COUNCIL CONSEIL

OF EUROPE DE L'EUROPE

COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS

CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(93) 484ter and 484quater

Conclusions

of the

484ter Meeting of the Ministers' Deputies

held in Strasbourg on 8 January 1993

The Conclusions of the 484quater meeting of the Ministers' Deputies held in Strasbourg on 13 January 1993 are reproduced at the end of this volume.

Strasbourg

484ter meeting - 8 January 1993

- i - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter

SUMMARY

Page

List of those present 1

Introduction 3

1. Adoption of the Agenda and of the Order of Business 5

2. Relations between the Council of Europe, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, after the dissolution of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic 7

3. Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) - Draft Recommendation No R(93)1 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on effective access to the law and to justice for the very poor and draft Explanatory Memorandum thereon 27

4. Staff Salaries - Coordinating Committee on Remuneration (CCR) - Adjustment of remuneration of the staff of the Coordinated Organisations - 14th Report 29

5. Coordinating Committee on Remuneration (CCR) - Pension scheme: Rate of contribution 15th report 33

6. Strengthening the European Convention on the suppression of terrorism - Assembly Recommendation 1170 (1991) Fight against international terrorism in Europe - Assembly Recommendation 1199 (1992) 39

7. Communication from the Secretary General 43

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 484ter MEETING OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES (Strasbourg, 8 (10 am) January 1993 - A level AGENDA AND ORDER OF BUSINESS al

APPENDIX 2 Recommendation No R(93)1 of the Committee (item 3) of Ministers to member States on effective access to the law and to justice for the very poor a3

APPENDIX 3 Resolution (93) 1 on revision of the regulations (item 4) governing staff salaries and allowances a7

APPENDIX 4 Resolution (93) 2 on remuneration of specially (item 4) appointed officials a9

484ter meeting - 8 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 1 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter

The 484ter meeting of the Ministers' Deputies opened at A level on Friday, 8 January 1993 at 10 am under the chairmanship of Mr. N. Marshall, Deputy for the Minister for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom.

PRESENT

AUSTRIA Mr H. Winkler Vice-Chairman

BELGIUM Mr H. Fonder

BULGARIA Mr S. Raev Mr M. Milouchev

CYPRUS Mr C. Papademas

DENMARK Mrs M-L. Overvad Mr J. Faerkel

FINLAND Mr H. Rotkirch Mr P. Hyvönen

FRANCE Mrs D. de Boisjolly-Hoyet

GERMANY Mr K-H. Neukirchen Mr K. Praller

GREECE Mr G. Coptsidis Miss N.N.E. Vraïla

HUNGARY Mr J. Perenyi Mrs J. Jozsef

ICELAND -

IRELAND Mr J. Morahan

ITALY Mr D. Vecchioni Mr G. Raimondi

LIECHTENSTEIN Mr J. Wolf

LUXEMBOURG Mr P. Faber

MALTA -

NETHERLANDS Mr J.S.L. Gualtherie Van Weezel Mr A. Bijlsma

NORWAY Mr S. Knudsen Mrs S.G. Eriksen CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 2 -

POLAND Mr J. Regulski Mr J. Wereszczynski

PORTUGAL Mr G.A. de Santa Clara Gomes Miss M.J. Morais Pires

SAN MARINO Mr G. Ceccoli Miss M. Faetanini

SPAIN Mr E. Artacho Castellano Mr M. Hernandez Ruigomez

SWEDEN Mrs I. Larsson Mr B. Hedberg Mrs A.K. Eneström

SWITZERLAND Mr Y. Moret Mr J.-P. Villard

TURKEY Mr C. Altan Mr Y. Belet

UNITED KINGDOM Mr N.H. Marshall, Chairman Mr J. Jamieson Mr A. Staunton 484ter meeting - 8 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 3 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter

At the start of the meeting the Chairman, referring to relations between the Council of Europe and OECD, congratulated the Representative of Hungary, who was Chairman of the Council of Europe liaison Committee for the two organisations, for taking the initiative of organising a meeting with the counterpart OECD Liaison Committee, the first to be held since July 1990.

The meeting had been scheduled for 5 February 1993 so as to coincide with the Parliamentary Assembly session. The timetabling would enable the OECD Ambassadors to follow the proceedings of the Assembly, which was, moreover, entitled, under the agreement reached by the two organisations in 1962, to appoint a delegation to attend the meeting of the Liaison Committees.

The agenda for the meeting would be devoted to a review of the two organisations' activities in Central and Eastern Europe and to the issue of human rights in connection with the procedure for the accession of Central and Eastern European countries to the Council of Europe.

The Representative of Hungary thanked the Chairman for his kind words.

The Chairman then informed the Deputies that a ceremony would be held at 12.15 pm to mark the departure of Ambassador Faber, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg; at the close of the ceremony the traditional "family photograph" would be taken.

484ter meeting - January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 5 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 1

1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND OF THE ORDER OF BUSINESS

Decision

The Deputies adopted the agenda for their 484ter meeting (8 January 1993 - A level), as it appears at Appendix 1 to these Conclusions.

484ter meeting - January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 7 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

2.

RELATIONS BETWEEN THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE, THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC, AFTER THE DISSOLUTION OF THE CZECH AND SLOVAK FEDERAL REPUBLIC (Concl(92)484bis/47, CM(92)238, Misc(92)94, CM(93)1 and 2)

The Chairman drew his colleagues' attention to the particular nature of the requests for accession made by the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, since Czechoslovakia, the dissolution of which on 31 December 1992 was the origin of these two applications, had already been a member of the Council of Europe. He nevertheless believed that it was important for the usual accession procedures to be fully complied with.

Referring to Notes No 9511 and Addendum, he said that two major issues would have to be decided by the Deputies: was the Committee of Ministers to transmit the two requests for accession to the Parliamentary Assembly for an opinion, and, if so, how was the request for accession to various Council of Europe Conventions to be dealt with? He proposed that the document drawn up by the Directorate of Legal Affairs be examined point by point.

The Representative of Austria said that the Deputies could decide, either at the present meeting or on 13 January, to transmit the two requests for accession to the Parliamentary Assembly. Where the Conventions were concerned, particularly the European Convention on Human Rights, the Deputies' decisions should take effect on 1 January 1993, ie retroactively.

His government was in favour of maintaining contact with both applicant states, both in the Council of Europe and at bilateral level. It was necessary to comply with the usual Council of Europe procedures and rules, and the document drawn up by the Directorate of Legal Affairs was a good basis for deciding on both the question of maintaining contact and the matter of accession in compliance with the rules of the Council of Europe. He was prepared to accept both the entry into force of the Conventions in respect of these two countries with retroactive effect and their provisional application, as had been the case for Croatia and Slovenia after the dissolution of Yugoslavia. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 8 - Item 2

It was necessary both to take a decision to recognise the two States and to maintain, as far as possible, co-operation with both, without taking a general decision in this respect. It was preferable for this co-operation to take place on an ad hoc basis and to be highly flexible. He hoped that both States would become members of the Council of Europe by May or in the near future.

The Representative of Switzerland said that the Czech and Slovak Republics could accede rapidly, and that the procedure could be speeded up to this end. Both States' requests for accession would have to be transmitted to the Parliamentary Assembly immediately for an opinion.

Where the Conventions were concerned, he took a flexible approach and subscribed to the conclusions of the Directorate of Legal Affairs as set out on page 7 of document CM(92)238.

Where the European Convention on Human Rights in particular was concerned, in the event of problems arising for the two States during proceedings before the organs of the Convention in respect of which of the two was concerned by an application submitted, the matter should be referred to the Commission of Human Rights. Thus he was generally in favour of the conclusions presented by the Directorate of Legal Affairs, but wondered whether observer status would be appropriate for participation in the meetings of the intergovernmental committees in which both states showed an interest.

The Representative of Poland said that his government supported the two States' accession to the Council of Europe. He hoped that they would be able to participate, as observers, in meetings of the Committee of Ministers from January onwards.

The Representative of Italy was in favour of the immediate transmission of both requests for accession to the Parliamentary Assembly for an opinion and considered that the conclusions of the document drawn up by the Directorate of Legal Affairs represented a good compromise between the requirements for both a speedy accession procedure and compliance with the usual rules of the Council of Europe.

The Chairman said that if the Deputies decided to transmit the two States' requests for accession to the Parliamentary Assembly, the message from the Committee of Ministers ought not to appear in a letter, but should be in the Resolution transmitting the requests.

The Representative of Sweden agreed that the request for the Parliamentary Assembly's opinion should be accompanied by the observations of the Committee of Ministers, as had been the case in respect of the Baltic States. CONFIDENTIAL

- 9 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

The Representative of the United Kingdom also emphasised the need for compliance with the usual rules of the Council of Europe during the accession procedure for the two Republics. He also agreed that the accession requests should be transmitted for an opinion to the Parliamentary Assembly, and said that the two Republics would have to be treated as equals. Both states were members of the CSCE, and it would not be appropriate to deal separately with each. He agreed with the principle that both Republics should participate in Council of Europe meetings, particularly those of the Committee of Ministers, but said that the idea of their being represented by observers at meetings of the Deputies was, in his view, questionable.

He mentioned the unfortunate experience of Poland, the rapid accession of which had at one stage been anticipated, and which had been able to send a Representative to meetings of the Deputies, but he had been obliged to leave the room when certain political points were discussed. This unhappy situation had lasted for a year. It would be preferable for the moment for the two States to participate only in meetings of steering committees, and the question of meetings of the Committee of Ministers could be reconsidered at a later date.

The Representative of Turkey thanked the Directorate of Legal Affairs for the excellent document on the problems thrown up by the dissolution of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and expressed his willingness to accept the suggestions it contained. In respect of the Chairman's proposals, it would be preferable to take each item in turn. Where the transmission to the Parliamentary Assembly for an opinion of the two requests for accession was concerned, he could see no reason to give the requests special treatment. On the subject of participation in meetings of the Committee of Ministers, he agreed with the Representative of Poland and believed that the two States should obtain observer status in order to participate; where the other committees were concerned, he agreed with the proposals put forward in the document prepared by the Directorate of Legal Affairs.

