Inter-Parliamentary Union
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Synopsis of the Meeting Held in Strasbourg on 21 January 2013
BUREAU OF THE ASSEMBLY AS/Bur/CB (2013) 01 21 January 2013 TO THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY Synopsis of the meeting held in Strasbourg on 21 January 2013 The Bureau of the Assembly, meeting on 21 January 2013 in Strasbourg, with Mr Jean-Claude Mignon, President of the Assembly, in the Chair, as regards: - First part-session of 2013 (Strasbourg, 21-25 January 2013): i. Requests for debates under urgent procedure and current affairs debates: . decided to propose to the Assembly to hold a debate under urgent procedure on “Migration and asylum: mounting tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean” on Thursday 24 January 2013 and to refer this item to the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons for report; . decided to propose to the Assembly to hold the debate under urgent procedure on “Recent developments in Mali and Algeria and the threat to security and human rights in the Mediterranean region” on Thursday 24 January 2013 and to refer this item to the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy for report; . decided not to hold a current affairs debate on “The deteriorating situation in Georgia”; . took note of the decision by the UEL Group to withdraw its request for a current affairs debate on “Political developments in Turkey regarding the human rights of the Kurds and other minorities”; ii. Draft agenda: updated the draft agenda; - Progress report of the Bureau of the Assembly and of the Standing Committee (5 October 2012 – 21 January 2013): (Rapporteur: Mr Kox, Netherlands, UEL): approved the Progress report; - Election observation: i. Presidential election in Armenia (18 February 2013): took note of the press release issued by the pre-electoral mission (Yerevan, 15-18 January 2013) and approved the final composition of the ad hoc committee to observe these elections (Appendix 1); ii. -
Haiti: Real Progress, Real Fragility a Special Report by the Inter-American Dialogue and the Canadian Foundation for the Americas
November 2007 Haiti: Real Progress, Real Fragility A Special Report by the Inter-American Dialogue and the Canadian Foundation for the Americas Haitian President René Préval says that working with the United Nations and other his country no longer deserves its “failed international partners – including a core state” stigma, and he is right. Haiti’s recent group of Latin American countries, the progress is real and profound, but it is United States and Canada – has achieved jeopardized by continued institutional modest but discernible progress in improv- dysfunction, including the government’s ing security and establishing, at least mini- inexperience in working with Parliament. mally, a democratic governing structure. There is an urgent need to create jobs, But institutions, both public and private, attract investment, overhaul and expand are woefully weak, and there has not been Haiti access to basic social services, and achieve significant economic advancement. Unem- tangible signs of economic recovery. Now ployment remains dangerously high and a that the United Nations has extended its majority of the population lives in extreme peacekeeping mandate until October 2008, poverty. Still, Haiti should be viewed today the international community must seek with guarded optimism. There is a real pos- ways to expand the Haitian state’s capacity sibility for the country to build towards a to absorb development aid and improve the better future. welfare of the population. The alternative could be dangerous backsliding. The Good News President René Préval was inaugurated in Haiti is beginning to emerge from the May 2006 following presidential and parlia- chaos that engulfed it in recent years. -
Government Response to Justice Select Committee's
Government response to Justice Select Committee’s opinion on the European Union Data Protection framework proposals January 2013 Government response to Justice Select Committee’s opinion on the European Union Data Protection framework proposals Presented to Parliament by the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice by Command of Her Majesty January 2013 Cm 8530 £6.25 © Crown copyright 2013 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or email: [email protected] Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: [email protected] or 020 3334 5408. This publication is available for download at www.official-documents.gov.uk and on our website at www.justice.gov.uk ISBN: 9780101853026 Printed in the UK by The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ID 2533713 01/13 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. Government response to Justice Select Committee’s opinion on the European Union Data Protection framework proposals Contents The approach to reforming the current data protection framework 3 The draft Regulation 5 Arguments for and against a Regulation 5 Impact assessment 6 Impact on the Information -
The Case for a Stronger European Parliament
