COUNCIL OF EUROPE CONSEIL DE L' EUROPE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS

^5th session

Strasbourg, Confidential CM (69) PV M-

MINUTES of the sitting held on 12 December 1969 at 10 a.m., CMPV013 at OECD Headquarters, 19 rue de Franqueville, Paris

PRESENT; MM. K. Waldheim AUSTRIA P. Harmel BELGIUM S. Kypr ianou CYPRUS P. Hartling DENMARK J. de Lipkowski (1) PRANCE V7;- Scheel FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF- GERMANY P. Pipinelis GREECE H.S. Bjornsson (2) ICELAND . P.J. Hillery IRELAND D. Coppo (J>) • ITALY V. (1) Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, replacing Mr. M. Schumann, Minister for Foreign Affairs. (2) Ambassador Extraordinary- and Plenipotentiary, Permanent Representative of Iceland to the Council of Europe, replacing Mr. E. Jonsson, Minister for Foreign Affairs. (J') Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, replacing Mr. A. Moro, Minister for Foreign Affairs (Chairman).

16.257 02.2/11 CM (69) PV ^• - 2 -

MM. G. Thorn LUXEMBOURG G. Borg Olivier- MALTA P.J. Gelderman (1) NETHERLANDS G. Lyng NORWAY T. Nilsson' SWEDEN W. Spuhler SWITZERLAND I.S. 9a£layangil TURKEY- -••"-• G. Thorns on (2) UNITED. KINGDOM

L. Toncic-Sorinj Secretary General S. Sforza Deputy Secretary General H. Leleu Director of Political Affairs H. Beesley Secretary-of the Committee of Ministers

Mr. A. MORO,-. the Italian Minister for Foreign Affairs, took the Chair at 10 a.m. The Chairman declared open the- M-5th session .of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. After congratulating Mr. Toncic-Sorinj on his election as Secretary General and paying tribute to his qualities, he called him to make his solemn declaration in accordance with the Statute. 1. Solemn declaration by the Secretary General.. . . The. Secretary General,. Mr. Lujo Tonclc Soring .made the solemn declaration laid down by Article }6 (e) of the Statute of the Council of Europe. ./"• (1) Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Permanent Representative of the Netherlands to the Council of Europe, replacing Mr. J.M.A.H. Luns, Minister for Foreign Affaire. (2) Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, replacing Mr. M. Stewart, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. - 3 - CM (69) PV 4

The Chairman thanked the Secretary General and took formal note of his declaration. 2. Adoption "of the agenda The Chairman said that the morning sitting would end at • 1 p.m. and the afternoon sitting begin at 3.30 p.m. He pointed out that a provisional agenda had been drawn up by the Secretary General. Item 3 was entitled "Situation in Greece - Recommendations 5^7 and 569 - Motion for the suspension of Greece". This it.m had been placed on the agenda for three reasons. Firstly, at its last session in London in May 1969 the Committee had discussed Recommendation 5^7 of the Consultative Assembly and in Resolution (69) .18 had decided to keep the recommendation on its agenda and had declared itself ready to take a decision at the present session. Secondly, the Consultative Assembly had addressed to the Committee of Ministers Recommendation 569 on recent developments in Greece in the juridical, field. The examination of this . recommendation was included in item 3 at the request of the Ministers' Deputies. 'Lastly, the governments of Denmark, Norway and Sweden had announced the tabling of a formal motion concerning Greece, in application of the Statute of the Council of Europe. If there was no objection to the inclusion of this item in the agenda, as worded, in document CM (69) OJ 2 prov., its inclusion would be considered as final. Otherwise the Committee would have to decide by a simple majority vote in accordance with Article 20 of the Statute. Mr. S. Kyprianou, (Cyprus), asked the Chairman on what motion the vote wnich he had said might be necessary ivould be taken, as he believed it was necessary to clarify the procedural position. • .

The Chairman noted that there was no objection to the : inclusion of item 3 or of any of the other items. He said that the French delegation proposed to make an announcement concerning the .Council buildings, and suggested including it under item.6 "Other business". The agenda, thus amonded, was adopted.

./. CM (69) PV ]4 - 4 -

3. Situation in Greece - Recommendations 5^7 and- $69 - ' ' ' Motion for the suspension of Greece The Chairman, recalling that this item had been included at the roouest of the Dan.i.sh., .Norwegian-and Swedish Governments, invitod the representative of one of these governments "to present the 'motion submitted to the Committee. Mr. T. Nils son (.Sweden) said that at the meeting of the Coramit'coe of Ministers in London on 6 May 1969 a resolution on the situation in Greece was adopted in which it was explicitly declared that the Committee was ready to take a decision at the present meeting on the basis of the recommendations of the Consultative Assembly. In its . Recommendation 54-7 the Assembly had concluded, that Greece seriously violated the Statute of the Council and consequently did not fulfil the conditions for membership. The Assembly recommended the Committee of Ministers to draw its conclusions to the attention of the Greek Government and to take action having regard to Articles J>, 7 and 8 of the Statute. The Committee of Ministers had already acted by drawing the conclusions of the parliamentarians .to the attention of the Greek Government. The Ministers thereby had hoped, that Greece would realise the necessity of returning to a democratic regime without delay or withdraw from the Council of Europe. What, was the responsibility today when Greece had not fulfilled, the hopes expressed at the last meeting. Certainly • the credibility of the Committee of Ministers and of the Council of Europe v:as at stake. The confidence in and the respect for the Council of Europe would be seriously harmed if the Ministers could not now arrive at a firm decision in this matter, The Committee had not taken any rash decisions in this -grave '.-uestion. Its attitude had up to now, rather been one of wait and sec. Nor had the Assembly, consisting of responsible politicians of all shades of democratic political opinion been over hasty in their actions. They and the Ministers had over ' the years urged Greece to return to democratic conditions. In the Committee of Ministers and in-other organs of'the Council of Europe tho Greek Government had been given ample time to explain and to correct the situation. But now the moment had come when. as members of .the Council of Europe and as representatives of governments in democratic nations the Committee had to take a decision implying action.

./. - 5 - CM (69) PV If

The Statute of the Council of Europe left no doubts as to the conditions for membership. The Statute was a mutual contract and it was a joint responsibility to see to it that, it was respected. Had anything happened since the meeting in May which indicated that Greece was now willing to follow the principles which'were fundamental for the work of the Council of Europe? Not in the opinion of the Swedish Government. Now and then the Ministers 'had listened to Greek declarations, as they^ • did in London already seven months ago, that Greece would restore human rights and eventu?lly return to democracy. New laws had been promulgated and a few more articles of the constitution had come into force. This might sound promising. But these laws were not inspired by democratic ideals. As regards the constitution, Mr. Nilsson mentioned that the first parllamentary elections would be carried out -by the national revolutionary government and the.second depend on its decrees. So long a;: civil liberties were suppressed and there'was no other indication of a speedy return to .democracy, one was cntitle.d to doubt that elections would bo democratic. And it should not be- forgotten that Greece was still governed by martial law with all that this implied of arbitrariness. Against that background even a timetable of gradual restoration of human, rights and civil liberties did not inspire his government with any confidence. Concrete proof .by solid actions showing a change of heart of the Greek Government was needed. In.the May resolution, the hope was expressed that the report of the European Commission of Human Rights would be made available to the Committee of Ministers as soon as possible. Some governments had earlier stated that they did not wish to take a decision on the recommendation of the. Assembly until the report had been transmitted to the Committee. The Commission's careful-and. thorough investigation should not be discussed at the present meeting but the report was available to governments. Mr. Nilsson wished in this context to refer to the note dated 7 December 1969 from the Greek Permanent Representative to the Secretary General. In this note a language was used which, by far, exceeded what the Committee was used and willing to listen to. The Swedish Government entirely supported the Secretary General when in his reply he had expressed the strongest reservations as regards the allegations contained in the note. • ./. CM (69) PV H - 6 -

