proved that tlire member States of the Council know their responsibility for the future of our continent. lt i'Ias also demonstrated that the new democracies are prepared to take their share of responsililiJity as well.

I am confident that the ideas we have heard in many statements at this meeting will give new impulses to the work of the oqans of the Council of Europe.

Let me thank the Council of Ela!rope which has been, since the beginning of its existence, a guardian of human rights standards.

I thank the Secretary General. Madame Lalurniere, for all that she has done to bring us together at this conference.

Our thanks are due to President Mitterrand for his initiative which has led to this meeting. - 41 - SUM(93)PV2

Last but not least, our thanks go to the host country, the city of Vienna, President Klestil, Foreign Minister Mock and especially to Chancellor Vranitzky for the outstanding leadership which he has given us these past two days.

We are parting to meet again in a united Europe".

33. The CHAIRMAN closed the Summit at 12.45 pm. tl,' ;I J

I~ I •

h' ';I J

• If' - al - SUM(93)PV2

APPENDIX

9 October 1993

VIENNA DECLARATION

We, Heads of State and Government of the member States of the Council of Europe, meeting for the first time in our Organisation's history at this Vienna summit conference, solemnly declare the following:

The end of the division of Europe offers an historic opportunity to consolidate peace and stability on the continent. All our countries are committed to pluralist and parliamentary democracy, the indivisibility and universality of human rights, the rule of law and a common cultural heritage enriched by its diversity. Europe can thus become a vast area of democratic security.

This Europe is a source of immense hope which must in no event be destroyed by territorial ambitions, the resurgence of aggressive nationalism, the perpetuation of spheres of influence, intolerance or totalitarian ideologies.

We condemn all such aberrations. They are plunging peoples of former Yugoslavia into hatred and war and threatening other regions. We call upon the leaders of these peoples to put an end to their conflicts. We invite these peoples to join us in constructing and consolidating the new Europe.

We express our awareness that the protection of national minorities is an essential element of stability and democratic security in our continent.

The Council of Europe is the pre-eminent European political institution capable of welcoming, on an equal footing and in permanent structures, the democracies of Europe freed from communist oppression. For that reason the accession of those countries to the Council of Europe is a central factor in the process of European construction based on our Organisation's values. SUM(93)PV2 - a2 -

Such accession presupposes that the applicant country has brought its institutions and legal system into line with the basic principles of democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights. The people's representatives must have been chosen by means of free and fair elections based on universal suffrage. Guaranteed freedom of expression and notably of the media, protection of national minorities and observance of the principles of international law must remain, in our view, decisive criteria for assessing any application for membership. An undertaking to sign the European Convention on Human Rights and accept the Convention's supervisory machinery in its entirety within a short period is also fundamental. We are resolved to ensure full compliance with the commitments accepted by all member States within the Council of Europe.

We affirm our will to promote the integration of new member States and to undertake the necessary reforms of the Organisation, taking account of the proposals of the Parliamentary Assembly and of the concerns- of local and regional authorities, which are essential to the democratic expression of peopies.

We confirm the policy of opemress and co-operation vis-a-vis all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe that opt for democracy. The programmes set up by the Council of Europe to assist the democratic transition should be developed and constantly adapted to the needs of our new partners.

We intend to render the Council of Europe fully capable of thus contributing to democratic security as well as meeting the· challenges of society in the 21st century, giving expression in the legal field to the valllles that define our European identity, and to fostering an improvement in the quality of lli.fe.

Attaining these objectives req'Lllires fuller co-ordination of the Council of Europe's activities with those of other organisations involved in the construction of a democratic and secure Europe, thus satisfying the need for complementarity and better use of resources.

In this connection, we welcome the co-operation established - in the fust instance, on the basis of the 1987 Arrangement- with the European Community, particularly the development of joint projects, notably in favour of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. We consider that such a partnership in increasingly varied fields of activity reflects the specific and open-ended institutional relationship existing between the two institutions.