The Representative of Liechtenstein made the following statement:

"The relations between the Principality of Liechtenstein and the former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic have been strained for decades. Contrary to the expectations of the Government of Liechtenstein, a normalisation of the relations between the two States could not be achieved, in particular for the following reasons: CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 10 - Item 2

- The Government of the former CSFR continued to identify itself with the decisions taken by the Czechoslovak Government in 1945 which are in contradiction to public international law and which question the sovereignty and existence of the Principality of Liechtenstein.

- The Government of the former CSFR refused to accord to the Principality of Liechtenstein the same treatment as to other European States, concerning legal issues relating to the declaration made in 1990 by the former CSFR in the framework of the CSCE. When negotiating with the former CSFR, the Principality of Liechtenstein had clearly stated that is was neither demanding the restitution of nor a full compensation for seized Liechtenstein property.

- The Government of the former CSFR refused the compromise proposal made by the Government of the Principality of Liechtenstein, that is, to submit the case to the International Court of Justice or to another neutral institution and to accept as binding the decision of such a body.

At the Third Meeting of the Council of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) held in Stockholm in December 1992, the Chairman, in connection with the consideration of agenda item 8 (Request for admission to the CSCE as participating States), made the following statement:

"It is understood that the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic are ready to conduct negotiations in mutual interest and on the basis of international law on any bilateral issue with the Principality of Liechtenstein which one of the sides considers to be open."

The delegation of Liechtenstein made the following Interpretative Statement under paragraph 79 (Chapter 6) of the Final Recommendations of the Helsinki Consultations:

"In connection with the adoption of agenda item 8 "Requests for admission to the CSCE as participating States", it is understanding of the delegation of the Principality of Liechtenstein that outstanding issues between the Czech an Slovak Federal Republic and the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic do encompass nationalization of property of Liechtenstein nationals seized without compensation in the years 1945 and thereafter." CONFIDENTIAL

- 11 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

Based on the aforementioned, the Government of the Principality if Liechtenstein will therefore invite the Governments of the Czech Republic and of the Slovak Republic in the near future to open negotiations on all outstanding issued in their relations with the Principality of Liechtenstein.

The Government of the Principality of Liechtenstein expects that a positive approach to the settling of all open issues in the relations between the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic and the Principality of Liechtenstein will be shown by the parties concerned before they are admitted as members of the Council of Europe."

The Representative of Hungary also congratulated the Directorate of Legal Affairs on the excellent document drawn up for the meeting and said that his government was in favour of the two Republics' requests for accession. He would make a statement later, but having heard what the Representative of Liechtenstein had said, he wished to make a few brief comments straight away. There were analogies between the fate of Hungarian and Liechtenstein citizens, for they had been declared collectively guilty in the first paragraph of the Beneš Decree of 1945. Although the Slovak National Council had offered its apologies to the Hungarians, the Beneš Decree was legally still in force and continued to transgress the rules of public international law. He would be making a statement later.

The Representative of France wished the two States' requests for accession to be transmitted as speedily as possible to the Parliamentary Assembly, so that the question could be referred to the Assembly as early as February. He also hoped that co-operation between both States and the Council of Europe would continue and be given concrete form as soon as possible. He also mentioned the problem of the Czech and Slovak delegations' participation in the Summit of Heads of State and Government in October 1993.

On the subject of referrals to the Commission of Human Rights in respect of Czech and Slovak cases during the two States' accession procedure, his government had legal reservations about the merits of this.

The Representative of Luxembourg agreed with the previous speakers about the rapid transmission of the requests for accession to the Parliamentary Assembly for an opinion. The procedure before the Parliamentary Assembly should be speeded up as much as possible, and the Resolution accompanied by the comments of the Committee of Ministers. He had the same reservations as his Swiss and United Kingdom colleagues about Czech and Slovak participation in meetings of the Committee of Ministers. On the other hand, he had no objection to their participation in meetings of steering committees and in Conventions. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 12 - Item 2

The Representative of Germany supported the Representatives of the United Kingdom and France and emphasised that the two States should participate in the activities of working parties on the Summit, without being given the right to vote.

The Representative of Spain agreed that co-operation with the two new Republics should continue and that their respective requests for accession should be speedily sent to the Parliamentary Assembly for an opinion. The document prepared by the Directorate of Legal Affairs was a good basis for the Resolutions, which should be accompanied by the comments of the Committee of Ministers.

The Representative of the Netherlands shared the view of his French, United Kingdom and Swiss colleagues on these two States' observer status with steering committees. He referred to the discussion three weeks previously of questions relating to the minorities in Slovakia and expressed a wish to know whether the two States planned to make declarations about minority languages. He also supported the views voiced by the Liechtenstein delegation.

The Representative of Hungary had no comments, but wished to make a statement about the text to be transmitted to the Parliamentary Assembly later.

The Chairman suggested that the document prepared by the Directorate of Legal Affairs be examined paragraph by paragraph.

The Representative of Ireland agreed with the delegations which wished the two states to be able to accede to the Council of Europe speedily, so that they were members of the organisation by the end of May. He also supported the idea of dealing with both accession requests together and hoped that the two States would be admitted to the Council of Europe at the same time. He had no specific remarks to make about the observations of the Committee of Ministers on the requests for accession, but said that it would be inadvisable to put too much pressure on the Parliamentary Assembly.

The Chairman noted that a consensus had emerged within the Committee of Ministers as to the procedure to be followed on this matter. Firstly, the document drawn up by the Directorate of Legal Affairs seemed acceptable to all. It was also clear that each item would have to be dealt with in turn and that the decisions would have to be taken speedily. CONFIDENTIAL

- 13 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

It seemed to have been accepted that the two applicant States would have to go through the following stages: expression of their desire for membership of the Council of Europe, rapid transmission of their requests to the Assembly for an opinion and, lastly, decision of the Committee of Ministers and issuing of a certificate of amendment to the Statute to take account of the new situation following the dissolution of Czechoslovakia. He pointed out that several delegations had underlined the need to deal with both States as equals. On the other hand, he wondered whether the requests should be transmitted to the Assembly with a single declaration or, perhaps, with two different texts.

The Representative of Hungary made the following statement:

"It is our belief that the admission of these two new States to the Council of Europe represents an enrichment of the Organisation and promotes stability and security in Europe.

In reflecting on the applications, Hungary is guided by some special considerations. Hungarians lived in a common state with the Slovaks for 1000 years, until 1918, and in an intermittent personal union with the Kingdom of Bohemia for several centuries. We are pleased that the efforts of the Czech and the Slovak nations for self-determination have now been fully realised.

The letters mentioned by the Chairman state that the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic consider themselves to be bound by the European Convention on Human Rights. In these letters, respect for the principles of pluralistic democracy including the rights of minorities are explicitly stated. We therefore assume that those portions of the Hungarian nation who were attached to Czechoslovakia by the peace treaties of 1920 and 1947, today numbering close to 600.000 people, will be granted those rights, enabling them to live a dignified life according to their own traditions and to maintain and develop all the institutions necessary to preserve their cultural identity and inheritance.

It should be noted that by the dissolution of the CSFR, the proportion of Hungarian minorities of the total population, from representing approximately 4% in Czechoslovakia has become approximately 11% in the Republic of Slovakia.

Commenting on this fact, I find it necessary to emphasise our deep concern about the fate of the Hungarian minority. Since the new State of Slovakia has only recently come into being, it is impossible to foresee the evolution of links between the Slovak Constitution and the law-making process. What matters is not the words of the Constitution but the spirit of law. Still, I would CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 14 - Item 2

like to make an observation on the Slovak Constitution. The Constitution stipulates that the rights of minorities "must not endanger the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Slovak Republic or cause discrimination against the rest of the population". This undoubtedly gives the impression that the minorities are implicitly considered a threat. Our opinion is that the rights of minorities represent an enrichment of states, an intrinsic value, and that those rights contribute to what has been called "democratic security".

There is an increasing awareness within the international community that these rights and their full implementation contribute to cultural diversity and political stability. The last expression of this is the recently adopted Declaration on the rights of persons belonging to national and ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities by the United Nations.

These developments are especially present in the work of the Council of Europe. Let me just refer to Recommendation No. (92)10 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 21 May 1992, Recommendation 1177 (1992) of the Parliamentary Assembly on the rights of minorities, the debate on 5 November 1992 within the Committee of Ministers, and, of course, the adoption of the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages.

In transmitting the request of the Republic of Slovakia to the Assembly, the necessity to make reference to the situation of minorities has to be mentioned. The best way to achieve this is to follow along the lines of Resolution 92(69) on Croatia adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 10 December 1992. Furthermore, the Committee of Ministers could, in my view, call attention to the Charter and that its ratification would contribute to the confidence between all the elements of the population within Slovakia. Similarly, the Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co- operation would contribute to the same end."

The Chairman said that, with the exception of one delegation, the Representatives seemed to be in favour of sending a single set of comments from the Committee of Ministers to the Assembly when the requests were transmitted. He awaited suggestions as to its contents.

The Representative of Austria was in favour of a single type of procedure for both states and supported the idea of including in the comments a reference to the question of minorities. He further stressed that the text should also refer to the need for an accelerated accession procedure and to the fact that both States considered themselves bound by the European Convention on Human Rights. CONFIDENTIAL

- 15 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

The Chairman saw two alternatives for the rapid drafting of the text containing the comments of the Committee of Ministers: either it could be drawn up and adopted at the present meeting, or the Secretariat could be instructed to draft it, and it could be adopted at a special meeting the following week, or at the Bureau's next meeting, on 15 January 1993.

The Representative of Liechtenstein hoped that the text would refer to the aide-mémoire presented by his delegation at the present meeting.

The Representative of Italy supported the proposal that the text of the comments include a reference to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. However, it was necessary to emphasise that the wording to be used would have to be chosen carefully, since it would be contradictory to require an applicant State to sign a Charter which had not yet been signed by all the delegations at the present meeting, his own among them.

The Representative of Sweden said that her government also wished there to be a carefully worded text giving the comments of the Committee of Ministers on the two States' requests for accession.