The case for a stronger European Parliament Lousewies van der Laan November 2003 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Contents Lousewies van der Laan is a member of the Dutch Parliament and deputy leader of the Dutch Liberal Democratic Party D66. From 1999-2003 she was a member of the European Parliament, where she served as vice-president of the Committee on Civil Liberties, About the author Justice and Home Affairs, vice-president of the Committee on Budget Control and as member of the Bureau of the European Author’s acknowledgements Liberal Democrat Party. She is a founding member of the Campaign for Parliament Reform. Ms van der Laan previously worked at the 1 Introduction 1 European Commission in Brussels for seven years. 2 The need for a stronger European Parliament 5 ★ 3Powers and location 13 AUTHOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 4 How the Parliament should improve its own workings 31 Thanks to Herman Beun, Arjan Bouter, Dennis Hesseling, Huib 5 Summary of recommendations 41 Hudig, Laetitia Kröner, Elwin Lammers, Gabrielle and Rene Vine, and Craig Winneker, for either having read earlier versions of this paper, or for having being helpful in other important ways. I am pleased that the Campaign for Parliament Reform has been a success and would like to thank the co-founders for their support and inspiration during my four years in the European Parliament. I have written this paper in a personal capacity. Any errors of fact or judgement are my responsibility alone. ★ Copyright of this publication is held by the Centre for European Reform. You may not copy, reproduce, republish or circulate in any way the content from this publication except for your own personal and non- commercial use. -
Annual Summit
DRAFT PROGRAMME WIP WOMEN IN PARLIAMENTS GLOBAL FORUM ANNUAL SUMMIT THE SPIRIT OF WOMEN IN PARLIAMENTS: ADVANCING SOCIETY 27-29 November 2013 | European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium DRAFT PROGRAMME SPEAKERS* Professor Muhammad Yunus, Dr. Jane Goodall, Dr. Viviane Reding, Kathy Calvin, Aung San Suu Kyi, Dr. Olli Rehn, Nino Burjanadze, Tom Motsoahae Thabane, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and UN Ambassador of Peace Vice-President of the European President and CEO of United Chairperson of the “National Vice-President of the European Former acting President of Prime Minister of Lesotho Founder of the Grameen Bank and Primatologist Commission Nations Foundations League for Democracy Burma” Commission Georgia and Speaker of the Georgian Parliament Ana Palacio, Saadia Zahidi, Professor Jody Williams, Neelie Kroes, Hillary Clinton, Martin Schulz, Jeni Klugman, Zainab Bangura, Former Minister of Foreign Senior Director at the World Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Vice-President of the European Former United States President of the European Director of Gender and Special Representative of the Affairs of Spain, former Vice- Economic Forum Commission Secretary of State Parliament Development at the World United Nations Secretary General President and General Counsel Bank Group on Sexual Violence in Con!ict of the World Bank Pascal Lamy, Dr. Mo Ibrahim, Dalia Grybauskaité, Benigno Aquino, Dr. Margaret Chan, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Lakshmi Puri, Dubravka Šuica, Former WTO Director General Entrepreneur and Philanthropist, President of Lithuania President of the Philippines Director-General of the President of Liberia Deputy Executive Director Member of the European Founder of the Mo Ibrahim World Health Organization of UN Women Parliament Foundation Portia Simpson-Miller, Mehriban Aliyeva, Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir, Michael D. -
Summary Records of the Proceedings of the 141St IPU Assembly
Summary Records of the Proceedings of the 141st IPU Assembly Belgrade, Serbia 13-17 October 2019 Table of contents Page(s) Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 4 Inaugural ceremony of the 141st Assembly • Speech by Ms. Maja Gojković, Speaker of the National Assembly of Serbia .................. 5 • Message by Mr. Antonio Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations and Speech by Ms. Tatiana Valovaya, United Nations Under-Secretary-General and Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva ................................................ 5 • Speech by Ms. Gabriela Cuevas Barron, President of the Inter-Parliamentary Union .... 6 • Speech by Mr. Aleksander Vučić, President of the Republic of Serbia ............................ 6 Organization of the work of the Assembly • Election of the President and Vice-Presidents of the 141st Assembly .............................. 8 • Establishment of a quorum ............................................................................................... 11 • Consideration of requests for the inclusion of an emergency item in the Assembly agenda ............................................................................................................. 18 • Final agenda ..................................................................................................................... 21 General Debate on the theme Strengthening international law: Parliamentary roles and mechanisms, and -
Haiti: Fact Sheet
Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 07/09/2021 11:33:58 AM HAITI: FACT SHEET 2016 Election • President MoYse received 32.8% of votes in the first round of the 2015 elections held on October 25, 2015, qualifying for a runoff with the second-place finisher, Jude Celestin. • Jude Celestin subsequently raised, without evidence, allegations that the votes for President MoYse in the October poll were fraudulent. Violence was instigated by his supporters and in turn caused the cancellation of the second round. o These claims emerged despite the Organization of American States, who had "125 observers from 27 countries present from the opening of the polls up to the counting of the votes in all 10 departments of the country, visiting 487 voting centers", officially declaring that "in spite of some isolated instances, Haitian citizens with the will to vote were able to cast their ballots." o "Schools that serve as election centres and voting stations in various towns have been attacked and set on fire in recent days, and election materials in a border town were hijacked by gunmen" Haiti cancels presidential election as violence erupts. Associated Press, Jan 23, 2016 • Following the cancellation of the 2015 elections due to the violence, the former head of Haiti's Senate and National Assembly, Jocelerme Privert, was elected interim president by Parliament following a vote that took nearly 12 hours on February 14, 2016. • Fresh elections were re-run on November 20, 2016 and overseen by the Provisional Electoral Council (CEP). President MoYse won 55.6% of the popular vote and was inaugurated on February 7, 2017. -
Scotland: Toward a New Settlement? in This Issue
| THE CONSTITUTION UNIT NEWSLETTER | ISSUE 38 | JANUARY 2008 | MONITOR SCOTLAND: TOWARD A NEW SETTLEMENT? IN THIS ISSUE The constitutional debate in Scotland in the SNP White Paper) with ideas on reconciling continues apace. In the last Monitor we more devolution with a renewal of the UK BRITISH BILL OF RIGHTS 2 reported on the SNP Government’s White union (which mark out a very different agenda). Paper Choosing Scotland’s Future – Especially notable were her ideas on risk-sharing A National Conversation. This set out options through fiscal solidarity across the UK, and those for Scotland’s constitutional future, ranging on guaranteeing rights of ‘social citizenship’ PARTY FUNDING REFORM 2 from further-reaching devolution to the SNP’s across the UK. Emphasising social rights across own preference of independence. jurisdictions suggests a concern to build common purposes – or, put another way, limits to policy EU REFORM TREATY 3 Beyond their commitment to ignore the SNP’s variation – to which risk-sharing and solidarity can ‘national conversation’, the other main parties be put to work in a UK-wide framework. in Scotland were generally silent on Scotland’s PARLIAMENT 3 constitutional options until a speech by the new This is a bold agenda. For it to work much would Labour leader in Scotland, Wendy Alexander, at depend on a willingness in Westminster and the University of Edinburgh on St Andrew’s Day, Whitehall to think creatively about rebalancing DEVOLUTION 5 30 November. This set out a unionist perspective the union. If devolution is to have a stronger on constitutional change; unlike the SNP White UK-wide context, then the devolved institutions Paper, independence was not an option. -
Serbia and Montenegro
ATTACKS ON JUSTICE – SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO Highlights Serbia and Montenegro (the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia until February 2003) entered the process of democratic transition, the creation of a system based on the rule of law, much later than other former socialist countries. On 4 February 2003 the new state union of Serbia and Montenegro was proclaimed. Under the Constitutional Charter of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro, there is only one instance of Serbia and Montenegro having a common judiciary – the Court of Serbia and Montenegro. Otherwise, each state – the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro – has its own internal courts system. A set of important judicial reforms came into force on 1 March 2002 in the Republic of Serbia and in July 2002 amendments to these laws were made that violate the principle of separation of powers and the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. In Montenegro, several laws relating to the judiciary were passed or amended during 2003. On 19 March 2003, the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia dismissed 35 judges from office, including seven Supreme Court judges, amid accusations that the judiciary had failed to take tougher measures in dealing with remnants of the former regime as well as in prosecuting organized crime. The legal system in Serbia and Montenegro is still characterized by a number of contradictory and inconsistent regulations, resulting in legal insecurity. BACKGROUND On March 2002 officials of the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro signed a procedural agreement for the restructuring of relations between both states in Belgrade, in the presence of the high representative of the EU,. -
Law Relating Amyotha Hluttaw