The .Swedish Government v.ras anxious to pay tribute to the objective and arduous legal work of the Commission. But it could not be accepted that the proceedings before that organ were used as an argument for not accepting the political responsibility the Committee had under the Statute. It. had been suggested that the Ministers should postpone the decision in view of the fact that they could not deal with the report of the Commission. A case before the. Commission or the Court did, however, in no way prejudice the powers vested in the Committee when it acted under the Statute. The sub-judice argument, which never -had been valid, should not prevent a decision. Other arguments for a postponement of a decision had also ^ been heard. Political, commercial or strategic reasons for yet another delay had. been advanced. But they were not relevant if the Ministers acted as they had to act, namely in accordance with their obligations under the Statute. A -further postponement of the unavoidable decision vrould seriously weaken the respect for the ideals for which the Council of Europe stood. This was a serious juncture in the history of the Council of Europe-, because it was grave when the Committee was asked to suspend a member. In the hope that the decision would be agreed to by as many member states as possible the Scandinavian delegations had • accepted to amend their resolution in accordance with a proposal from the German delegation.. According to the Statute the Committee could have gone even further but in the hope that the Greek people would -understand that Europe expected Greece to return to democracy, the Scandinavian—' delegations suggested that Greece be suspended from the 'organisation to which Greece had no right to belong under its present regime. The Greek people would certainly understand that it was its present, government's policy which did not correspond to the obliga- tions of the organisation. True to the democratic principles the Committee had first tried to persuade Greece to restore democracy. Now it had come to a moment when persuasion uas not enough. The Ministers would have to take a firm decision. Finally, Mr. Nilsson mentioned that the draft resolution presented by the delegations of Denmark, Norway and Sweden with amendments proposed by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany, which he had introduced, had been distributed at the opening of the meeting (Misc. 4-1). ' ./. CM (69) PV 4

Ho understood that several other, delegations wished to join the original sponsors. The final version of the resolution, which circulated later in the Committee, read as follows: "Situation in Greece. Draft resolution presented by the delegations of Denmark, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Iceland, Ireland and the Federal- Republic of Germany, Italy and Belgium. The Committee of Ministers, Having considered Recommendation 5^7 of the Consultative Assembly, adopted on }0 January 1969 on tho situation in Greece, and Recommendation 569, adopted on 2 October 1969* on recent, developments in Greece in the juridical field, Recalling its Resolution (69) 18 of 6 May 1969 on the situation in. Greece, Having; decided in this resolution to bring the conclusions of Recommendation 54-7 to the attention of the Greek Government in order that the latter might draw the necessary conclusions, Having declared itself ready by the same resolution to take a decision^at the present meeting, Deploring that the Greek Government has not taken effective measures for the restoration of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Greece and for a speedy return to political liberty and the rule of law, Noting that the Greek Government has not drawn the necessary conclusions from Recommendation 5!^7 of the Consultative Assembly and Resolution (69) 18 of the Committee of Ministers; 1. Declares that Greece hag seriously violated Article 3 of the Statute containing the conditions for membership of the Council of Europe, 2. Suspends Greece from its rights of representation until such time as satisfactory progress has been made in that country in the normalisation of the situation with regard to human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as political liberty and the rule of law, CM (69) PV 4 - 8 -

5« Stresses the hope that this normalisation will be brought about soon and thereby allow the speedy return of Greek representatives to the Committee of Ministers and the Consultative Assembly as well as other bodies of the Council of Europe concerned, ^* - Pfe dares that it will decide in .due time whether the conditions set forth in paragraph 2 of this resolution have been fulfilled." The Chairman pointed out that since the motion had been . tabled under Article 8 of the Statute, any decision on its substance was governed by Arcicle 20 (d). This means that it required a two-thirds majority of the representatives casting a vo'co and a majority of the representatives entitled to sit on the Committee. Any representative could, however, propose in accordance with Article 20 (a) (vi) of the Statute., that the unanimity rule bo applied. In that case, the Committee would have to - decide by a preliminary vote. To be carried, the motion' required a two-thirds majority of the representatives casting a vote and a majority of the representatives entitled to sit on the Committee. Mr. S. Kyprianou (Cyprus), reverting to what he had said earlier, said that though there were procedural and legal aspects to their discussion, it was basically a political" problem-. He had his own views about procedure, but thought that they should first hear more of the political arguments. The Chairman had thought it advisable to give a few explanations regarding procedure. But he was ready to open the political debate at once. Mr. do Lipkowskl (France) said that he was about to make the same observations as Mr. Kyprianou had just made. Mr. Pipinelis (Greece) apologised in advance for the length of the statement he was going to have to make.. He would endeavour, however, to respect the Aristotelian principle that a speech should be long enough to enable listeners to guess the end right from the beginning, but short enough for them still to remember the beginning when it was nearing an end.

./. - 9 - ' ' CM (69)

It would be necessary to go back first of all and explain the.political facts of the Creek problem. Already by the end of the first world war, -the Greek parliamentary system had shown unmistakable signs of exhaustion: acute political tension, a succession of coups d'etat - in 1923, 1924, 1926, 1927, 1953 - civil war in 1935- Only the constant intervention of military power could save uncrowned democracy. It needed the iron hand of General Metaxas and the prestige of bh-3 restored monarchy for the country to recover its calm, reconstitute its finances and its army and bear up with honour against Italian and German aggression. After its liberation, Greece enjoyed, for a few months, the benefits of free institutions, for under the threat of a communist invasion,, the political parties rallied together. Immediately the danger receded, however, thoy resumed their former strife, provoking a further series of crises. It seemed as if nothing had be&n learned, nothing forgotten. But this was hardly surprising for, since the first world war., the country had been split into two large political clans whose fierce hostility rendered national . coexistence virtually impossible The administration, the. judiciary, the army and even the Church, instead of defending social and political order, became the parties' tools in overthrowing it. Moreover, Creeks from Asia Minor, destitute and despairing, sought refuge in Greece, frequently without being able to find work. There were one-and-a-half million of them in a population totalling five million. This explained why a part of the population let themselves be influenced by demagogues. The Communist party, taking advantage of the conflict between the two bourgeois groups, occupied a key situation enabling it to decide the countryts future. Anyone who was unaware of this could understand nothing of the Greek problem and had no right to voice an opinion. He (Mr. Pipinelis) was not alone in holding these views.: they were shared by many prominent Greeks. Mr. Constantin Caramaniis, a statesman who had served Greece well, realising that all his endeavours would lead nowhere, had resolved, .in 1963., 'to propose a revision of the Constitution, Explaining his proposal, he had said that public life in Greece was suffering from a serious organic rnalaise, although there was a hypocritical reluctance to speak of it," and that if the political leaders did not tnUe steps to protect the true

./. CM,(69) FV 4 - 10 -

freedom of all Greeks; there was a risk of the country being forced, against its will; to give up its free•institutions. In a statement, published in Le Monde in November 1967, that •'. is to say after the military revolution, Mr. Caramanlis agreed ' • that Greece was threatened by political and moral -anarchy and that democracy could be said to have been assassinated under a .free regime. ' • •• """'"'" President Papanastasiou, a left-wing bourgeois and the promoter .of the .most far-reaching social and political reforms carried out around .the .years 1930 and 1935 > .speaking .in the • Greek Chamber in 19^6 of the political life of the country, had referred to the legend of Sisyphus and said that a11 Greece's military triumphs had been reduced to naught by internal •' • dissension in .the same way as all efforts to gjve Greece an' ' • Impartial, and efficient administration;, and that the state was ' In danger of becoming paralysed.' • " Only recently, Mr. Theodorakis, a member of the extreme right wing; who was constantly attacking the present government; in a statement to the press had admitted, in a moment of lucidity and candour, that it'was not Colonel Papadopoulos who was to blame for the present situation.out that it was all the Greeks and, more particularly, the politicians, the men of letters and the members of the ruling class who must be held responsible. Thus, opinions were unanimous in diagnosing the. trouble. He (Mr. Pipineli.'i;.) who, never having- belonged to any party, • oxcept.that of tho King whom he had-defended when forced int'6:"""' •"" exJle;. could claim, a certain objectivity, acknowledged, like everyone else, that what was happening in Greece was the result, not of any mere accident, but of a need for radical reform. The reform advocated by Mr, Caramanlis had never materialised owing to opposition from the Chamber,-whrich was little inclined to reform itself. and likewise rejected all the.other proposals' submitted to it. The truth was that.there never had been any••' constitutional reform, .In Greece, that was not brought about by an insurrection: as in l8lK, 1.864 and 1911; such was the lesson :' •caught bj history. In the absence of reform, the situation steadily worsened: after.the fall of the Caramanlis government and the Piplnelis • '" government which succeeded it. political tension reached an • -': unimaginable pitch, so . that when, in 1966. Mr Stephanopoulos resigned in his turn, the formation of a minority government had