Similarly, to foster democratic security we are in favour of intensifying functional co­ operation in the human dimension sphere between the Council of Europe and the CSCE. Arrangements could usefully be concluded with the latter, including its Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, and its High Commissioner on National Minorities. * * * - a3 - SUM(93)PV2

We are resolved to make full use of the political forum provided by our Committee of Ministers and Parliamentary Assembly to promote, in accordance with the competences and vocation of the Organisation, the strengthening of democratic security in Europe. The political dialogue within our Organisation will make a valuable contribution to the stability of our continent. We will do so all the more effectively if we are able to initiate such a dialogue with all the European States that have expressed a desire to observe the Council's principles.

Convinced that the setting up of appropriate legal structures and the training of administrative personnel are essential conditions for the success of the economic and political transition in Central and Eastern Europe, we attach the greatest importance to the development and coordination of assistance programmes for this purpose in liaison with the European Community.

The creation of a tolerant and prosperous Europe does not depend only on co-operation between States. It also requires transfrontier co-operation between local and regional authorities, without prejudice to the constitution and the territorial integrity of each State. We urge the Organisation to pursue its work in this field and to extend it to co-operation between non-adjacent regions.

We express our conviction that cultural co-operation, in which the Council of Europe is a prime instrument, - through education, the media, cultural action, the protection and enhancement of the cultural heritage and participation of young people - is essential for creating a cohesive yet diverse Europe. Our governments undertake to bear in mind the Council of Europe's priorities and guidelines in their bilateral and multilateral co-operation.

With the aim of contributing to the cohesion of our societies, we stress the importance of commitments accepted within the framework of the Council of Europe Social Charter and European Code of Social Security in order to provide member countries with an adequate system of social protection.

We recognise the value of co-operation conducted within the Council of Europe to protect the natural environment and improve the built environment.

We will continue our efforts to facilitate the social integration of lawfully residing migrants and to improve the management and control of migratory flows, while preserving the freedom to travel within Europe. We therefore encourage the "Vienna Group" to pursue its work, thus contributing, with other competent groups, to a comprehensive approach to migration challenges.

Fortified by our bonds of friendship with non-European States sharing the same values, we wish to develop with them our common efforts to promote peace and democracy. SUM(93)PV2 - a4-

We also affirm that the deepening of co-operation in order to take account of the new European situation should in no way divert us from our responsibilities regarding North/South interdependence and solidarity. * * * In the political context thus outlined, we, Heads of State and Government of the member States of the Council of Europe, resolve:

to improve the effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights by establishing a single Court for ensuring compliance with undertakings given thereunder (see decision in Appendix 1),

to enter into political and legal commitments relating to the protection of national minorities in Europe and to instruct the Committee of Ministers to elaborate appropriate international legal instruments (see decision in Appendix ID.

to pursue a policy for combating racism, xenophobia, antisemltlsm and intolerance, and to adopt for this purpose a Declaration and a Plan of Action (see decision in Appendix III),

to approve the principle of creating a consultative organ genuinely representing both local and regional authorities in Europe,

to invite the Council of Europe to study the provision of instruments for stimulating the development of European cultural schemes in a partnership, involving public authorities and the community at large,

to instruct the Committee of Ministers to adapt the Organisation's Statute as necessary for its functioning, having regard to the proposals put forward by the Parliamentary Assembly. I~, • ' '

• - aS - SUM(93)PV2

APPENDIX I

Reform of the control mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights

We, Heads of States and Government of the Council of Europe member States have decided the following, as regards the reform of the European Convention on Human Rights control mechanism:

With the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms which entered into force 40 years ago the Council of Europe created an international system for the protection of human rights which is unique of its kind. Its main distinguishing feature is that contracting States assume the obligation to effectively protect the human rights enshrined in the Convention and to accept international monitoring in this respect. This responsibility has been so far carried out by the European Commission of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights.

Since the Convention entered into force in 1953 the number of contracting States has almost tripled and more countries will accede after becoming members of the Council of Europe. We are of the opinion that it has become urgently necessary to adapt the present control mechanism to this development in order to be able to maintain in the future effective international protection for human rights. The purpose of this reform is to enhance the efficiency of the means of protection, to shorten procedures and to maintain the present high quality of human rights protection.

To this end we have resolved to establish, as an integral part of the Convention, a single European Court of Human Rights to supersede the present controlling bodies.