The Representative of Turkey wondered whether it was necessary to make any comments and whether that would foster a rapid procedure. He referred to the established practice of the Committee of Ministers, which had previously consisted of simply transmitting requests to the Parliamentary Assembly, without any comments.

Exceptions had been made in the cases of Ukraine, Russia and Croatia: their accession requests had been transmitted to the Assembly accompanied by the comments of the Committee of Ministers. In this instance, however, the requests came from former member States of the Council of Europe, and he thought it improbable that their internal situations had changed fundamentally since the very recent dissolution of the Czechoslovak Federation. As the Parliamentary Assembly would have to consider the requests in accordance with its usual procedure, he did not think it worthwhile to make specific comments on obligations under the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.

The Chairman said that, while the two applicant countries' internal situations had not altered at all in the space of a week, there had been changes in the rules of the game. Account also had to be taken, in the context of the decisions, of present requirements in terms of compliance with both the European Convention on Human Rights and other Conventions. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 16 - Item 2

The Representative of Hungary said that it was difficult to ascertain precisely what was the established practice just referred to by the Representative of Turkey. He agreed that there was no need for the comments of the Committee of Ministers to take the form of a long text. One aspect of the internal situation had in fact altered fundamentally: the Hungarian minority was now concentrated in one of the Czechoslovak Federation's successor States. In his view, this should be taken into account in the text accompanying the Resolutions requesting the Assembly's opinion.

The Representative of Belgium was in favour of the idea of sending comments accompanying the Resolutions of the Committee of Ministers requesting the Assembly's opinion and of including in them a reference to the question of minorities. He nevertheless wished the wording to be used for this purpose to be carefully chosen, so as to avoid, inter alia, any allusion to the collective rights of a minority as a group. Instead he preferred the conventional concepts.

The Chairman noted that the Deputies, with one exception, agreed with the proposal that the Secretariat be asked to prepare a single text containing comments, drafted in a similar way to its predecessors. He wondered whether a decision on the principle of doing this might not have a certain political advantage, and the question of form could be reviewed at a subsequent meeting. In the absence of other comments on paragraph 8 of the document prepared by the Directorate of Legal Affairs, he proposed that the Deputies examine paragraph 9 on the retroactive effect of the decision taken in pursuance of the previous paragraph, and then paragraph 10 on the financial consequences of the two States' accession.

The Representative of Switzerland, referring to paragraph 9, did not consider it necessary to take a decision on this subject at the present meeting.

The Director of Administration, referring to paragraph 10, said that the General Budget of the Council of Europe for 1993 had included a normal contribution from Czechoslovakia, with reference to both income and expenditure. In view of the situation, however, the Administration had not asked the Czechoslovak authorities to contribute to the 1993 Budget. He was sure that this matter was not urgent, since the Council of Europe would be able to operate without this income. The question could be raised again when the two States became members, and their contribution recalculated either on a pro rata temporis basis or with effect from 1 January, should retroactive effect be decided upon. CONFIDENTIAL

- 17 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

The Representative of Norway supported the idea of not going into detail about financial matters at the present meeting. In the context of the budgetary discussions for 1993, the Czechoslovak delegation had made a statement saying that both successor States were willing to pay, on the basis of an apportionment, the contribution due from Czechoslovakia. He proposed that consideration of this question be resumed at a later stage, once the two States' position was known.

The Secretary General, referring to paragraph 10, mentioned a technical question thrown up by the dissolution of Czechoslovakia. The Czech and Slovak delegations actually had no legal right to an office at the Council of Europe. They were, however, having some practical difficulty in finding alternative accommodation. She took the view that during the transitional period, meaning until such time as they again became full members of the Council of Europe, they should be given permission to use their old rooms, if the Deputies had no objections.

The Chairman wondered whether the creation of special conditions for these two applicant States was justified, while others did not enjoy them.

The Representative of Norway had no objection to the two rooms concerned being made available to the Czech and Slovak delegations.

The Chairman, referring to paragraph 11 of the document prepared by the Directorate of Legal Affairs, said that a distinction ought to be made, for the purposes of the invitation to the two new States to participate in Council of Europe meetings, between meetings of intergovernmental committees and those of the Committee of Ministers. The majority of those who had spoken had supported both States' participation in meetings of steering committees. He had reservations about granting them a similar opportunity to participate in meetings of the Deputies. He asked for his colleagues' views on this point.

The Representative of Hungary drew attention to the question raised by the Turkish delegation at a previous meeting, namely whether or not the two States would be associated with the preparations for the Summit.

The Representative of Austria said that a decision ought to be taken to invite the two new States to participate in meetings of intergovernmental committees, but he had reservations about the idea of granting them observer status. Where the question raised by his Hungarian colleague was concerned, he believed it necessary for these States to participate as observers in the meetings of the working party responsible for the preparation of the Vienna Summit, but not in the meetings of the Committee of Ministers. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 18 - Item 2

The Representative of Poland supported his Austrian colleague and said that it was natural for the two States to be associated with the preparations for the Summit.

In reply to a question from the Chairman, the Representative of Austria said that the working party responsible for the preparation of the Summit did not take decisions, but reported to the Deputies. Observer status in the working party thus by no means involved participation in decision making.

The Representative of Switzerland had no objection to the two States being invited to participate in meetings of intergovernmental committees. On the other hand, participation in the Summit working party was, in his view, a more political than technical matter. It would be discriminatory, in his opinion, to invite certain non-member States to participate in working party meetings, but not others.

The Representative of the United Kingdom shared the reservations of his Swiss colleague. He also believed the subject of preparations for the Summit to be a political one, and given the fact that the working party responsible for preparations would hold few meetings before May, he would prefer no decision to be taken on this matter at the present meeting.

The Representative of Italy said that the document prepared by the Directorate of Legal Affairs endeavoured to provide continuity between the Federal Republic and the two new States. He was in favour of this principle of continuity, and therefore hoped that the two States would be able to participate as observers in the meetings of the working party responsible for preparing for the Summit and, on the occasion of political exchanges of views, those of the Committee of Ministers.

The Chairman said that the proposals that the two States be admitted to meetings of the preparatory working party and the Committee of Ministers required political decisions. Where the principle of continuity was concerned, he was not convinced that the document drawn up by the Directorate of Legal Affairs was intended to foster decisions in favour of this principle.

The Representative of France agreed with the Chairman. This case was unique, and no comparison could be made with other applicant States. Czechoslovakia, a former Council of Europe member State, had divided into two sovereign States in a peaceful process, and this was unprecedented. He agreed with his Italian colleague that it was necessary to give them permission to participate in Council of Europe meetings, including those of the Committee of Ministers. He pointed to the precedent of Poland, which had, before becoming a member State, obtained observer status with the Committee of Ministers. He wondered why two States derived from a former member State could not take advantage of this precedent. CONFIDENTIAL

- 19 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

The Representative of Hungary shared the reservations expressed by the Representative of Switzerland. If the two States were admitted to meetings of the preparatory working party, this would set a political precedent, making it difficult thereafter to exclude other applicant States from those meetings. The situation was a delicate and exceptional one, and he would prefer to leave a decision on this subject to the month of May.

The Representative of Austria agreed with the Chairman that the participation of these States in the meetings of the preparatory working party was a political matter. As far as the principle of continuity was concerned, there were political and legal arguments in favour of this. Although he agreed with the Representative of Hungary that it would be pragmatic to leave the decision on this matter to May, he would prefer the two States to participate from now on in the meetings of the preparatory working party.

The Representative of Poland, with the support of the Representative of Ireland, agreed with the viewpoint of his Austrian colleague. One week prior to the present meeting, Czechoslovakia had been a full member of the Council of Europe, meeting all European standards. This being so, the Parliamentary Assembly should ascertain whether any drastic changes had occurred in the last few days. He pointed out that nobody disputed the fact that this case was one of the continuation of a State by two others, but two which derived from the common State. As no parallel could be drawn with other accession requests, he took the view that these two states should be dealt with separately, and therefore granted the right to participate in the meetings of the preparatory working party.

The Representative of Sweden noted that there seemed to be divergent opinions as to the two States' participation in meetings of the preparatory working party, and suggested that the position of her United Kingdom colleague be accepted, meaning that the two States would be admitted as observers to all intergovernmental committees with the exception of the preparatory working party and the Committee of Ministers. She believed that a decision on this matter had to be taken at the present meeting.

The Chairman pointed out that decisions taken by the Deputies could always be amended.

The Representative of Hungary said that references to continuity between the federal State and the two new states derived from the federation were legal fiction. He considered it contradictory to wish to establish the principle of continuity while not wanting to make it automatic. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 20 - Item 2

The Representative of the Netherlands agreed with his Hungarian colleague and expressed the view that member status could not be automatic until such time as the Parliamentary Assembly's reply on the subject had been received.

The Representative of Belgium was in favour of a pragmatic approach, particularly that adopted by his Swedish colleague and the Chairman. He was convinced that continuity between the federation and the two new States ought to be preserved, so that one decision at least could be taken at the present meeting. He had no objection to the two new States being invited to meetings of steering committees.

The Representative of the United Kingdom agreed with his Netherlands colleague. It was necessary to await the decision of the Parliamentary Assembly on the requests for accession, and this should not be anticipated.

The Chairman said that the Deputies had still not found an area of agreement concerning the working party responsible for the preparation of the Summit, and the Deputies could not therefore do more at this stage than grant these two new States the right to participate in intergovernmental committees. He proposed a return to the question of the preparatory working party at a later stage.

The Representative of France wondered whether the Chairman's proposal meant that the two new States would be entitled to participate in the meetings of the Committee of Ministers and preparatory working party as of the date of adoption by the Parliamentary Assembly of its opinions on the requests for accession.

The Chairman proposed that this question be left open and be discussed again, either by the Ministers' Deputies themselves or by a technical working party of the Deputies. He nevertheless believed that a precise date could already be set for a decision on the subject of participation in the meetings of the Summit preparatory working party. The most that the Deputies were able to accept unanimously seemed for the moment to be participation in intergovernmental committees.