J ^ 11 - . CM (69) PV 4 provoked a veritable bar-rage of protest. In the ranks of the opposition, whose alliance with the extreme ""eft had created the threat of civil war., The popular front had then become the great 'dread of the orthodox elements It was difficult to say whether this fear was real 1,7 justified whether the communists would have seised, power immediately after the elections - thank Ood, it was never put to ':;he test - out such was the general apprehension that th-:- army's inter- vention was greeted by all r-'-reeks with immense relief, •' In these conditions, the revolutionary government had managed very quickly to restore order re^-; ve the confidence of business circles, strengthen a shaky economy pr-epnre * the reforms the country needed and finally, in September 1968, have a new constitution appro-ed. It may be that the instigators-of the" revolution had had no clear idea themselves • as to the principles they were going • to apply when they assumed power; the fact remained that, after the explosion, new.ideas had emerged and these were now contributing to reform the country. New men, new leaders^ with whom he had had the pleasure of working were now flocking in from all quarters; he saw with pride and confidence a new Greece being born. He thought it might' be well to linger .for a moment' on the Constitution, A'glance at i::-s content would leave one in no doubt -as to its democratic character For it recognised the' pre-eminence of elected authority over- executive authority by instituting minister;.al responsibility It prescribed - and this was new - a democratjc organisation of the parties. It clearly defined the King's pov/ors in order to avoid the ambiguities which had provoked several constitutional crises in the past. It embodied new . guarantees, based mainly on the Scandinavian model5 for the protection of individual rights . It provided for the setting up of an institutional High Court on i;he German model. It sought to facilitate parliamentary business by precluding obstructionism in ;.he Chambers, It incorporated and strengthened all the precaut.ons stipulated in the previous Constitution for the protection of individual rights. It could not, therefore., be maintained that its content'was-inconsistent with the Rome Convention. Moreover., the framers of the Constitution had provided for a whole series of institutional laws of fundamental •importance for the normalisation of the country, such as that relating to. the pr^ss or \;o fcho Nation**1 CounoiU.,

./. CM -(69) PV 4 . - 12 - responsible for assisting the royal government. This legislative work was, progressing very satisfactorily and he 'hoped that certain of the laws planned would be promulgated before the date fixed, that was to say before the end of 1970. The.government was also engaged in"organising the" political forces, old or new, capable of governing the country. It was to this end that, availing "itself of ' .;. • Article 138 of'the Constitution, it had temporarily postponed the application of certain constitutional" provisions.. For this reason, it had been suspected, quite unjustly, of wishing to delay their entry into force- indefinitely. He could .; affirm categorically that this -suspicion was unfounded. Immediate^ after it was 'formed, the Greek Government had said', and had never ceased to repeat, that it considered itself as a provisional-government whose sole task was to reform . . the political life of the' country, after which it would- leave the -field free to the political forces to dispute the power. - A series of practical measures had been taken which ' .. . proved that these were'-no mere intentions. An act passed as early as 28 November 1968 put an end to deportation by simple administrative decision, a rule dating from the, time of Venizelos in 1928, which all the parliamentary governments ..had applied.- The PAPADOPOULOS government had decided, on'the contrary, that-a court composed of five'judges would review. _„,,„ all the decisions taken' by the previous administrative courts; . - as a result, certain persons had already been freed and further, releases would follow. • ; . " _'-... In May 19&9 the government had reformed the committees of first instance which decided on deportation. Each of these now comprised a member of the judiciary. . . • On the same date, the government had is-sued a decree reinstating all officials under grade 6 who had been deprived - of their posts by-administrative decision. Higher grade officials would be reinstated after an examination, of their case by. committees comprising a judge. ". • In June 19^9, the right to strike had been granted to trade union organisations. In July and August 1969, the 'Greek Government, which had -.' been working out a normalisation plan since May, had specified • the measures to be taken to comply vrith ,the proposals made by the Commission of Human Rights. This plan provided for the «/• - 13 - CM (69) PV 4

integral application, without restriction, of the 1968 Constitution by the end of 1970. In addition to this general . time limit, a series of .dates were fixed, which so far had all been adhered to, A new act on the press was promulgated,, as. •• announced, on 15 September. The entry into force of Article 10 of the .Constitution was promised for 15 April 1970 at the : latest: this date.would be respected. Articles 110 and 111 . would enter im;o force on the- prescribed date. All the institutional laws .announced.', whether it be the Political Parties Act, .the Electoral. Act or the National Council Act, would be enforced, by.the end of December at the latest. The Press Act, already published, would enter into force on 1 January. It contained nothing which was no.t in : strict conformity with the Greek Criminal Code as it had existed for at least twenty-five years. No -new penalty was prescribed. Sanctions had perhaps been reinforced, but that was indispensable in view of the licence taken by the Greek press, which was one of the mailri causes of the failure of parliamentarianism against which all. the parties had revolted, One essential feature of this act was that it would prevent con- centration of the press and put an end to the arbitrary fixing of a maximum selling price for newspapers. All these were measures making for freedom of the press and freedom of opinion. ,. Article 10 of the Constitution was of capital importance, since it.stipulated that, except in the case of flagrante delictb, no' one could be arrested or imprisoned without a court warrant. This';was a literal reproduction of the provisions-of' the.previous Constitution. The rule was already. • being observed, but .only by virtue of an administrative decision, which did not afford' the same guarantees as a- .• constitutional law. Article 10 would become operative as' '. . , from next April. It was in conformity with the rules existing in-all'democratic countries. Articles 110 and 111 made it 'illegal to constitute extraordinary courts and to submit civilians t'o judgment . •by military-courts. Again, these provisions were already being respected, but only in pursuance of an administrative decision. . . Generally speaking,' it was striking to note .that the essence of the -'suggestion made by the Commission of Human .- Rights was perfectly consistent with the plan drawn up by the Greek Government on its own Initiative. That was why

./. CM (69) pv 4 - '14 -

the Greek Government could, without hesitation, take the Commission' r> proposals into consideration. The .Commission 'asko'd for impartial courts, strict control over ,the secret police; that .was also what.the Greek Government wanted. It had, in fact, concluded an agreement oh 3 November with the International Red Cross which would,.. be_ejnti tied. ...to,, visit ^^ whom it pleased, where it • pleased, when'it pleased. "'"""" It --•«-«••*- could interview any accused-without'witnesses, .take evidence use it and publish cornrnuniqUos after notifying the , Greek Government. The,Reel Cross could, for example, enquire into the detainees' physical condition and the circumstances of their arrest. It had already begun its visits and published a first communique stating that in all the detention' carnps visited - and it listed a large number - its •representatives were allowed to move freely, question persons without witnesses 'and without an3r time 'restriction. It had . despatched material aid to several' detention camps,. The Greek Government had nothing to hide. If -there had been any ill-treatment - which could happen in any country - severe sanctions would be imposed. But specific cases must first be investigated by independent judges. The Commission of Human Rights also called for recognition of the right to criticise the government freely. The information he had given regarding the Press Act should allay any disquiet on that score. . The most important clause was that in..which the.,.Commission advocated the holding of free- elections as soon as conditions permitted. The Greek Government's position in this regard had never varied. If there had been any misunderstanding, this was the fault 'of emigres who had represented their country's government as a fascist clique determined never to hold elections and to stay in power, In point of fact, the Greek Government considered itself as a transitional government whose ' function way to reform the state and establish it on new' foundations. It had stated repeatedly that the day would come when the nation would be consulted. True, it declined to fix a date at the moment. But for this it had sound reasons of which the Commission, was well aware. He asked the true friends of his country, those who knew ithe situation, to help its leaders to carry through a difficult undertaking. He begged them, instead of taking "the easy v.Tay out, of yielding to doctrinal prejudices or