The Union of Myanmar Chapter I The State Peace and Development Council Title, Enforcement and Definition The Law Relating to the Amyotha Hluttaw 1. (a) This Law shall be called the Law relating to the Amyotha ( The State Peace and Development Council Law No. 13 /2010 ) Hluttaw, The 13th Waxing Day of Thadinkyut , 1372 M.E. (b) This Law shall come into force throughout the country ( 21st October, 2010 ) commencing from the day of its promulgation. Preamble 2. The following expressions contained in this Law shall have the meanings Since it is provided in Section 443 of the Constitution of the Republic given hereunder: of the Union of Myanmar that the State Peace and Development Council shall (a) Constitution means the Constitution of the Republic of the carry out the necessary preparatory works to implement the Constitution, it has Union of Myanmar; become necessary to enact the relevant laws to enable performance of the legislative, administrative and judicial functions of the Union smoothly, to enable (b) Hluttaw means the Amyotha Hluttaw formed under the performance of works that are to be carried out when the various Hluttaws come Constitution for the purpose of this Law; into existence and to enable performance of the preparatory works in accord (c) Chairperson means the Hluttaw representative elected to with law. supervise the Hluttaw session until the Hluttaw Speaker and As such, the State Peace and Development Council hereby enacts this the Deputy Speaker are elected when the first session of a Law in accord with section 443 of the Constitution of the Republic of the Union term of Hluttaw commences; of Myanmar, in order to implement the works relating to Hluttaw smoothly in (d) Speaker means the Hluttaw representative elected as the convening the sessions of the Amyotha Hluttaw in accord with the Constitution Speaker of the Hluttaw for a term of the Hluttaw; of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar. -
Pomp, Circumstance and Arms the Post of Sergeant-At-Arms Has a Rich Tradition and a Vital Modern Role
28 | LEGISLATIVE STAFF | 01.2013 Pomp, Circumstance and Arms The post of sergeant-at-arms has a rich tradition and a vital modern role. Wisconsin Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Ted Blazel was in charge of maintaining normal legislative operations during the protests of 2011. A Storied History BY MORGAN CULLEN Each legislature has developed special customs over the years, yet the traditional responsibilities of the sergeant-at-arms very year for the past 230, the South Carolina Senate remain, and can be traced back more than 700 years to England’s has convened session in the same manner. Lawmakers King Edward I. He was the first, in 1279, to employ 20 sergeants file down the center aisle, stand in front of their seats as personal body guards. Previously, they had guarded only the and wait for the lieutenant governor to be escorted into garrisons of royal castles, or escorted traitors or other prisoners the chamber by the sergeant-at-arms. to the Tower of London. Over the two centuries, as the number For 30 years, Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Jim Melton of the king’s body guards grew, so did their reputation for brutal- Ehas worn the same customary black suit and white gloves as his ity and abuse of power. predecessors and led the presiding officer to his desk bearing the In 1415, after Parliament issued a formal request, King Henry ceremonial state sword in his hands. The sword is placed in a V appointed Nicholas Maudit, one of his royal sergeants, to be cradle on the Senate rostrum and lamps on either side are turned the first House of Commons sergeant-at-arms. -
2Nd Report, 2016 (Session 4): Legacy Paper
Published 21st March 2016 SP Paper 974 2nd Report, 2016 (Session 4) Web Public Petitions Committee Legacy Paper Published in Scotland by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. All documents are available on the Scottish For information on the Scottish Parliament Parliament website at: contact Public Information on: www.scottish.parliament.uk/documents Telephone: 0131 348 5000 Textphone: 0800 092 7100 Email: [email protected] © Parliamentary copyright. Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body The Scottish Parliament’ copyright policy can be found on the website – www.scottish.parliament.uk Public Petitions Committee Legacy paper, 2nd Report, 2016 (Session 4) Contents Introduction 1 The Committee’s work in Session 4 1 Engagement and innovation 1 New approaches to consideration of petitions 2 Engagement with other legislatures 4 Membership 5 Review of the petitions process 7 Engagement 7 Frequency of external meetings 7 Quality of engagement 8 Use of social media 8 Petitioner diversity 9 Transparency 11 Petition proposals 11 Data 11 Consideration of petitions 12 Petitions in Session 5 12 Petitions carried forward to Session 5 12 Implementation of petition outcomes 13 Annexe A: Petitions carried forward to Session 5 14 Public Petitions Committee Legacy Paper, 2nd Report, 2016 (Session 4) Public Petitions Committee To consider public petitions addressed to the Parliament in accordance with these Rules and, in particular, to— a. decide in a case of dispute whether a petition is admissible; b. decide what action should be taken