The Director of Legal Affairs said that there was nothing automatic in the procedure for accession to the Council of Europe. The Parliamentary Assembly had to take a decision according to its usual procedures, after which it was up to the Committee of Ministers to decide the issue. CONFIDENTIAL

- 21 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

The Representative of Austria expressed a wish for greater clarity in decisions concerning accession.

The Representative of the United Kingdom, with the backing of the Representative of Hungary, supported the proposals in the document drawn up by the Directorate of Legal Affairs and expressed the hope that the Deputies would take the decisions at the present meeting.

The Representative of Austria, referring to section III of the document prepared by the Directorate of Legal Affairs concerning the participation of the two new States in European Conventions, presumed that, at paragraph 15, relating to Conventions open to non-member States, the wording should be "the Committee of Ministers could accept them as Parties", rather than "the Committee of Ministers could recognise them as Parties to these Conventions".

The Representative of Finland said that the Committee of Ministers would have to find a form of words on this point capable of reflecting the desire of the whole Committee of Ministers, and he suggested the following: "... the Committee of Ministers will declare that these two States are successors". He had the impression that the two States had decided to be successors.

The Director of Legal Affairs said that the idea underlying the document prepared by the Directorate of Legal Affairs was that the two States were effectively successors. The two States had expressed their desire to be successors in their respective letters dated 1 January. It was for the Committee of Ministers to decide whether it was able to accept that the two States considered themselves successors of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic with regard to the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Representative of Austria said that, in his opinion, the two States should notify the Council of Europe in a joint letter of their desire to succeed the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. He had previously thought that the procedure was automatic, but if a formal declaration was required, he thought that the letters sent by both States on 1 January could serve as a basis. The letters had in fact referred to the fact that the two new States would comply with the obligations incumbent on the former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic under the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Chairman wondered whether the Committee of Ministers should officially recognise, in a specific decision, the declaration by both new States concerning their status as successors to the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 22 - Item 2

The Director of Legal Affairs said that such recognition should be in concreto and required an examination of each specific case.

The Representative of Hungary wondered what was the legal effect of the problem dealt with in paragraph 16 of the document prepared by the Directorate of Legal Affairs, concerning closed Conventions. He thought that clarification was necessary of the legal form which these declarations of succession with regard to the Convention should take.

The Director of Legal Affairs said that the declarations concerned would be examined in detail. In any case the Deputies would have to accept or take note of them. In respect of the closed Conventions, there would have to be an examination of whether continuity was possible and whether the situation was the same as for the European Convention on Human Rights. The procedure in respect of the open Conventions was much simpler, as it was sufficient to take note of the fact that the two States had declared themselves to be the successor States of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic.

The Representative of Belgium said, in respect of the open Conventions, that he was in favour of the solution put forward by his Austrian colleague. Where paragraph 15 of the document drawn up by the Directorate of Legal Affairs was concerned, he believed that this implied a certain amount of automatism. In his view this was not a case of the succession of States. He pointed out that, in the case of Russia, an exception had been made to enable it to be the successor State of the Soviet Union. It was necessary to apply the usual rules to the case of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. The two new States would therefore have to accede to the Council of Europe's open Conventions, and mere notification was not enough in this respect.

The Representative of Austria said that there seemed to be a consensus among the Deputies about the possibility of allowing the two new States to accede to the open Conventions by simple notification, as had been done for Slovenia following the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Where the closed Conventions were concerned, it had been suggested that the two new States be allowed to apply them provisionally. CONFIDENTIAL

- 23 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

Decisions

The Deputies

1. noted that the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic was no longer a member of the Council of Europe and approved the following amendment to Article 26 of the Statute of the Council of Europe:

"Members shall be entitled to the number of Representatives given below:

Austria 6 Belgium 7 Bulgaria 6 Cyprus 3 Denmark 5 Finland 5 France 18 Germany 18 Greece 7 Hungary 7 Iceland 3 Ireland 4 Italy 18 Liechtenstein 2 Luxembourg 3 Malta 3 Netherlands 7 Norway 5 Poland 12 Portugal 7 San Marino 2 Spain 12 Sweden 6 Switzerland 6 Turkey 12 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 18"

2. took note of the declarations made by the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic which appear in the letters reproduced in documents CM(93)1 and CM(93)2 to the effect that they wish to assume the succession of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic;

3. decided that, regarding the Statute of the Organisation, the status of member could only be granted once the Committee of Ministers, in the light of the opinion of the Parliamentary Assembly, had established that the conditions for membership of the Organisation were respected; CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 24 - Item 2

4. decided to transmit the requests for accession from the Czech Republic and from the Slovak Republic to the Parliamentary Assembly for opinion, and invited the Secretariat to prepare, on the basis of the discussions which had taken place at the present meeting, draft Resolutions to this end;

5. decided to hold a special meeting on 13 January 1993 at 9.30 am in order to consider these draft Resolutions;

6. decided provisionally that the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic could participate as observers in all the intergovernmental expert Committees in which they expressed an interest;

7. took note of the declarations of succession of the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic and decided accordingly, in their composition restricted to the Parties to the Partial Agreement on the Co-operation Group to Combat Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking in Drugs (Pompidou Group)1 that the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic are Parties to this Agreement with retroactive effect as of 1 January 1993;

8. - took note of the declarations of succession of the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic in respect of the "open" Conventions to which the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic had been a Party

- noted that in their respective requests for accession dated 1 January 1993 the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic declared explicitly that they were bound, as from that date, by the said Conventions

- decided that, taking these declarations into account, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic are, with retroactive effect from that date, Contracting Parties to the following Conventions:

- European Cultural Convention (ETS No. 18);

- Conventions in the Academic field:

i. European Convention on the Equivalence of Diplomas Leading to admission to Universities and Protocol thereto (ETS Nos. 15 and 49);

1 Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom CONFIDENTIAL

- 25 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 2

ii. European Convention on the Equivalence of Periods of University Study (ETS No. 21);

iii. European Convention on the Academic Recognition of University Qualifications (ETS No. 32);

- Conventions in the field of criminal law:

i. European Convention on Extradition (ETS No. 24);

ii. European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (ETS No. 30);

iii. European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters (ETS No. 73);

iv. Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons (ETS No. 112).

9. took note of the declarations of succession of the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic in respect of the "closed" Conventions to which the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic had been a Party (European Convention for the Suppression of Terrorism - ETS No. 90) or Signatory (European Social Charter (ETS No. 35) - Additional Protocol and Amending Protocol thereto (ETS Nos. 128 and 142) as well as the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (ETS No. 126), and agreed to take decisions on this point at the appropriate moment.

10. took note with satisfaction of the declarations by the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic by which they consider themselves bound, as from 1 January 1993, by the Convention for the Safeguard of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and by Protocols Nos. 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 and 10 thereto and by the declarations provided for under Articles 25 and 46 of the Convention.

484ter meeting - January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 27 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 3

3. STEERING COMMITTEE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS (CDDH) Draft Recommendation No. R(93)1 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on effective access to the law and to justice for the very poor and draft explanatory memorandum thereon (Concl(92)485/21b,CM(92)214 , Appendix III)

Decisions

The Deputies

1. adopted Recommendation No. R(93)1 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on effective access to the law and to justice for the very poor, as it appears at Appendix 2 to these Conclusions;

2. authorised the publication of the explanatory memorandum thereon (CM(92)214, Appendix III).

When Recommendation No. R(93)1 was adopted, the Representative of Austria, in application of Article 10.2.c. of the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies, reserved the right of his Government to comply or not with the text of the Recommendation.

484ter meeting - January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 29 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 4 4. STAFF SALARIES Co-ordinating Committee on Remuneration (CCR) Adjusment of remuneration of the staff of the Coordinated Organisations - 14th Report (Concl(92)485/1 and 36, CM(92)232 and Add. I and II)

Replying to a question from the Representative of Norway, the Director of Administration said that some of the Co-ordinated Organisations had already examined one or both reports of the CCR. In the case of OECD, for example, the report on salary adjustments had been adopted and the report on pensions had been adopted in principle. At NATO, the reports on salaries and pensions were currently under consideration and were likely to be adopted at the end of a written procedure which should be completed on 11 January. Regarding the European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts, the report on salaries had been adopted and the report on pensions had been referred back to Co- ordination. The situation was the same at the European Space Agency, where only the report on pensions had been adopted, although in fact the measure which it recommended had been approved even before it had been proposed by the Co-ordination system, some time ago. The reports had not yet been examined by the WEU, but their examination was now imminent.

The Representative of Germany agreed to the draft decisions but he requested clarification regarding point 1 of the draft decisions. His authorities understood that this point included all recommendations adopted by the CCR and contained in its 14th report.

The Director of Administration said that indeed, the first decision related to all the recommendations contained in the CCR's 14th report on salary adjustment. He added that a special scale for B and C grades at the Council of Europe was provided for, following an Appeals Board decision. The Co-ordination report had laid down the scales applicable at the Council of Europe; these were appended to the report and the Council of Europe had to adopt them.

The Representative of Norway pointed out that, at the meeting held in the OECD headquarters, the principle of the Co-ordination was questioned by the Secretary Generals' representatives concerning the pension and the increased contribution of the staff to the pension scheme. He recalled that he was in favour of the Co-ordination system, but he thought that the time had CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 30 - Item 4

come to reconsider the question and see whether it was in the interest of the Council of Europe to stay with the Co-ordination.

Furthermore he added that another question of principle had been raised in the debate in the OECD i.e., whether the Organisations would be bound by the recommendations of the Co-ordinating Committee. Several delegations stated that the co-ordinated organisations were not necessarily bound by these recommendations. He thought that the Council of Europe should, in the light of these proposals, rethink whether it wished to stay co-ordinated or not, and if so it should find a balance and accept to a certain extent what was proposed by the CCR. As far as he knew the Strasbourg staff was favourable to the Co- ordination. However, Strasbourg is neither Paris nor Bruxelles and he wondered whether it was fair to compare conditions and terms in Strasbourg with other parts of France or Europe. In conclusion he proposed that this whole complex of Co-ordination and the level of remuneration in the light of particular local conditions should be examined at a later stage this year if possible.