./. 15 - CM (69) PV 4 simply to the expediencies of internal policy, to think of the real interests of the Greek people and to help their government to return as speedily o.s possible to full democratic legality. A"revolutionary regime, he frankly admitted, had its difficulties li!:e any other. It was not a monolith, but rather a torrent in which various currents mingled it would take time, much wisdom and an enormous amount of political adroitness before it could flow peacefully. As a European from the very first, he warned his colleagues that the course they were being urged to take was a dangerous one. Besides, it would lead nowhere, for if they severed relations with the Greek Government, what influence could they subsequently exert on it? Extremist elements in Greece would thereby be strengthened to the detriment of Greece and Europe. Everything militated in favour of choosing the other course, that of prudence, friendship and confidence. It would still be possible to take 'sanctions the day it was proved that the programme outlined by the Greek Government was not being loyally implemented. But by what right, by virtue of what logic could they do so in advance? Finally, was it\: in Europe's interests, at a time when the situation was so uncertain and so dangerous, to stir up quarrels? Greece would accept any condemnation with serenity. It had been through graver trials. If Greece were, to be condemned, however, he would feel a certain sadness. Not for Greece, but for Europe. Mr. Waldhcim (Austria) said that the Committee had now listened to important statements by the Foreign Ministers of Sweden and Greece and a draft resolution had r.lso been circulated in the meantime. He thought they should have - time to study the.statements and, in particular, the resolution and he accordingly suggested that the meeting be adjourned for about 2.0 or JO minutes. :jf The Chairman noted that there was no. objection to Mr. Waldheim's proposal. The sitting was suspended at 11.55 a.m. '

./. CM (69) PV >4 ' ' '. - 16

It was resumed at 12.50 p.m. . ' . ,••.,• Mr. W. Scheel '(Fedora! Republic of Germany), who had '• ' '• listened with rapt attention to Mr. Pipinelis's statement, said • that the Federal Republic had followed developments in Greece since April 1967 with the greatest concern, • • It was far from : -. his intention,, in explaining the- reasons for .this concern, to interfere in the internal affairs of a member state. But the 'Statute of tha 'Council of Europe and the common ideal uniting all the nations represented therein placed an olibgation on the Committee of Ministers 'to take a decision that day, however • . grave it might be, for it was the credibility of the Organisation which was at stake.. Could Greece continue to be a member .of an institution founded on respect for democratic principles and the rule of lav;? The traditional friendship binding the German arid Greek peoples had .led the Federal Republic to urge the Greek Government on a number of occasions to restore democracy in Greece as quickly as possible. Once more, as its Minister for Foreign Affairs, he was addressing a solemn appeal to the Greek Minister for Foreign Affairs. The complete restoration of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Greece would not only be in the interests of the West and consistent with its ideals, but would also serve the interests of the Greek people and the Greek Government itself. For only as a democratic sta'te could Gr^tce fulfil the mission conferred on it by its own history and the part it had played in civilisation. The Greek . Government, it was true, had never ceased'to affirm its desire . • for a speedy normalisation of the situation, but for two and a half years now it had kept public opinion waiting.. Although it had taken a few decisions of tho kind expected of it, their ' ' effect had unfortunately been neutralised by measures in the contrary direction. The Statute-of the Council of Europe was undoubtedly being \ seriously violated. The Federal Republic would therefore vote '' for the suspension of Greece,'while expressing the hope that it v/ould soon return to respect for democratic priniples and thus bo a bit: once again to collaborate fully in the activities of the Council of Europe, in accordance with its own interests and those of Europe. Mr. P./'.' Hillery (Ire-land) said that it was with regret that he found on pretending hio first meeting of the Committee of Ministers that tixe main subject of discussion wa$ wh^thor or not a fellow member stat-c, should oe suspended.

./. - 17 - CM (69) PV 4

His government had already, both in the Committee of Ministers and the Irish Parliament, expressed their concern and anxiety about the situation that had existed in Greece for more than two. years. This concern had grown in recent months when it was seen that.no substantial steps appeared to have been taken to restore constitutional democracy and the rule of law to a county which once had been the source and fountainhead of such democracy. They were aware that certain member governments had taken proceedings against Greece under the European Convention on Human Rights. They were also aware of how far these proceedings hr.d £cne and knew that there- were 'arguments for postponing a decision on the question of Greece until the Committee came'to consider the.report of the European Commission on Human Rights. His government had taken every cognisance of these arguments. Their concern for the situation in that country was such, however, and their regret that no adequate steps had been taken to rectify it was so great, that they felt the time had come when the}' must talro c. positive stand in relation to a country in which the provisions of Article 5 of the Statute, which was the paramount document, were being manifestly violated. .His government, therefore, had to take a position in favour of'the principle of the suspension of a member state. In taking this position they nevertheless hoped that all necessary steps would soon be tn.ken so as to enable Greece to resume her place in the Council of Europe. Mr. Lyng (Norway), recalled that during his speech Mr. Pipinelis had expressed admiration for the former Greek Prime Minister, Mr. Kararnanlis. But he had not mentioned that two months ago, Mr. Kararnanlis had made an appeal to the na'ti»ns of the world to assist in the restoration of democracy in Greece. In the Council of Europe, a bond of solidarity had been built up between the 18 member nations. Their very purpose was to assist in protecting the human rights of the member populations. If a country broke its obligations under the Statute in this respoct, the population of that country had a right to look to the.Council for support. The Council of Europe had a responsibility-to act in favour of human rights. Through its resolutions the Assembly had shown its understanding of this responsibility; now it'was up to the Committee of Ministers to display the same .sense of purpose. •

./. CM (69) PV 4' ' - 18 -

He wished to emphasise that paragraph 2 of the resolution mentioned only suspension and that paragraphs 3 an^ ^ opened the way for a resumption of relations, between Greece and'the Council of Europe. His'government advocated the suspension of Greece in the hope that it would load to the establishment of democratic government. Mr. Kyprianou (Cyprus) said that although he realised what the trend of the debate had been, it was his duty to the Committee which he had attended for ton years to express his views quite i'ranlcly. He saw tv/o commitments: the first., to serve the purposes and principles of the Council of Europe; the r.econd to help . Men&ors of the Council in difficult times. Under this second commitment the Government of Cyprus was in a special, position because of the well known relationship between Cyprus and Greece., but he would be constructive and objective with a view to the general interests of Greece as well as the Council of Europe. When the Ministers came to the meeting this Morning they /'cnew more or less what was in each others minds, but governments.always left room for manoeuvre on important issues, particularly when they were discussed in secret session. Had the Committee met to decide on the past, to decide whether Greece should be suspended or not? ' This was not, in his view its main objective, which he saw- as how best to help the restoration of a democratic constitution in Greece. If Greece v/ore outside the Council of Europe, what could the Council do? There were enough examples to show that it could do nothing. The implementation of principles was quite as important as the. decisions ta!:en on them and the consequences of any action : taken should be carefully considered. The Greek Foreign Minister had spoken of plans and dutes for their implementation. Was it impossible, within.that framework, for Greece to remain in the; Counc:,i of Europe and to undertake certain obligations? ; Certainly, if Greece were outside the Council of Europe, she * • would have no responsibility towards it. Even at this late hour he locked for a solution; for the.consequences of expulsion or suspension would go far beyond taking a simple decision. The Ministers should ask themselves how they could help Greece -. not hov; to wash their hands of the problem.- which was what suspension really meant. It was obvious, from trie presence of the Foreign Minister, that the Greek Government • wanted to remain in the Council of Europe; if it had resolutely decided not to comply with the Council's Statutes the Foreign Minister would'not have come. Decisions should--be based riot on tho past but on what should be done -in the future. Today's meeting was a sad occasion could they not try to alleviate this sadness by finding a way out? He sincerely believed it could be done. ./• - 19 - CM (C9) PV 4-