We mandate the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to finalise a draft protocol amending the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, on which substantial progress has been made, with a view to adopting a text and opening it for signature at its ministerial meeting in May 1994. We will then ensure that this protocol is submitted for ratification at the earliest possible date. I~,

••• - a7 - SUM(93)PV2

APPENDIX 11

National Minorities

We, Heads of State and Government of the member States of the Council of Europe, have agreed as follows, concerning the protection of national minorities:

The national minorities which the upheavals of history have established in Europe should be protected and respected so that they can contribute to stability and peace.

In this Europe which we wish to build, we must respond to this challenge: assuring the protection of the rights of persons belonging to national minorities within the rule of law, respecting the territorial integrity and the national sovereignty of States. On these conditions, these minorities will make a valuable contribution to the life of our societies.

The creation of a climate of tolerance and dialogue is necessary for the participation of all in political life. In this regard an important contribution should be made by regional and local authorities.

In their actions, States should ensure the respect of the principles which are fundamental to our common European tradition: equality before the law, non­ discrimination, equal opportunity, freedom of association and assembly as well as to participate actively in public life.

States should create the conditions necessary for persons belonging to national minorities to develop their culture, while preserving their religion, traditions and customs. These persons must be able to use their language both in private and in public and should be able to use it, under certain conditions, in their relations with the public authorities.

We stress the importance which bilateral agreements between States, aimed at assuring the protection of the national minorities concerned, can have for stability and peace in Europe.

We confirm our determination to implement fully the commitments concerning the protection of national minorities contained in the Copenhagen and other documents of the CSCE.

We consider that the Council of Europe should apply itself to transforming, to the greatest possible extent, these political commitments into legal obligations. li' SUM(93)PV2 - a8 -

Having regard to its fundamental vocation, the Council of Europe is particularly well placed to contribute to the settlement of problems of national minorities. In this connection, we intend to pursue the close co-operation engaged between the Council of Europe and the CSCE High Commissioner for National Minorities. <'

lt..<) In consequence, we decide to instruct the Committee of Ministers: ' J to draw up confidence-building measures aimed at increasing tolerance and 11' understanding among peoples;

to respond to requests for assistance for the negotiation and implementation of treaties on questions concerning national minorities as well as agreements on transfrontier co-operation; <' to draft with minimum delay a framework convention specifying the principles tl· oil which contracting States commit themselves to respect, in order to assure the ' protection of national minorities. This instrument would also be open for J signature by non-member States; • li' to begin work on drafting a protocol complementing the European Convention on Human Rights in the cultural field by provisions guaranteeing individual rights, in particular for persons belonging to national minorities.

i h '.,...-1 J li'

< h ';I 'J li'

tl.' ';I ·~l'

1 If

,,' tl . ---- ..

APPENDIX Ill

Declaration and Plan of Action on combating racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance

We, Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe member States,

Convinced that the diversity of traditions and cultures has for centuries been one of Europe's riches and that the principle of tolerance is the guarantee of the maintenance in Europe of an open society respecting the cultural diversity to which we are attached;

Convinced that to bring about a democratic and pluralist society respecting the equal dignity of all human beings remains one of the prime objectives of European construction;

Alarmed by the present resurgence of racism, xenophobia and antisemitism, the development of a climate of intolerance, the increase in acts of violence, notably against migrants and people of immigrant origin, and the degrading treatment and discriminatory practices accompanying them;

Equally alarmed also by the development of aggressive nationalism and ethnocentrism which constitute new expressions of xenophobia;

Concerned at the deterioration of the economic situation, which threatens the cohesion of European societies by generating forms of exclusion likely to foster social tensions and manifestations of xenophobia;

Convinced that these manifestations of intolerance threaten democratic societies and their fundamental values and undermine the foundations of European construction;

Confirming the Declaration of 14 May 1981 of the Committee of Ministers in which the latter already solemnly condemned all forms of intolerance and the acts of violence that they engender;

Reaffirming the values of solidarity which must inspire all members of society in order to reduce marginalisation and social exclusion; SUM(93)PV2 - alO -

Convinced furthermore that Europe's future demands from individuals and from groups not only tolerance but also the will to act together, combining their diverse contributions,