The Chairman said that he was sure all present took note of the Norwegian Ambassador's suggestion, no doubt with different degrees of enthusiasm.

The Representative of the United Kingdom said that his Government was prepared to adopt the draft decisions as proposed by the Secretariat but he indeed shared the concerns just expressed by the Norwegian Ambassador. He pointed out that the British Government was not happy with the current CCR system and particularly not with the supposed automaticity of accepting recommendations from the CCR. He believed that each organisation in the system was free to accept or to reject those recommendations. According to Article 5(k) of the Regulations which figures on page 17 of the document CM(92)232 Add. I, "the Governing body of each Co-ordinated Organisation shall decide on the recommendations made to it by the CCR" this meant in his view, that organisations were free to decide whether to accept, reject or modify such recommendations. His Government was increasingly of the view that more attention should be paid to the question of affordability and that the Council of Europe should be freer to decide what level of salaries should be set. This system would have the advantage in some cases that the Council would be more flexible when, for example, deciding to pay more for a director of information in order to attract candidates into the job. He finally noted that there was a certain contradiction when the Secretary General insisted on observing the recommendations of the CCR regarding salaries whereas this was not the case with regard to increasing pensions contributions. CONFIDENTIAL

- 31 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 4

The Representative of Norway said that should his colleagues share his views, these questions could be examined in the future by the Deputies' Rapporteur Group on administrative questions.

Decisions

The Deputies

1. approved the recommendations set out in paragraph 3 of the 14th Report of the Co-ordinating Committee on Remuneration (CM(92)232, Add.I) concerning adjustment of remuneration of the staff of the Co-ordinated Organisations and accordingly;

2. approved, with effect from 1 July 1992, the salary scales and allowances set out in the Annexes by country attached to the 14th Report (CM(92)232, Add. I) with the exception of the salary scales for B and C grade staff members for France, Belgium and Germany which are replaced by the salary scales set out in document CM(92)232, Add. II;

3. decided as an ad hoc measure that, should the adoption of the new scales lead, for certain staff, to a total net remuneration that is less than the remuneration they were paid under the previous scales, no refund of any over-payments would be required;

4. noted that, in accordance with the decision taken at the Deputies' 289th meeting (item XVIIIb), pensions (as calculated in application of the Pension Scheme Rules) are the subject of an identical proportional adjustment to that granted to serving staff at 1 July 1992;

5. noted that, in accordance with the interpretation given to paragraph 3 of the Co-ordinating Committee's 34th Report of 10 October 1965 (CCG(65)5), at the meeting on 29 June 1966 (CCG/M(66)6), the remuneration of auxiliary staff serving in the Co-ordinated Organisations will be adjusted in the same proportions as that of permanent staff;

6. adopted Resolution (93)1 on Revision of the Regulations Governing Staff Salaries and Allowances, as it appears at Appendix 3 to these Conclusions;

7. adopted Resolution (93)2 on the Remuneration of Specially Appointed Officials, as it appears at Appendix 4 to these Conclusions; CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 32 - Item 4

8. noted that a recommendation to approve the application of new purchasing power parities to be applied with effect at 1 July 1992 will be made by the CCR as soon as final figures become available;

9. released the appropriations frozen under the relevant sub- heads of the ordinary budget, of each of the Partial Agreement budgets and of the Pensions Budget for 1992 and 1993 to the extent necessary for the implementation of the foregoing decisions. 484ter meeting - January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 33 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 5

5. CO-ORDINATING COMMITTEE ON REMUNERATION (CCR) Pension scheme: Rate of contribution 15th Report (Concl(92)485/1 and 37, CM(92)233)

The Representative of Germany said that his Government supported the 15th Report of the CCR but was not convinced by the position of the Secretariat as reflected in the document CM(92)233. He emphasized that all studies had showed that the current rate of 7% was insufficient for a well-balanced financing of the pensions over the long term.

The Representative of France said that her authorities agreed with the German delegation and considered that the 0.5 % increase in contributions recommended by the CCR should be implemented.

The Representative of the United Kingdom said that his Government also supported the proposals made unanimously by the CCR. Although these were interim measures, the studies so far made indicate that there would be a need for a larger contribution to the pension fund, which would of course be matched by improved benefits as well. He thought that arguments over the actuarial basis had been used for avoiding the hard decisions. However, it was certainly not the member Governments' fault that a common basis for the actuarial study was not taken up and was now used as an argument for saying that there was no clear basis for making any increase at all.

The Representative of Italy said that he concurred with the German, French and British delegations.

The Director of Administration explained that document CM (92) 233 did not comprise a draft decision but that it did mention certain reservations on the part of the Secretariat regarding the Co-ordinating Committee's 15th report. It was wrong to say that when it came to adjusting salaries the Secretariat proposed adjusting them automatically but that when it came to increasing contributions to the pension scheme the Secretariat had reservations. The two recommendations put forward by the Co- ordinating Committee were different in kind, because the first only concerned, at this stage, a purely mechanical adjustment on the basis of a method already adopted by the Deputies, even though it was currently under review, whereas the second involved taking up a position of principle on which differing opinions were possible. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 34 - Item 5

He informed the Deputies that the Secretary General considered this matter extremely important because it affected the very reliability of the pension scheme in the medium and long term.

She had no objection on principle to an increase in the rate of contribution, even if it were to be implemented in a provisional manner. However, she considered it necessary to take account of a number of technical aspects before proceeding to decisions on the rate increase, the amount of the increase, and also the reserve fund which would have to be set up to receive, while waiting for a subsequent decision, payment of the staff's additional 0.5% contribution. The Secretary General felt that not all the technical aspects of such decisions had been properly examined and weighed up, thus casting doubt on both the agreement on the amount of the increase and the actual mode of functioning of Co-ordination. In that connection, the Director said that although the Co-ordinating Committee's 15th report had been unanimously adopted, such unanimity concerned only the government representatives, whereas the document had, only on the previous day, been distributed to the representatives of the Secretaries General and the staff. Although Co-ordination could not be considered as a wage negotiating mechanism, the Deputies had themselves decided that it should also fully involve the Secretaries General and the staff.

He mentioned the reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1102 (1989) relating notably to the problem of staff consultation, in which the Deputies had expressed their support for genuine staff consultation, even though the final decision rested with the government representatives. In the present case such consultation had not taken place, even though it would have helped to secure a solution more acceptable to the three parties.

Where the technical aspects were concerned, it was accepted that the rate of contribution to the pension scheme had to be increased, but it remained to be seen, in particular, what rate of inflation adjustment the experts would eventually take on board. It might for instance be in the region of 3 or 4% if there were an increase, but it might equally be less than that. Furthermore, the Co-ordinating Committee should be able to formulate a final recommendation by 1 July this year, after deciding on the rate of inflation adjustment. In the case in point, therefore, the 0.5% increase was a provisional, conservative measure, though the final measure would probably be adopted in a few months' time.

Those were the reasons for the Secretary General's reservations regarding the report, in the light of which it would be desirable to wait the extra few months before taking a decision on the increase, particularly so that genuine tripartite discussions CONFIDENTIAL

- 35 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 5

could be held, as should normally happen in the Co-ordinating Committee. He did not think that the pension scheme was in danger since there would be a few months' delay in introducing the increase in contributions. On the other hand, if the Deputies considered that a decision had to be taken and the CCR's Recommendation approved that very day, the Secretary General would like a number of conditions and safeguards to be attached to such approval. In particular, it was essential to follow the example of the OECD and ensure that a decision of principle was only taken provisionally and that the provisional increase in the rate of contribution only be introduced as of 1 February, on a tempoary basis. Arrangements might also be made to ensure that the increase only took effect after a number of technical aspects had been settled in the Council setting, possibly with retroactive effect.

The technical aspects included the question of the fund into which the additional 0.5% staff contribution would be paid and which might constitute a kind of guarantee fund. The fund would of course be maintained by the additional 0.5% staff contribution, but thought would also have to be given to the possibility of an additional 1% payment by Member States. The established principle was that, when staff paid 7% into the pension scheme the governments normally had to pay 14%. This meant that a 0.5% increase in staff contributions should be accompanied, in setting up the guarantee fund, by a 1% increase in the Member States' contributions. Moreover, the Council of Europe had Partial Agreements which made a lump-sum contribution to the general scheme, depending on the number of staff, of 14% per staff member, paid by those Member States who were members of the partial agreement. In such cases the corresponding amounts of contributions to the guarantee fund would therefore also have to be adjusted. All these matters would have to be considered, possibly by the Rapporteur Group on Administrative Questions, so that the measure could then come into force.

He reminded the Deputies that the Secretary General was very much attached to the principle that Co-ordination should function normally, although the Chairman of the Co-ordinating Committee seemed to be increasingly moving in the opposite direction. In the reply to Assembly Recommendation 1102 (1989) the Deputies had not only expressed their support for genuine consultation but also their concern to examine periodically the functioning of Co- ordination. He consequently thought that it would be useful for the Deputies to hear the Chairman of the Co-ordinating Committee in the near future, as had been envisaged the previous year, and express their concern, as the OECD Council of Ministers had done, to see a genuine consultation procedure involving all parties in the functioning of Co-ordination. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 36 - Item 5

In conclusion, he proposed that no decisions should be adopted at the present meeting, or, if the Deputies thought otherwise, that they should express their determination to follow the main lines of the Co-ordinating Committee's report, attaching thereto two conditions, one enabling a number of technical aspects, particularly at Council level, to be properly identified, and the other providing for an interview with the Chairman of the Co-ordinating Committee in the very near future.

The Chairman thanked the Director of Administration for his explanations and said that he understood that the CCR had recommended that contributions to the pension fund be increased for actuarial reasons, but he was not sure whether there would be a further CCR Report. He also understood that the proper consultation procedures have not been gone through. The question that the Deputies therefore had to decide upon was whether it was sufficiently probable that more money would be needed for the pension found and, if so, whether they should take a provisional decision to start collecting money against this possible need early rather than late.

He thought that the thrust of the suggestion was that there should be a provisional increase, as Mr Gianardi had said, and, if the Deputies wished to make this decision, he could make some technical suggestions about how this additional fund should be used. He noted that four Delegations had already spoken in support of the CCR recommendations.