Mr. Thomson (United Kingdom) . said that, although one. was bound to "bo personally impressed by tho way in which Mr. Pipinclis had addressed thw- Committee, all the governments represented at today's meeting had signed the Statute of the Council of Europe "in which the democracies of •Europe had expressed their devotion to spiritual and moral values, a true sense of liberty and the rule of lav; The Council of Europe was an organisation devoted to common, ideals; if it were not true to these it would bo nothing. If a member oi" a club did not conform to the rul^s this 'could be tolerated for a period, but there ce.rne a time vrhon violation of the rules could no longer be accepted. This time had come today. It was by no means a policy of the British Government to dictate to the Greek Government what its internal policies should be, but Recommendation '5^7 of 30 January clearly stated thr.t the Greek regime was in serious violation of the rules of the Council of Europe and it had been decided in May to take a final decision at today's meeting, The Greek Government had had time to complete, or at least go a long way towards, the restoration of democracy, The Committee should not allot-/ the possibility of action under the Convention on Human Rights to prevent their talcing a decision under the Statute of the Council of Europe. The issue should not be shirked. With sadness, he was bound to say that the Council of Europe could not be true to itself if the Representative of the Greek Government continued to take part in its deliberations. As tho British Prime Minister had said on Monday, the word "democracy" derived from Greece and he looked forward to a democratic constitution in Greece chosen by the people- themselves. The United Kingdom had many ties with Greece, both cultural and military, and it was the hope of the British Government that anv suspension which might take place today would be temporary r-kowever this could only be brought about by a return to the rule of law and to institutions of parliamentary democracy. He had listened to the speech of Mr. Pipinelis^ and was glad that the Greek Government had relaxed certain restrictions; he also welcomed the agreement with the Rud Cross which Mr. Pipinelis had announced. However, having considered the matter with great care, the British Government had come to the conclusion that the Greek Government had fr.llen short of the standards required from members of the Council of Europe, particularly as expressed at the meeting of the Committee in May. He concluded by saying that with regret the British Government had lent their support to the resolution calling for the suspension of Gro^e-a from nu&oiTM>F»h2.p, ./. CM (69) PV If •- 20

The Chairman thanked Mr, Thomson and announced that the sitting would" be~suspeiided and resumed again at 3.^0 p.m. Mr. Pipinolis (Greece) said that he had a communication to make. Having noted, in the course' of the debate, that the representatives of several governments had criticised measures announced for the gradual restoration of the constitutional order in Greece, within fixed time limits, he was obliged, on his government's instructions, to announce Greece's decision to denounce the Statute and, in pursuance of Article 7 thereof to withdraw from the Council of Europe. Notification of this decision vrould be made to the. Secretary General. The sitting was suspended at 1.25 P.-m•

./. 21 - CM (69) PV Ij-

APPENDIXI

45th Sessipn' • . • '

AGENDA (Paris, 12th and l^th December 19&9 at 10 a.m.) OECD, 19, rue de Franoueville Telephone: 5.2'4.82.00

1. Adoption of the agenda 2. Solemn statutory declaration by the Secretary General 3. Situation in Greece - Recommendations. 5^7 and 5&9 - Proposal for suspension of Greece lf. Relations with other states 5. Political aspects of European economic integration 6. Other business (i) Relations between the Council of Europe and the United Nations - oral report by the Secretary General on the execution of his mandate (ii) Development of technological resources in Europe - Report by the Secretary General on the execution of his mandate (ili) Council of Europe buildinge 7. Date and place of next meeting 8. Press communique .. COUNCIL OF EUROPE -CONSEIL DE L' EUROPE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS

45th Session

Strasbourg, 20 January 1970 Confidential CM (69) PV 5

MINUTES of the sitting held on •12 December 1969 at 6 p.m., at OECt) headquarters, 19 rue de Franqueville, Paris

Present;

MM. K* Waldheim AUSTRIA P..Harmel BELGIUTJI 'S'* Kyprianou. CYPRUS . P* 'Hartling' DENMARK J. de Lipkowski (1) PR;JTCE W. Scheel PEDEIL'JD REPUBLIC OP GERMANY GREECE H.S. B^'drnsson (2) ICELAND

./.

(1) Secretary of'/State' for foreign Affairs, replacing !v£r. Schumann, Minister for Foreign Affairs. ., ,< • .• '"''''• (2) Ambassador Extraordinary--and Plenipotentiary, Permanent Representative of Iceland to the Council of Europe, replacing-Mr. E.-Jonsson, Minister for For ei'gn-Affairs

16.256 CMPV014 02.2/11 CM (69) PV 5 - 2 -

P.J. Hillery IRELAND D. Coppo (1) ITALY G. Thorn - "LUXEMBOURG G, Borg Olivier MALTA P.J. Gelderraan(2) NETHERLANDS G, Lyhs- ; .'.';.:.: 'NORWAY ' T. Nilsison SWEDEN , W. Spuhler SWITZERLAND I.S. Caglayangil TURKEY G. Thomson (3) UNITED KINGDOM

L» Toncic-Sorinj Secretary General S. Sforza Deputy,Secretary General H. Leleu .. Director, "of Political Affairs H-. Beesley' Secretary of the Committee of Ministers

The J3ittin& was resumed at 6.25^..^* The CJELIIRMN said that following the declaration made ,. ; that 'mofni'rig* liy"l!rt Pipinelis, talks had taken place tretwe*e'n delegations. They had resulted in a draft resolution'which, would now be submitted to the Committee. He asked the Secretary General to read it out.

'./.

(1) Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, replacing •Mr. A. Moro, Minister for Foreign Affairs (Chairman). (2) Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Permanent Representative.of the Netherlands to the Council of Europe, replacing Mr. J.M.A.H. Luns, Minister for Foreign Affairs.. '(3). Chancellor, of the Duchy of Lancaster," replacing- Mr. M. Stewart, Secretary of State for' Foreign and' Commonwealth Affairs. - 3 - ' CM (69) PV 5

The SjDCRETARY GENERAL read the .following text to the Committee inHSngTish": . The Committee of Ministers Considering that Greece has seriously violated Article 3 of the Statute; Noting the situation in Greece as described in Recommendation 547 of the Consultative Assembly, adopted on 30 January 19695 Noting further that the Greek Government as required in paragraph 7 of this Recommendation, have declared their withdrawal from the Council of Europe under Article 7 of the Statute. I* Under^stajids that the Greek Government will abstain from any~Yurther participation in the activities of the Council of Europe as from today; 2. Concludes that on this understanding there is no need to pur~sue~":EEe procedure for suspension, under Article 8 of. the Statute; 3. Ghjargeft the Ministers' Deputies to settle the administrative ancTfinancial consequences of this situation; 5» 525HLe_sAe-s- "k*16 h°Pe °£ an early return in Greece of condl/Fibns which will enable' her to resume full membership

of the Council of Europe. i Mr. de LIPKOY/SKI (France) had'intended speaking in the morning. After-the new~cTeveTopraent constituted by Mr. Hlpinelis's declaration-, he would not make a long speech. But he did not mean, for all that, to withdraw into prudent silence for, as a philosopher had once said, there were tiroes when to say-nothing was to lie. The French delegation did not intend to lie either to itself or to Europe. By remaining silent it would be lying to itself, for everyone was aware of the strong attachment of France's Government and of all i'cs citizens to human rights and democratic principles. It would be lying to Europe, for the essential mission of the Organisation that Europe had created was to present to the world the image 'of a group of countries in which individual freedom and its corollary, a certain humanism, prevailed. , •