- Condemn in the st:I'mngest possible terms racism in all its forms, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance and all forms of religious discrimination;

- Encourage member States to continue efforts already undertaken to eliminate these phenomena, and commit ourselves to strengthening national laws and international instruments and taking appropriate measures at national and European level;

- Undertake to combat all ideologies, policies and practices constituting an incitement to racial hatred, violern::e and discrimination, as well as any action or language likely to strengthen fears and: tensions between groups from different racial, ethnic, national, religious or social bacltgrounds;

- Launch an urgent appeal to European peoples, groups and citizens, and young people in particular, that they MSolutely engage in combating all forms of intolerance and that they actively participant: in the construction of a European society based on common values, characterised ~, democracy, tolerance and solidarity.

To this end, we instruct the Clilmmittee of Ministers to develop and implement as soon as possible the following plan of' action and mobilise the necessary financial resources.

PLAN OF ACTION

1. Launch a broad European Youth Campaign to mobilise the public in favour of a tolerant society based on the e!ijual dignity of all its members and against manifestations of racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance.

This campaign, co-ordinated l:ly the Council of Europe in co-operation with the European Youth Organisations will have a national and local dimension through the creation of national committees.

It will aim in particular at stimulating pilot projects involving all sections of society.

2. Invite member States to reinforce guarantees against all forms of discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin or on religion, and to this end to:

h',, J I~~

'.. ' ,;: I - all - SUM(93)PV2

re-examine without delay their legislation and regulations with a view to eliminating provisions likely to generate discrimination based on any of these reasons or likely to sustain prejudice;

assure effective implementation of legislation aimed at combating racism and discrimination;

reinforce and implement preventive measures to combat racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance, giving special attention to awareness-raising and confidence-building measures.

3. Establish a Committee of governmental Experts with a mandate to:

review member States' legislation, policies and other measures to combat racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance, and their effectiveness;

propose further action at local, national and European level;

formulate general policy recommendations to member States;

study international legal instruments applicable in the matter with a view to their reinforcement where appropriate.

The Committee of Experts will report regularly to the Committee of Ministers, which will seek the opinions of the relevant Steering Committees.

Further modalities for the functioning of this new mechanism should be decided by the Committee of Ministers.

4. Reinforce mutual understanding and confidence between people through the Council of Europe's co-operation and assistance programmes. Work in this area would focus in particular on:

studying the deep-seated causes of intolerance and considering remedies, notably by means of a seminar and support for research programmes:

promoting education in the fields of human rights and respect for cultural diversity; SUM(93)PV2 - al2 -

strengthening programmes aimed at eliminating prejudice in the teaching of history by emphasising positive mutual influence between different countries, religions and ideas in the historical development of Europe;

encouraging transfrontier co-operation between local authorities so as to boost confidence;

intensifying co-operative work in the fields of intercommunity relations and equality of opportunities;

developing policies to combat social exclusion and extreme poverty.

5. Request the media professions to report and comment on acts of racism and intolerance factually and responsibly, and to continue to develop professional codes of ethics which reflect these requirements.

In the execution of this Plan, the Council of Europe will take due account of the work of UNESCO in the field of tolerance, in particular preparations for a "Year of Tolerance" in 1995.

A first report on implementation of the Plan of Action will be submitted to the Committee of Ministers at its 94th Session in May 1994.

' ' "'•• - al3 - SUM(93)PV2

For the Republic Pour la Republique of Austria d'Autriche

Franz Vranitzky

Federal Chancellor Chancelier Federal

For the Kingdom Pour le Royaume of Belgium de Belgique

Jean-Luc Dehaene

Prime Minister Premier Ministre

For the Republic Pour la Republique of Bulgaria de Bulgarie

Jeliu Jelev

President President

For the Republic Pour la Republique of Cyprus de Chypre

Glafcos Clerides President President

For the Czech Republic Pour la Republique tcheque Vaclav Ravel

President President Ji ' il, SUM(93)PV2 - al4 - ;) )

' ' For the Kingdom Pour le Royaume )i of Denmark de Danemark h Paul Nyrup Rasmussen