The Representative of the Netherlands also received instructions to support the recommendations made by the CCR. Having listened to the arguments put forward by Mr Gianardi, he noted that, in the past, tripartite consultations have taken place on a number of issues, among others, on temporary precautionary measures. In the debate at the OECD a very large majority of the member States had voted for these measures. He thought that this was a precedent to be followed.

He pointed out that his authorities were concerned about delaying the decision on pensions because it could contribute to a situation of insecurity and result in future generation's having to pay for the present days generation's comfort.

The Representative of the United Kingdom shared the views expressed by his Dutch colleague. He admitted that possibly final papers on the provisional temporary increase had not been not given to the Secretaries Generals' representatives with enough time to study them in detail but in his opinion it could not justify denying that there was a need for a substantial contribution to the pension fund. CONFIDENTIAL

- 37 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 5

He recalled that the modest measure which was now unanimously agreed in the CCR was one which his Government wished to see implemented without any conditions as soon as possible. He added, in response to other remarks by the Director of Administration, that the Government of the United Kingdom had a full confidence in the Chairman of the CCR.

The Representative of Germany supported his British colleague's opinion and said that his Delegation could not accept any conditions and would prefer to take a decision now.

The Representative of France said that her instructions were very firm and made no mention of conditions. She was therefore unable to accept them, and she shared the viewpoint of the British and German Representatives.

The Chairman, having heard no contrary opinion, suggested that the Secratariat circulate to Delegations the provisional and slightly modified draft, including the decision of principle on contibutions and certain explanations which did not seem to him to be conditions.

The Representative of the United Kingdom thought that all the Delegations that had spoken on this question wished to take a decision during this meeting in favour of an increase of 0,5 and 1 % of the pension contribution and therefore he suggested that the Deputies take that decision.

The Chairman suggested that the Secretariat circulate the paper, because the Deputies did not have the text of the decision and hoped that a decision could be taken at this meeting.

The Director of Administration agreed with the Chairman and said that the Secretariat should circulate the text of the decisions, because he noted from the reactions that it had used a word, "conditions", which the Deputies had perhaps found rather difficult. He agreed that it was probably an infelicitous word because the text did not really mean conditions, merely a number of important considerations. The draft decision stated that the principle of the 0.5% increase as of 1 February should be accepted. On the other hand, when taking such a decision one could not ignore the fact that it comprised a number of technical implications which would have to be reconsidered at a later date.

Lastly, he suggested taking account of the positions taken up by the co-ordinated organisations, including that of the OECD which had accepted the CCR's Recommendations in principle, attaching to its acceptance a number of specific amendments. No final decisions had yet been taken in NATO and the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, but it would seem that the two CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 38 - Item 5

organisations were to go a little further in their rejection of the recommendation. The Council of Europe's position was similar to that adopted by the Council of the OECD, the organisation with which the Council of Europe most often conducted close co-operation.

Decision

The Deputies decided to resume consideration of this item on the basis of the recommendations of the 15th Report of the Co-ordinating Committee on Remuneration (CCR) (CM(92)233) at their 484quater meeting (13 January 1993) and of a draft decision examined by the Rapporteur Group on Administrative Questions at its meeting on 12 January 1993. 484ter meeting - January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 39 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 6

6. STRENGTHENING THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION OF TERRORISM Assembly Recommendation 1170 (1991)

FIGHT AGAINST INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM IN EUROPE Assembly Recommendation 1199 (1992) (Concl(91)463/19, 467/7, (92)469/23, 484/21 and 42, 485/39, CM(92)183, Doc. 6587)

Decisions

The Deputies

1. adopted the following reply to Assembly Recommendation 1170 (1991) and 1199 (1992):

"1. The Committee of Ministers has noted with interest Assembly Recommendation 1170 (1991) of 25 November 1991 on strengthening the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism. At its 469th meeting (January 1992), it adopted an interim reply to the Recommendation drawing the attention of the Governments of member States to the Recommendation, more particularly to its paragraph 6.

The Committee of Ministers also refers to the reply it made on 7 October 1991 to Written Question No. 314 by Mr Bruton.

The Committee of Ministers has since consulted the European Committee on Crime Problems (CDPC) and is in a position to make the following reply, on the basis of the opinion of the CDPC, to the proposals set out in Recommendation 1170 (1991).

2. Under the terms of Article 1 of the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (ETS 90), for the purposes of extradition between Contracting States, none of a series of expressly listed offences shall be regarded as a political offence or as an offence connected with a political offence or as an offence inspired by political motives. One of the effects of this article is to modify the legal consequences of the provisions of Article 3, paragraph 1, of the European Extradition Convention (ETS 24). The latter Convention lays down that extradition will not be accorded if the offence for CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 40 - Item 6

which it is requested is considered by the requested Party as a political offence or as an offence connected with a political offence (the "political offence exception"). The Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism tends in this way to eliminate the possibility for the requested State to rely on the political nature of the offence for the purposes of opposing a request for extradition.

The choice of offences appearing in Article 1 of the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism is intended to cover certain particularly odious crimes which had previously been mentioned in United Nations treaties against certain acts of terrorism, or offences regarded as being so serious that they needed to be equated with such offences.

The Committee of Ministers also wishes to recall the terms of its reply to Written Question No. 314 by Mr Bruton about the amendment of Article 1 of the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism:

"The main value of the Convention lies in principle not in the enumeration of the kind of offences in Article 1 but rather in the political message which is conveyed by the Convention."

3. In paragraph 7 of its Recommendation, the Assembly expresses the view that it would be desirable for the weak spots to be eliminated from the Convention. In its reply to Written Question No. 314 by Mr Bruton, the Committee of Ministers already replied to certain criticisms on this point. It also considers that at the moment the prospects of effecting adjustments to the Convention are not sufficiently realistic.

4. In connection with the recommendation in paragraph 8 of the Assembly text (definition of terrorism as a crime against humanity), it is undeniable that acts of terrorism constitute a threat to the most fundamental human rights. Nevertheless, bearing in mind in particular the work carried out by the Committee of Experts on the application of penal law to acts of terrorism (PC-TE) and before it by the group of Ministers' counsellors concerning terrorism, the Committee of Ministers considers that the time has not yet come to try to reach consensus on the definition of terrorism and consequently to examine the highly problematic question of including this concept - which has not been defined - in the category of crimes against humanity. CONFIDENTIAL

- 41 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 6

5. Lastly, in the view of the Committee of Ministers, the Assembly proposals in paragraph 9 are already being carried out to a considerable extent, notably by means of the member States' national legislation and the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism, and it urges member States to continue the efforts to achieve these ends.

6. The Committee of Ministers has started the examination of Assembly Recommendation 1199 (1992) on the fight against international terrorism in Europe. It recalls that it has already expressed views on certain aspects of the issue raised in the Recommendation 1199 (1992) in its reply to Recommendation 1170 (1991).

7. The Committee of Ministers, having in mind paragraph 9 of Recommendation 1199 (1992) which concerns in particular co-operation with Central and Eastern European countries, would point out that the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (ETS 90) is open for signature by these countries as soon as they become members of the Council of Europe. With the exception of Czechoslovakia, none of the countries which have recently joined the Organisation has yet acceded to this Convention.

8. The Committee of Ministers also recalls that under Article 9 of the Convention the European Committee on Crime Problems (CDPC) is responsible for monitoring implementation of the Convention.

Since the countries applying for accession to the Council of Europe have observer status with the Steering Committee, the Committee of Ministers has asked that Committee to consider, in conjunction with the delegations from those countries and in the light of the fact, whether or not an activity of the type proposed by the Assembly should be included in the Intergovernmental Programme of Activities, which could possibly be qualified "Greater Europe" activity.

9. The Committee of Ministers has drawn the attention of the Governments of member States to the Recommendation 1199 (1992), more particularly to its paragraph 9."; CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - 42 - Item 6

2. as far as the Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1199 (1992) on the fight against international terrorism in Europe is concerned, agreed to bring it to the attention of their Governments, drawing their attention more particularly to paragraph 9. 484ter meeting - 8 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 43 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Item 7

7. COMMUNICATION FROM THE SECRETARY GENERAL

The text of the communication of the Secretary General concerning the visit of Ambassador Arifhodzic, Permanent Representative of Bosnia-Herzegovina in Tunisia, has been distributed by "navette" to all delegations on 12 January 1993.

484ter meeting - 8 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- a1 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter

APPENDIX 1

484ter MEETING OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES (Strasbourg, 8 (10 am) January 1993 - A level)

AGENDA AND ORDER OF BUSINESS

1. Adoption of the Agenda and of the Order of Businesss (Notes No. 9533 of 6.1.93)

2. Relations between the Council of Europe, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, after the dissolution of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic (Concl(92)484bis/47, CM(92)238, Misc(92)94, CM(93)1 and 2) (Notes No. 9511 of 15.12.92 and Add. of 6.1.93)

3. Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) - Draft Recommendation No R(92)... of the Committee of Ministers to member States on effective access to the law and to justice for the very poor and draft Explanatory Memorandum thereon (Concl(92)485/21b, CM(92)214, Appendix III) (Notes No. 9532 of 17.12.92)

4. Staff Salaries - Coordinating Committee on Remuneration (CCR) - Adjustment of remuneration of the staff of the Coordinated Organisations - 14th Report (Concl(92)485/36, CM(92)232 and Add. I and II) (Notes No. 9534 of 18.12.92)

5. Coordinating Committee on Remuneration (CCR) - Pension scheme: Rate of contribution - 15th report (Concl(92)485/1 and 37, CM(92)233) (Notes No. 9535 of 18.12.92)

6. Strengthening the European Convention on the suppression of terrorism -Assembly Recommendation 1170 (1991) Fight against international terrorism in Europe - Assembly Recommendation 1199 (1992) (Concl(91)463/19, 467/7, (92)469/23, 484/21 and 42, 485/39, CM(92)183, Doc. 6587) (Notes No. 9536 of 5.1.93)

7. Communication from the Secretary General

484ter meeting - 8 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- a3 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter

APPENDIX 2 (item 3)

RECOMMENDATION No. R(93)1

OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS TO MEMBER STATES ON EFFECTIVE ACCESS TO THE LAW AND TO JUSTICE FOR THE VERY POOR1

(adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 8 January 1993 at the 484ter meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15.b of the Statute of the Council of Europe,

1. Recalling that, under the European Convention on Human Rights, member States proclaimed their attachment to human rights and fundamental freedoms;

2. Referring to Resolutions (76) 5 on legal aid in civil, commercial and administrative matters and (78) 8 on legal aid and advice, to Recommendation No. R (81) 7 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on measures facilitating access to justice and to the United Nations Resolutions on human rights and extreme poverty, in particular Resolution 46/121 of 17.12.1991 of the General Assembly and Resolution 1992/11 of 18.2.1992 of the Commission on Human Rights, as well as to the study prepared by the International Movement ATD-Fourth World entitled "Towards justice accessible to all: legal aid machinery and certain local initiatives as seen by families affected by severe poverty" [H(92)2];

3. Concerned at the situation of the very poor, understood to mean persons who are particularly deprived, marginalised or excluded from society both in economic and in social and cultural terms;

1 When this Recommendation was adopted, and in application of Article 10.2.c. of the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies, the Representative of Austria reserved the right of his Government to comply with it or not. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - a4 - Appendix 2

4. Considering that this situation of severe poverty continues to deprive men and women of the effective enjoyment of human rights which must be secured for all without distinction, in accordance with Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights;

5. Convinced that efforts to promote access to the law and to justice will only be fully effective as part of a comprehensive, coherent and forward-looking policy aimed at combating severe poverty in co-operation with the population groups concerned;

6. Recalling the principle of the indivisibility of human rights which implies that the enjoyment of civil and political rights such as those enshrined particularly in Articles 6(3)c and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights is not effective if economic, social and cultural rights are not equally protected;

7. Reaffirming that attachment to human rights is linked to respect for human dignity, especially as regards access to the law and to justice for the very poor;

8. Recalling that in addition to the right of access to the law and to justice provided for in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the other provisions of the Convention and particularly Articles 2, 3 and 8 are equally applicable to the very poor, as are the other legal instruments of the Council of Europe such as the European Social Charter;

9. Considering that this Recommendation is intended to improve, especially with regard to the very poor, existing legal advice and legal aid systems, and therefore to complement existing machinery with regard to the other categories of people for which the systems were designed,

Recommends that the governments of member States

I. Facilitate access to the law for the very poor ("the right to the protection of the law") by:

a. promoting, where necessary, action to make the legal profession aware of the problems of the very poor;

b. promoting legal advice services for the very poor; CONFIDENTIAL

- a5 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter Appendix 2

c. defraying the cost of legal advice for the very poor through legal aid, without prejudice to the payment of a modest contribution by the persons benefiting from such advice where this is required by domestic law;

d. promoting the setting up where the need seems to appear of advice centres in underprivileged areas;

II. Facilitate effective access to quasi-judicial methods of conflict resolution for the very poor by:

a. increasing the involvement of non-governmental organisations or voluntary organisations providing support to the very poor in quasi-judicial forms of conflict resolution such as mediation and conciliation;

b. extending the benefit of legal aid or any other form of assistance to such methods of conflict resolution;

III. Facilitate effective access to the courts for the very poor, especially by the following means:

a. extending legal aid or any other form of assistance to all judicial instances (civil, criminal, commercial, administrative, social, etc.) and to all proceedings, contentious or non- contentious, irrespective of the capacity in which the persons concerned act;

b. extending legal aid to very poor persons who are stateless or aliens, in any event where they are habitually resident in the territory of the member State in which the proceedings are to be conducted;

c. recognising the right to be assisted by an appropriate counsel, as far as possible of one's choice, who will receive adequate remuneration;

d. limiting the circumstances in which legal aid may be refused by the competent authorities chiefly to those cases in which the grounds for refusal are inadmissibility, manifestly insufficient prospects of success, or cases in which the granting of legal aid is not necessary in the interests of justice;

e. simplifying the procedure for granting legal aid to the very poor, and considering the immediate granting of provisional legal aid wherever possible; CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter - a6 - Appendix 2

f. considering the possibility of enabling non-governmental organisations or voluntary organisations providing support to the very poor, to give assistance, in the context of access to the courts, to persons who are in a position of such dependence and deprivation that they cannot defend themselves; this appraisal should concern both proceedings before national tribunals and proceedings before the European Commission and Court of Human Rights and other international instances of judicial nature;

IV. Consult whenever possible, in the framework of their general policy aimed at combatting severe poverty, non- governmental organisations interested by the field covered by the present Recommendation and voluntary organisations providing support to the very poor. 484ter meeting - 8 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- a7 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter

APPENDIX 3 (item 4)

RESOLUTION (93)1

ON REVISION OF THE REGULATIONS GOVERNING STAFF SALARIES AND ALLOWANCES

(adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 8 January 1993 at the 484ter meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 16 of the Statute of the Council of Europe,

Having regard to Resolution (81)18 on the Regulations governing staff salaries and allowances, and to Resolution (81)20 on the Council of Europe's Staff Regulations incorporating the regulations concerning salaries and allowances at Appendix IV;

Having regard to the 14th report of the Co-ordinating Committee on Remuneration and the recommendations on that basis, approved by the Committee of Ministers at the 484ter meeting of the Deputies;

Whereas, as a result of that approval, the Regulations governing salaries and allowances of Council of Europe staff need to be revised;

At the proposal of the Secretary General,

Resolves as follows:

Single article:

The relevant tables appended to the Regulations governing staff salaries and allowances, setting out the basic salary scales and other elements of remuneration, are replaced, with effect from 1 July 1992, by the tables applicable to Council of Europe Secretariat staff which are appended to the 14th report of the Co-ordinating Committee on Remuneration (CM(92)232, Add.I), with the exception of the salary scales for B and C grade staff members for France, Belgium and Germany which are replaced by the salary scale set out in document CM(92)232, Add. II.

484ter meeting - 8 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- a9 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484ter

APPENDIX 4 (item 4)

RESOLUTION (93)2

ON REMUNERATION OF SPECIALLY APPOINTED OFFICIALS

(adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 8 January 1993 at the 484ter meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 16 of the Statute of the Council of Europe,

Having regard to Resolution (71)8 on the remuneration of specially appointed officials of the Council of Europe, as last amended by Resolution (91)55;

Having regard to the decision reached at the 484ter meeting of Ministers' Deputies in the light of the 14th report of the Co- ordinating Committee on Remuneration on the new salary scales for members of the permanent staff with effect from 1 July 1992;

Whereas, as a result of that decision, and in accordance with Article 2 of Resolution (71)8 referred to above, new basic salary scales for the specially appointed officials of the Council of Europe need to be established,

Resolves as follows:

Single article:

The basic annual salaries laid down in Article 1, paragraph (a), of Resolution (71)8 as last amended by Resolution (91)55, shall be adjusted as follows with effect from 1 July 1992:

- Secretary General 787.396 FF

- Deputy Secretary General and Clerk of the Assembly having the rank of Deputy Secretary General 745.214 FF

484quater meeting - 13 January 1993

- i - CM/Del/Concl(93)484quater

SUMMARY

Page

List of those present 1

1. Adoption of the Agenda and of the Order of Business 3

2. Relations between the Council of Europe, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, after the dissolution of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic 5

3. Coordinating Committee on Remuneration (CCR) - Pension scheme: Rate of contribution - 15th report 7

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 484 QUATER MEETING OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES (Strasbourg, 13 January 1993 (9.30 am) - A level) AGENDA AND ORDER OF BUSINESS al

APPENDIX 2 RESOLUTION (93)3 on the (item 2) Czech Republic a3

APPENDIX 3 RESOLUTION (93)4 (item 2) on the Slovak Republic a5

484quater meeting - 13 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 1 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484 quater

The 484quater meeting of the Ministers' Deputies opened at A level on Wednesday, 13 January 1993 at 9.30am under the chairmanship of Mr. N. Marshall, Deputy for the Minister for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom.

PRESENT

AUSTRIA Mr H. Winkler Vice-Chairman Mrs E.-M. Koprolin

BELGIUM Mr H. Fonder Mr P. Dubuisson

BULGARIA Mr M. Milouchev

CYPRUS Mr C. Papademas

DENMARK Mrs M-L. Overvad Mr J. Faerkel

FINLAND Mr H. Rotkirch Mr P. Hyvönen

FRANCE Mrs D. de Boisjolly-Hoyet

GERMANY Mr K-H. Neukirchen Mr K. Praller

GREECE Mr G. Coptsidis Mrs V. Dicopoulou

HUNGARY Mr J. Perenyi Mrs J. Jozsef

ICELAND -

IRELAND Mr J. Morahan

ITALY Mr D. Vecchioni Mr G. Raimondi

LIECHTENSTEIN Mr J. Wolf

LUXEMBOURG -

MALTA -

NETHERLANDS Mr J.S.L. Gualtherie Van Weezel Mr A. Bijlsma CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484 quater - 2 -

NORWAY Mr S. Knudsen Mrs S.G. Eriksen

POLAND Mr J. Regulski Mr J. Wereszczynski

PORTUGAL Mr L.F. de Castro Mendes Miss M.J. Morais Pires

SAN MARINO Mr G. Ceccoli Miss M. Faetanini

SPAIN Mr E. Artacho Castellano Mr M. Hernandez Ruigomez

SWEDEN Mrs I. Larsson Mr B. Hedberg

SWITZERLAND Mr Y. Moret Mr J.-P. Villard

TURKEY Mr C. Altan Mr A. Meriç Mr Y. Belet

UNITED KINGDOM Mr N.H. Marshall, Chairman Mr J. Jamieson Mr A. Staunton 484quater meeting - 13 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 3 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484 quater Item 1

1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND OF THE ORDER OF BUSINESS

Decision

The Deputies adopted the agenda and the order of business for their 484quater meeting (13 January 1993 - A level), as it appears at Appendix 1 to these Conclusions.