./. CM (69) PV 5 - 4,-

The French Government could not "but be concerned by. a situation which was in contradiction with this image. It • considered the normalisation process of the situation in Greece to be much too slow and very inadequate. True, the agreement concluded with the International Red Cross, for example, represented some.progress, but it was not enough to bring, about a restoration of democratic freedoms. Everyone had listened, deeply moved, to the statement made by Mr, Fipinells, whose'personal, sincerity. could not be1 doubted. But a de facto situation remained which was clearly incompatible with the principles and rules of the Council of Europe? it. was becoming urgent to^ put an end to it. . The'position was now clear. Greece had withdrawn from the Council of Europe. It only remained to take cognisance of the fact, and the text submitted to the Committee merely-photographed the present situation, so to speak. His natural optimism and the friendship he bore the Greek people led him to believe that this withdrawal would be only temporary and that a return to democracy soon would enable Greece to return to the Council of Europe, and to make a contribution worthy of its past, its traditions and its rightful place in the free world. ' • • In conclusion, Mr. de LIPKOWSKI expressed his unreserved support for.the draft resolution. . . Mr. P. HURTLING (Denmark) said'that'the Danish Government would have preferred the draft resolution tabled by the Swedish Government and others earlier in the day. But his Government, agreed to vote on the text before the .Committee which had just •' been read out by the Secretary General. He was authorised to speak on this matter for the governments of Sweden and Norway also, Mr. K. WALDHEIM (Austria) said that a new 'situation had . been created by the wrEKdlFawal of Greece. If the resolution tabled earlier in the day had been put to the vote, he would have voted for it. He would, however, have preferred the inclusion of .an amendment, which had been discussed by a number of delegations and which would have' provided a deadline for the introduction of basic reforms in Greece.

./. - 5 - CM (69) PV 5

To meet the new situation, a new text had "been drafted as a result of intensive efforts to reach a consensus. Austria would vote for this text. He had noted with appreciation the viev/s expressed by the Foreign Minister of Denmark, who had spoken on behalf of the Scandinavian countries. He concluded by expressing the hope that the day when Greece v/ould be welcomed back to the Council was not far removed. Mr. HARMBL (Belgium) said that for two-and-a-half years now the Belgian Government and people had been concerned by the violations of the law being committed in Greece. When the Greek Government announced the timetable which, it claimed, was to lead to the restoration of individual freedoms, they noted with regret that ita proposals were usually accompanied by conditions - relating mainly to state security - of which it remained the sole judge. He had hoped that that morning the Greek Government would declare its readiness to apply the recommendations of the Commission of Human Rights immediately. Unfortunately, moving and sincere though it had been, Mr. Pipinelis's speech had provided no such assurance. The Belgian Government had therefore no choice but to support the motion for suspension tabled by the Scandinavian countries. . It had done so that morning. Row that the Greek Government had announced its voluntary withdrawal, there was no longer any point in maintainj^ng the motion. The Belgian delegation would therefore vote for the draft resolution which the Secretary General had read out. Mr. KYPR.IANOU (Cyprus^ said that he v/ould confine his remarks to the new drarV resolution. He would only repeat that it was with regret that his country saw Greece leaving the Council, not because they did not regard the situation in .Greece with concern but because they believed that progress towards the restoration of democracy in Greece would be more likely if Greece were to remain a member. He had two points to make on the new draft resolution. The first clause of the preamble, stating that Greece had violated the conditions of Article 3 of the Statute, was in his opinion an unhappy statement.. The Committee was not sitting as a Court of Law and had not adjudicated on this matter. The second clause of the preamble implied that Greece had withdrawn as a result of a rocommendation from tho Consultative A»o©mblyj but, as the-Belgian Representative had already stated, the withdrawal was a voluntary one. ./.. CM (69) PV 5 • - 6 -

For this reason the Cypriot delegation would not participate in the vote on the resolution, as they thought that the present circumstances now made it unnecessary. Mr. I.S. CAGLAY;.NGIL (Turjeey_) said that no Council of Europe member state could defend arf "anti-democratic regime, but he regretted, for his part, that the draft resolution submitted to the Committee should pass judgment on a member state which had just withdrawn from the Organisation.' He would therefore have preferred the first preambular paragraphs to be left out;' however, noting that the last paragraph of the resolution expressed the hope that Greece would soon be able to resume full membership of the Council of Europe, he would vote for the proposed text. • , ~*~s Mr. COPPO (I.taly_) said that the position his country had taken that morning"-on the resolution which was then before the Committee had stemmed from the statement made by Mr. Pipinelis. Judging the merits of the case, it was clear that there was no real will to restore democracy in Greece except in limited, formal terms. These considerations.now led them to vote in favour of the new resolution, but they would do so with sadness. Everyone listening to Mr. Pipinelisrs .speech had felt with some emotion what the Greek people had undergone and had • ' . appreciated the tensions of their political life. The present resolution was an act of confidence in the Council of Europe but also an act of confidence in Greece herself, inspired by the hope that Greece would soon resume her place among free nations of Europe. Mr. SpiJHIER (Swi^_erlaiidJ stated that, despite the . ^) withdrawal of Greece", S'witz'er'land hoped that the Government _ . of that country would ensure a rapid return to democracy and' give the Greek people back their freedoms. As the Swiss delegation would have liked to explain, had there been time that morning, he felt it would have been desirable for the Committee of Ministers to be given the possibility, while suspending Greece from its right of representation, of persuading her to comply with the proposals of the European Commission of Human Rights and adopt a programme of concrete, .effective measures. In conclusion, Mr. Spuhler hoped that in • spite of everything Greece would find its v/ay back to the Council of Europe by fulfilling its obligations under the Statute. It was in this spirit that the Swiss delegation would vote for the draft resolution.

./. - 7 - CM (69) PV 5

Mr. BORG OLIVIER (Malta) said that it had "been Malta's intention to vote for the" resolution proposed that morning. He wished to make this clear because of the unwarranted speculation in the press about his country's attitude. The withdrawal of Greece created a new situation v/hich made it unnecessary to pursue the procedure- under Article 8 of the Statute. The nexv resolution before them set out their understanding of the results of that withdrawal and their hopes for the future and he would vote for it on behalf of his country.• . ' .Mr. V/. SO HEEL (^^Q^^^S^^io^f^^^m^^) explained that, in supporting the~"re~soTutTon t'o" ~suspencT Greece, the Federal Republic had had no intention of excluding Greece once and for all from the activities of the Council of Europe. It merely wished to- gain time in the hope that Greece, after restoring parliamentary democracy and resp,ect for human rights would be able to resume its place in the Organisation. The Greek .Government's decision had completely altered the situation and the Federal Republic .would vote for the new , draft resolution which took account of these changed circumstances, Mr. G. THORN (Luxembourg) recalled that his country, too, had supported the resolxrtion on the suspension of Greece. He would have voted for it, since this vote would not ha^e implied any hostility towards Greece, but would have been dictated, by . • faithfulness to democratic principles and to the Statute of • the Council of Europe. The Greek delegation had preferred, to withdraw, thereby satisfying the wish of the Consultative Assembly. Luxembourg would vote in favour of the new resolution in the hope that the Athens Government would be anxious to prove, in the forthcoming months, the sincerity of the attachment it professed to democratic principles. This having been proved, Luxembourg would be happy to see Greece return to 'the Council. Mr. F.J. GELDERMAN (Netherlands), after recalling that . his country had associated itself~th"at morning with those-'that . had advocated suspension, announced that the Netherlands would vote for the new resolution, while expressing the hope •. that Greece would soon be in a position to resume its place in the Council of Europe.