Prime Minister Premier Ministre h l~ For the Republic Pour la Republique li' of Estonia d'Estonie

Mart Laar

Prime Minister Premier Ministre , • h,;J !:! For the Republic Pour la Republique I1' of Finland de Finlande

Mauno Koivisto

President President

h,;) '!:! For the French Republic Pour la Republique 1 fran~aise ti

Fran,.ois Mitterrand

President President h '>

·i· '>

----· - --- ""~·~·, f, I - al5- SUM(93)PV2

For the Federal Republic Pour la Republique of Germany Federale d 'Allernagne

Helmut Kohl

Federal Chancellor Chancelier Federal

For the Hellenic Pour la Republique Republic hellenique

Virginia Tsouderos

Minister of State Secretaire d' Etat aux for Foreign Affairs Ajfaires etrangeres

For the Republic Pour la Republique of Hungary de Hongrie

Geza Jeszenszky

Minister for Foreign Affairs Ministre des Affaires Etrangeres

For the Icelandic Pour la Republique Republic islandaise

David Oddsson

Prime Minister Premier Ministre Ii· " SUM(93)PV2 - al6 - :) li' For Ireland Pour l'Irlande

Albert Reynolds T.D.

Pri11U! Minister , Premier Ministre I ~I· :l.'" For the Italian Pour la Republique Republic italienne b' Carlo Azeglio Ciampi Pri11U! Minister Premier Ministre ~ 11. .."l. For the Principality Pour la Principaute of Liechtenstein de Liechtenstein b' Markus Biichel Head of Govern11U!nt Chef de Gouverne11U!nt ~ 11. " For the Republic Pour la Republique J of Lithuania de Lituanie ' ! \i Algirdas Mykolas Brazauskas President President ~ it . .iJ :l

' ! \i

~I 11. ;I J

' ! \i

-.., .. _ i - al7 - SUM(93)PV2

For the Grand Duchy Pour le Grand-Duche of Luxembourg de Luxembourg

Jacques Santer

Prime Minister Premier Ministre

For Malta Pour Malte

Edward Fenech-Adami

Prime Minister Premier Ministre

For the Kingdom Pour le Royaume of the Netherlands des Pays-Bas

Ruud Lubbers

Prime Minister Premier Ministre

For the Kingdom Pour le Royaume of Norway de Norvege

Gro Harlem Brundtland

Prime Minister Premier Ministre J

. I SUM(93)PV2 - al8 - li

For the Republic Pour la Republique of Poland de Pologne

Hanna Suchocka ~ 11, .<) Prime Minister Premier Ministre .l

. I li

For the Portuguese Pour la Republique Republic portugaise lp Anibal Cavaco Silva 11· Prime Minister ,, Premier Ministre l

For Romania Pour la Roumanie

Ion Iliescu

,I President President 11, .<) l For the Republic Pour la Republique of San Marino de Saint-Marin

Gian Luigi Berti Paride Andreoli

~I Captains Regent Capitaines Regents

I· -il l - al9 - SUM(93)PV2

For the Slovak Republic Pour la Republique slovaque

Vladimir Meciar

Head of Government Chef du Gouvernement

For the Republic Pour la Republique of Slovenia de Slovenie

Janez Drnovsek

Prime Minister Premier Ministre

For the Kingdom of Spain Pour le Royaume d'Espagne

Felipe Gonzalez

President of Government President du Gouvernement

For the Kingdom of Sweden Pour le Royaume de Suede

Carl Bildt

Prime Minister Premier Ministre

For the Swiss Confederation Pour la Confederation suisse Adolf Ogi

President of the Confederation· President de la Confederation 1 SUM(93)PV2 - a20 - ,,I·

For the Turkish Pour la Republique Republic turque

Tansu <;iller

Prime Minister Premier Ministre

For the United Kingdom Pour le Royaume-Uni of Great Britain and de Gran de-Bretagne et de Northern Ireland l'Irlande du Nord

Lord Mackay of Clashfern

Lord Chancellor Lord Chancellor

I• * d

* * V.I

Catherine Lalumiere

The Secretary General Le Secn§taire General of the Council of Europe du Conseil de I' Europe I· ~ li'

I· h li'