484quater meeting - 13 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 5 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484 quater Item 2 2. RELATIONS BETWEEN THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC, AFTER THE DISSOLUTION OF THE CZECH AND SLOVAK FEDERAL REPUBLIC (Concl(92)484bis/47, Concl(93)484ter/2, CM(92)238, Misc(92)94, CM(93)1 and 2)

Decisions

The Deputies

1. adopted Resolution (93)3 on the Czech Republic, as it appears at Appendix 2 to these Conclusions;

2. adopted Resolution (93)4 on the Slovak Republic, as it appears at Appendix 3 to these Conclusions.

484 quater meeting - 13 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- 7 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484 quater Item 3 3. CO-ORDINATING COMMITTEE ON REMUNERATION (CCR) Pension scheme: rate of contribution 15th report (Concl(92)485/1 and 37, Concl(93)484ter/5, CM(92)233)

The Secretary General made the following statement:

"I am concerned that our staff pension scheme should remain viable, and to this end I believe that it is proper to envisage a possible increase in the staff contribution to ensure its funding.

Nonetheless, in common with my colleagues, the Secretaries General of the other Co-ordinated Organisations, I find that the proposal which has been submitted to you is a little premature, first because we don't yet have solid actuarial data for all the Organisations, and secondly because in our view the proposal has not been preceded by the concertation required by the Co- ordination system.

Regarding the first point, while it is true that evaluations have been carried out in various organisations, each organisation used its own method and its own actuaries, and needless to say the outcome was that there were differences of opinion. Two actuaries were then asked to evaluate all the organisations. The work is not quite finished so there is some uncertainty whether contributions will actually need raising and if so, by how much. The solution we are moving towards is, I think, a reasonably good one: you agree a 0.5% rise but the money is put into a special blocked account so as not to prejudge the actuaries' findings. That strikes me as a reasonable precautionary measure.

The second point, as I said, is a procedural matter. The procedure it adopted on the pensions issue struck us as somewhat authoritarian and as disregarding the undertakings that had been given about genuine tripartite consultation. Staff representatives have protested about the lack of consultation. I have several times informed you of these misgivings, which relate not only to the pensions issue but to the whole question of the setting of levels of remuneration. The machinery is being mishandled and the secretaries general as well as the staff representatives increasingly have the impression of being excluded and of decisions being taken unilaterally by the government representatives - contrary, incidentally, to your own recommendations. That is why I think a paragraph 5 needs adding to the decisions to make it clear there was concern about the co- ordination system and more particularly the consultation arrangements degenerating. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484 quater - 8 - Item 3

Those were my two substantive and procedural reasons for initially preferring a postponement of the 0.5% increase. However, a clear majority of you seem to be in favour of raising the contribution rate right away. I can support this, on the understanding that the decision sends the right messages.

The Chairman thanked the Secretary General for her explanation and said that a number of Governments had the same suspicion of the degeneration of the co-ordination system.

The Representative of Norway thought that if the co-ordination provided insufficient consultation either with the staff or with the Secretaries General, the whole question of co-ordination should be reexamined and especially the question of whether or not it was in the Council of Europe's interest to stay in it.

He personally was convinced that the Council of Europe would take advantage of leaving the co-ordination system and negotiate only with its own staff. Subject of course to the agreement of the latter.

The Representative of Switzerland said that this was not the time to start discussing the question of co-ordination. He disagreed with his Norwegian colleague and was in favour of the co- ordination system. It had worked very well so far and a new system was to come into operation on 1 June 1993 which would accommodate the legitimate desire not only of staff but also of the secretaries general for their voices to be heard.

The Chairman proposed not to start the debate on co-ordination in general but to approve the draft decisions in Notes 9546. CONFIDENTIAL

- 9 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484 quater Item 3

Decisions

The Deputies

1. took note of the 15th report of the Co-ordinating Committee on Remuneration concerning the pension scheme (rate of contribution) and particularly the recommendation by the CCR as well as the opinions expressed by the Secretaries General and the staff representatives concerning the procedure itself;

2. decided that, pending completion of work on the consolidation and review of the results of the actuarial studies, on the basis of the findings of actuarial experts, the staff rate of contribution to the Pension Scheme be increased to 7.5%, as a temporary precautionary measure, with effect at 1 February 1993;

3. decided that the additional amounts collected in respect of the increase of 0.5%, will be placed in a blocked account until a final decision has been taken;

4. instructed the Secretary General to present a report by 15 February 1993 on the administrative measures to accompany such a decision in order to ensure its implementation within the specific framework of the Council of Europe;

5. agreed to invite the Chairman of the CCR to an exchange of views with the Ministers' Deputies on the functioning of the co- ordination system.

484quater meeting - 13 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- a1 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484quater

APPENDIX 1

484quater MEETING OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES (Strasbourg, 13 (9.30 am) January 1993 - A level)

AGENDA AND ORDER OF BUSINESS

1. Adoption of the Agenda and of the Order of Business (Notes No. 9544 of 12.1.93)

2. Relations between the Council of Europe, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, after the dissolution of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic (Concl(92)484bis/47, Concl(93)484ter/2, CM(92)238, Misc(92)94, CM(93)1 and 2) (Notes No. 9545 of 12.1.93)

3. Coordinating Committee on Remuneration (CCR) - Pension scheme: Rate of contribution - 15th report (Concl(92)485/1 and 37, Concl(93)484ter/5, CM(92)233) (Notes No. 9546 of 11.1.93 and Add. of 12.1.93)

484quater meeting - 13 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- a3 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484quater

APPENDIX 2 (item 2)

RESOLUTION (93)3

ON THE CZECH REPUBLIC

(adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 13 January 1993 at the 484quater meeting of the Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers,

Recalling its decision, expressed at its 8th Session in May 1951, to consult the Parliamentary Assembly before inviting a State to become a member or associate member of the Council of Europe in conformity with the provisions of the Statute;

Considering that the Government of the Czech Republic, in its letter of 1 January 1993 addressed to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, expressed the wish to be invited to become a member of the Council of Europe and declared its readiness to respect the principles stated in Article 3 of the Statute;

Having noted with satisfaction the interest shown by the Czech Republic in acceding to the Organisation,

Invites the Parliamentary Assembly to express its opinion on the matter and brings the following considerations to the attention of the Assembly at this stage:

First of all, the Committee of Ministers considers that the Czech Republic, one of the successor States of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, which was a member of the Council of Europe from 21 February 1991 to 31 December 1992, should have the possibility of joining the Organisation at the earliest opportunity, having regard to the requirements of the Statute, that is, implementation of the principles of pluralist parliamentary democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law.

The Committee of Ministers noted with satisfaction that, according to the above-mentioned letter, the Czech Republic considers itself bound, as from 1 January 1993, by the European Convention on Human Rights and the Protocols thereto, including Articles 25 and 46, that is, the right of individual petition and the compulsory jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, as they had been accepted by the former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. This decision, combined with the will expressed by the Czech Republic to consider itself bound by all CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484 quater - a4 - Appendix 2

the other Council of Europe conventions to which the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic was a Party, is serious evidence of the intention of the new State's authorities to comply fully with the principles which govern membership of the Council of Europe. The Committee of Ministers believes that everything possible should be done to reduce the duration and consequences of the period separating the dissolution of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic from the accession of the Czech Republic to the Council of Europe.

The Committee of Ministers stresses the importance it attaches to the respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all persons living on the territory of the Czech Republic, including those belonging to national minorities and ethnic groups.

The Committee of Ministers also wishes to highlight the political importance of the commitments which membership of the Council of Europe implies in regard to respect for the rules governing the democratic process and to the solving of problems through political dialogue. Membership of the Council of Europe also implies the preparedness to settle by dialogue and negotiation any outstanding question in relations between member States. 484quater meeting - 13 January 1993

CONFIDENTIAL

- a5 - CM/Del/Concl(93)484quater

APPENDIX 3 (item 2)

RESOLUTION (93)4

ON THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC

(adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 13 January 1993 at the 484quater meeting of the Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers,

Recalling its decision, expressed at its 8th Session in May 1951, to consult the Parliamentary Assembly before inviting a State to become a member or associate member of the Council of Europe in conformity with the provisions of the Statute;

Considering that the Government of the Slovak Republic, in its letter of 1 January 1993 addressed to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, expressed the wish to be invited to become a member of the Council of Europe and declared its readiness to respect the principles stated in Article 3 of the Statute;

Having noted with satisfaction the interest shown by the Slovak Republic in acceding to the Organisation,

Invites the Parliamentary Assembly to express its opinion on the matter and brings the following considerations to the attention of the Assembly at this stage:

First of all, the Committee of Ministers considers that the Slovak Republic, one of the successor States of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, which was a member of the Council of Europe from 21 February 1991 to 31 December 1992, should have the possibility of joining the Organisation at the earliest opportunity, having regard to the requirements of the Statute, that is, implementation of the principles of pluralist parliamentary democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law.

The Committee of Ministers noted with satisfaction that, according to the above-mentioned letter, the Slovak Republic considers itself bound, as from 1 January 1993, by the European Convention on Human Rights and the Protocols thereto, including Articles 25 and 46, that is, the right of individual petition and the compulsory jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, as they had been accepted by the former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. This decision, combined with the will CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(93)484 quater - a6 - Appendix 3

expressed by the Slovak Republic to consider itself bound by all the other Council of Europe conventions to which the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic was a Party, is serious evidence of the intention of the new State's authorities to comply fully with the principles which govern membership of the Council of Europe. The Committee of Ministers believes that everything possible should be done to reduce the duration and consequences of the period separating the dissolution of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic from the accession of the Slovak Republic to the Council of Europe.

The Committee of Ministers stresses the importance it attaches to the respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all persons living on the territory of the Slovak Republic, including those belonging to national minorities and ethnic groups.

The Committee of Ministers also wishes to highlight the political importance of the commitments which membership of the Council of Europe implies in regard to respect for the rules governing the democratic process and to the solving of problems through political dialogue. Membership of the Council of Europe also implies the preparedness to settle by dialogue and negotiation any outstanding question in relations between member States.