./. CM (69) PV 5

Mr. THOMSON (United Kingdom) said that ho had made the views of tlivj United Kingdom Government clear in his speech that morning. Liki ethers that had spoken they took the view that the withdrawal.of Greece created a new situation which . was adequately reflected in the new draft resolution. They should have two purposes. One was to recognise the standard of behaviour to tvhich the Council was pledged. The other was to do what they could to encourage Greece to return to those standards as soon as possible. He hoped they would soon see a representative from Greece in the seat which noxv stood so sadly empty. Mr. EGILSSON (l) (Iceland) said that in view of the changed circumstances his government also were prepared to vote for the draft, resolution; they also shared the hopes that others had expressed that the Oouncil would soon be able to welcome Greece back. The CHAIRMAN, noting that no delegation had spoken against the draft resolution; but that the Cyprus delegation had . stated"that it would not take part in the voting, did not consider it necessary to put the resolution to the vote; with' the Committee's agreement he would, declare it adopted. ( (Agreed) The CHAIRMAN declared the draft resolution adopted. The SECRETARY GENERAL said that he had just received two communications from the Greek Representative, the first of which ended with the words that the Greek Government denounced the Statute of the Council of Europe and withdrew from the Organisation, according to the terms of Article 7 of the Statute.. The second announced that the- Greek Government denounced the Convention on Human Rights, in accordance with Article 65 of this Convention. The CHAIRMAN thanked the Secretary General and took note of his communications. The Committee had now concluded item III of the agenda.

./...

(l) Deputy Permanent Representative to the Council of Europe, replacing Mr. Bjbrnsson, Ambassador and Permanent Representative. - 9 - CM (69) PV 5

4. Relations with other states The SECRETARY GENERAL said that it was his responsibility to report to the Committee on relations with other European countries. There had been a hiatus with Eastern European countries after the Czechoslovakian affair, but from April to October of this year these countries had shown a more favourable attitude towards representatives from the Council of Europe. Since October, there had been a demand, particularly from Poland, for East German participation in the affairs of the Council of Europe: this had caused some difficulties. Relations with Finland and Yugoslavia had improved, both of them sending representatives to Strasbourg. He had nothing new to report about Spain and Portugal, although he had hopes of improved relations. The CHAIRMAN thanked the Secretary General and invited delegation representatives to speak. No one having requested leave to speak, he declared the discussion closed. 5. Political aspects of European economic integration The CHAIRMAN suggested postponing discussion of this item till, the next meeting of the Committee of Ministers. Agreed. C. Other business The CHAIRMAN suggested postponing discussion of item (i) till a later meeting. Agreed. ' . ' • • The CHAIRMAN then invited the Representative of France* to make his statement on the Council of Europe buildings, Mr. DE LIPKOWBKI (France) was happy to inform the. Committee .of Ministers that, as regards the financing of the new buildings which the Council of Europe planned to construct, the French Government was willing to arrange for the Caiss.e des Depots et Consignations to make a long-term loan at a preferential rate for a minimum period of ten years. In view of present conditions on the French money market, the interest rate for this loan would be 6 1/4$. • The amount of the loan would be proportionate to the scale of the work to be undertaken in accordance with the prepared estimates, on the understanding that the sum in question should not exceed a ceiling of 70 million francs. • /• CM (69) pv 5 - 10 -

The SECRETARY GENERAL thanked the French Government for- • their generous.offer, which meant that, after many years'of endeavour, there would be a new building for the Council of Europe, which would stand as a symbol of its development. He asked all governments to accept the French offer and said that • he would himself try to speed up construction of the new building, which he hoped would start at the beginning of 1970 and might b.e completed in two to three years. The CHAIRMAN, in his turn, thanked the Representative of France for. his announcement and called the Secretary General to speak on item (ii). The SECRETARY GENERAL said that he would not- go into detail, but he had to put forward a short report to comply with the Committee's previous decision. In May, Mr. Srnithers, his predecessor, had made proposals for co-operation in science, and technology, suggesting an inventory of all the multilateral activities of the members of the Council of Europe. He himself, when he took over,•had recognised the difficulties of the task and after much consultation with those involved, had been forced to conclude that such an ambitious enterprise would not succeed, for the interest shown by some was not enough to counterbalance the lack of interest shown by others. . He was therefore today submitting proposals much more modest than those submitted by Mr. Srnitliers, proposals which took the form' of a rather limited academic exercise which would show results only in the future. He asked for agreement in principle to these proposals and that the Ministers should instruct their Deputies to discuss how to implement them. Mr. WALDHEIM (Austria) thanked the Secretary General, , whose proposal no doubt represented the maximum of what was possible at the present juncture. Multilateral scientific co-operation was still -not very far advanced in Europe and it created complex problems. It would be wise to adopt the Secretary General's proposal as a basis for discussion. Mr. SPtJHLER (Switzerland) thought the problem raised by the Secretary General was rightly a matter of concern to all member states. However, the research programme and targets proposed by the.University of Sussex seemed highly complex. Their implementation required the co-operation not only of governments but also, arid perhaps still more, of other international organisations. That being so, preliminary consultations were essential and it would be premature to take any .decision of principle immediately.- Mr. SpUhler proposed that, without prejudging the future, the Deputies should be instructed to study the new proposals in full knowledge of Uhe t'aq^M, ./. - 11 - CM (69) PV 5

Mr. DE LIPKOWSKI (France) shared this view. The Secretary General's proposals were interesting. They were certainly more realistic than what had been proposed hitherto, It would be advisable for the Secretary General to put this plan into due form and send it to the Deputies, who would take a decision on behalf of the Committee. Mr. GAGLAYANGIL (Turkey) supported the views expressed by MM. SpUhler and de Lipkowski. The CHAIRMAN concluded that the Committee agreed that the Deputies be instructed to study the problem in collaboration with the Secretary General. Agreed. 7. Time and place of the next session The CHAIRMAN suggested leaving it to the Deputies to fix the date and place of the next session of the Committee of Ministers. Agreed. 8. Press jornmunique . • The CHAIRMAN proposed that it be left to the Secretariat to draft the press communique in agreement with the Chairman.

Mr. KYPRIANOU (Cyprus) agreed with the proposal of the Chairman that he and the Secretariat should draft the press communique, and said he had full confidence in them. He asked, however, that his decision not to take part in the vote, which he had made clear earlier to the Committee, should be mentioned when drafting the communique. The CHAIRMAN gave him an assurance that it would be specified in the communique that Cyprus did not take part in the vote. Closing of the session The CHAIRMAN declared closed the 45th session of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. The 45th session was closed at 7.25 P.m. ./. '- 12 - CM (69) PV 5

" ' • .• PRESS' COMMUNIQUE' • - • 45th SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS

The 45th session of tile Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe was held i:i Paris on Friday 12 December 1969. The Ministers for Foreign Affairs, or their representatives, of the eighteen member states-of the Council of Europe met at the Chateau de la Muette under the chairmanship of Mr. Aldo MORO, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Italy. The discussions related mainly to the situation in Greece and to relations with Eastern European countries. At the opening of the meeting, Mr. Lujo TONCIC-30RINJ, the new Secretary General of the Council of Europe, elected on 14 May last by the Assembly, took the oath before the Committee of Ministers. GREECE The Committee of Ministers, which had before it Recommendations 5^-7 and 569 of the Consultative Assembly and a proposal for the suspension of Greece sponsored by eleven delegations, discussed the situation in that country and heard a statement by Mr. P1PINELIS, the Greek Minister for Foreign Affairs'. Following the discussiozi, the Representative of Greece having delcared that his country was withdrawing from the Organisation under the terms of Article 7 of the Statute, the Committee of Ministers adopted the following resolution by a unanimous-vote of the- delegations casting a vote: "The Committee of Ministers considering that Greece' has seriously violated Article J of the Statute of the Council of Europe; Noting; the situation in Greece as described in Recommendation 5^7 of the Consultative Assembly, adopted on j>0 January 19^9s

./. CM (69) PV 5 - 15 -

Noting further that the Greek Government, as required in paragraph 7 of this recommendation, have declared their withdrawal from the Council of Europe under Article 7 of the Statute; Understands, that the Gre-ek-Government will abstain from any further participation in the activities of the Council of Europe as from, today; Concludes, that on this understanding there is no need to' pursue the procedure for suspension under Article 8 of the Statute; Charges the Ministers' Deputies to settle the administrative and financial consequences of this situation; Expresses the hope of an early return in Greece of conditions which will enable her to resume full membership of the Council of Europe." •i Cyprus did not take part in the vote. The Foreign Minister of Cyprus explained that, after the withdrawal of Greece, it was not, in his view, appropriate to adopt any resolution. • Greece, which had announced beforehand that she was withdrawing from the Council of Europe, was'not present at the vote. The Secretary General read out two "Notes Verbales" which had been handed to him by the Permanent Representative of Greece, one denouncing the Statute of the Council of Europe, the other'the European Convention on Human Rights. RELATIONS WITH NON-MEMBER STATES ' . The Committee was informed by the Secretary General of developments in relations between the Council of Europe and certain countries of East Europe. NEW BUILDINGS OF THE COUKOIL OF'EUROPE IN STRASBOURG Mr. DE LIPKOWSKI announced to the Committee that the French Government was prepared to grant the Council of Europe a loan to be provided by the "Caisse des Depdts et Consignations" for new

./. - 14 - CM (69) PV 5 buildings for the Council of Europe in Strasbourg. The Secretary General, after having expressed his thanks to the French Government, announced-that everything would be done to complete the -construction of these new buildings within two or three years. DEVELOPMENT OF'EUROPEAN TECMOLOG 1CAL; RESOURCES The Committee took note of the statements made on this subject, by the Secretary General of the Council and instructed the Ministers' Deputies to consider the action to be taken on his proposals. FORTY-FIFTH SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS

Sitting held on 12 December 1969 at 10 a.m., at OECD Headquaters, 19 rue de Franqueville, Paris

Present :

AUSTRIA Mr. K. WALDHEIM NETHERLANDS Mr. F.J. GELDERMAN4 BELGIUM Mr. P. HARM EL NORWAY Mr. G. LYNG CYPRUS Mr. S. KYPRIANOU SWEDEN Mr. T. NISSON DENMARK Mr. P. HARTLING SWITZERLAND Mr. W. SPÜHLER FRANCE Mr. J. de LIPKOWSKI TURKEY Mr. I.S. ÇAGLAYANGIL FEDERAL UNITED KINGDOM Mr. G, THOMSON5 REPUBLIC OF GERMANY Mr. W. SCHEEL GREECE Mr. P. PIPINELIS Mr. L. TONCIC-SORINJ, Secretary General ICELAND Mr. H.S. BJÖRNSSON2 Mr. S. SFORZA, Deputy Secretary General IRELAND Mr. P. HILLERY Mr.H, LELEU, Director of Political Affairs ITALY Mr. D. COPPO3 ME.H. BEESLEY, Secretary of the Committee of Ministers. LUXEMBOURG Mr. G. THORN MALTA Mr. G. BORG OLIVIER

1.Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, replacing 4.Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Mr. M. Schumann, Minister for Foreign Affairs. Permanent Representative of the Netherlands to the Council of Europe, replacing Mr. J.M.A.H. Luns, 2.Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Minister for Foreign Affairs. Permanent Representative of Iceland to the Council of Europe, replacing Mr. E. Jonsson, Minister for 5.Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, replacing Foreign Affairs. Mr. M. Stewart, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. 3.Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, re- placing Mr. A. Moro, Minister for Foreign Affairs (Chairman).

- 364 - Forty-Fifth Session of the Committee of Ministers

AGENDA

1. Adoption of the agenda. 2. Solemn statutory declaration by the Secretary General.

3. Situation in Greece - Recommendations 547 and 569 - Proposal for suspension of Greece. 4. Relations with other states.

5. Political aspects of European economic inte- gration. 6. Other business :

(i) Relations between the Council of Europe and the United Nations - Oral report by the Secretary General on the execution of his mandate; (ii) Development of technological resources in Europe - Report by the Secretary General on the execution of his mandate ; (iii) Council of Europe buildings. 7. Date and place of next meeting. 8. Press communiqué.

- 365 - Forty-Fifth Session of the Committee of Ministers

PRESS COMMUNIQUE is no need to pursue the procedure for sus- pension under Article 8 of the Statute; Charges the Ministers' Deputies to settle The 45th Session of the Committee of Minis- the administrative and financial consequences ters of the Council of Europe was held in Paris of this situation ; on Friday 12 December 1969. Expresses the hope of an early return in The Ministers for Foreign Affairs, or their Greece of conditions which will enable her to Representatives, of the eighteen member states resume full membership of the Councilof of the Council of Europe met at the Château de Europe." la Muette under the chairmanship of Mr. Aldo Moro, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Italy. Cyprus did not take part in the vote. The Foreign Minister of Cyprus explained that, after The discussions related mainly to the situ- the withdrawal of Greece, it was not, in his ation in Greece and to relations with Eastern view, appropriate to adopt any resolution. European countries. Greece, which had announced beforehand At the opening of the meeting, Mr. Lujo that she was withdrawing from the Council of Toncic-Sorinj, the new Secretary General of the Council of Europe, elected on 14 May last by the Europe, was not present at the vote. Assembly, took the oath before the Committee of The Secretary General read out two "Notes Ministers. Verbales" which had been handed to him by the Permanent Representative of Greece, one de- Greece nouncing the Statute of the Council of Europe, the other the European Convention on Human The Committee of Ministers, which had be- Rights. fore it Recommendations 547 and 569 of the Consultative Assembly and a proposal for the Relations with non-member states suspension of Greece sponsored by eleven dele- gations, discussed the situation in that country The committee was informed by the Secretary and heard a statement by Mr. Pipinelis, the Greek General of developments in relations between Minister for Foreign Affairs. Following the dis- the Council of Europe and certain countries of cussion, the Representative of Greece having East Europe. declared that his country was withdrawing from the organisation under the terms of Article 7 of New buildings of the Council of Europe the Stature, the Committee of Ministers adopted in Strasbourg the following resolution by a unanimous vote of the delegations casting a vote : Mr. de Lipkowski announced to the commit- tee that the French Government was prepared to "The Committee of Ministers, grant the Council of Europe a loan to be pro- vided by the Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations Considering that Greece has seriously viol- for new buildings for the Council of Europe in ated Article 3 of the Statute of the Council of Strasbourg. Europe ; The Secretary General, after having express- Noting the situation in Greece as described ed his thanks to the French Government, an- in Recommendation 547 of the Consultative nounced that everything would be done to com- Assembly, adopted on 30 January 1969; plete the construction of these new buildings Noting further that the Greek Government, as within two or three years. required in paragraph 7 of this recommendation, Development of European technological have declared their withdrawal from the Council resources of Europe under Article 7 of the Statute, The committee took note of the statements Understands that the Greek Government will made on this subject by the Secretary General abstain from any further participation in the of the Council and instructed the Ministers' activities of the Council of Europe as from today; Deputies to consider the action to be taken on his proposals. Concludes that on this understanding there

- 366 - Owing to a change in the composition of this volume in the course of printing, the page- numbering is inaccurate and there are no pages 367-381.

Une modification dans la composition de ce volume en cours de tirage a amené la page 382 à la suite de la page 366. II n'y a pas de pages 367 à 381.