Unofficial translation MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION REPORT ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION Moscow, 2013 2 Contents Introduction ………………………………………………………………... 3 European Union ….. ………………………………………………………. 5 Austria …………………………………………………………………….... 15 Belgium ..………………………………………………………………….... 19 Bulgaria ………….…….…………….…………………………………….. 26 Great Britain…… …………………………………………………………. 29 Hungary ……….………………………………………………………….... 35 Germany ………..….………………………………………………………. 39 Greece …………..………………………………………………………...... 51 Denmark ………………………………………………………………........ 55 Ireland ………….………………………………………………………….. 61 Spain ………..…………………………………………………………….... 65 Italy …………….…………….…………………………………………...... 69 Cyprus ………….…………………………………………………….......... 73 Latvia …..……….………………………………………………………...... 76 Lithuania ……………..………………………………………………........ 84 Luxembourg …………….…………………………………………………. 91 Malta …………………….………………………………………………..... 94 Netherlands …..………………………….………………………………… 95 Poland …………………………………………………………………….... 104 Portugal ……………………………………………………………………. 109 Romania …………..……………………………………………………….. 116 Slovakia …………….….………..…………………………………………. 120 Slovenia ……………………………………………………………………. 123 Finland ……………….…………………………………………………….. 126 France …………………….………………………………………………... 130 Croatia …………………….………………………………………………... 136 Czech Republic ……………………………..…………………………........ 138 Sweden …………………………………………………………………….... 141 Estonia …………………………………………………………………….... 148 3 Introduction The report prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation on the situation with respect for human rights in the European Union in 2013 covers in detail the human rights situation in all 28 EU Member States. Special attention has been paid to the operation of supranational pan-European institutions in that area. The report was prepared using authoritative international sources, including reports of the UN Human Rights Council and the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, OSCE documents as well as information provided by human rights defenders, representatives of media community and relevant non-governmental organizations and structures. All of them are united by a desire to free the European Union from serious problems in the human rights sphere that, as demonstrated by the developments of the previous year, have only aggravated and require appropriate practical steps to address them. The most pressing human rights issues in the EU still include a steady growth of xenophobia, racism, violent nationalism, chauvinism and neo- Nazism. In the context of financial and economic crisis that continues in Europe, grave violations of the rights of minorities, refugees and migrants are increasing, and social rights of citizens are being infringed upon. Such issues as the lack of protection of children's rights, gender inequality, abuse of power by the police, violations of the prisoners' rights and harboring by a number of EU countries of CIA black sites remain acute. The facts proving systematic and mass violations of privacy and infringements on the freedom of speech and media have caused a special concern. A large part of EU Member States continue to refrain from assuming obligations under basic multilateral human rights treaties, and if they do assume such obligations, these are often accompanied by neutralizing reservations. 4 In this context, it is still clear that the existing system of protection of fundamental human rights and freedoms in the EU remains ineffective and flawed. No improvements have been noted in ensuring both at the institutional and regulatory level in the EU of constant supranational monitoring of cases involving violations of fundamental rights and freedoms by some of its Member States. There are no mechanisms of proactive response by the EU institutions and bringing those responsible to justice. Moreover, in some cases EU governing bodies indulge on human rights violations by the EU Member States. 5 European Union The European Union continues to position itself as the main outpost in the struggle for human rights in the world. But its own legal activity in this area does not correspond to these claims. In the European Union space still remain some unresolved issues concerning the implementation of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The inclusion of the Charter in the Lisbon Treaty (December 1, 2009) has not changed its limited application. The Charter applies only to the activities of the EU institutions and its Member States in case they implement the EU legislation. Moreover, the Final Act to the Lisbon Treaty provides that the Charter neither extends the scope of the EU law, nor assigns new powers to the Union. Consequently, the Charter does not regulate the activities of the EU Member States outside the legal framework of the Union, nor creates new responsibilities for the EU itself, which makes its inclusion in the Treaty of Lisbon more a symbolic than a practical step. The European officials continue to justify low activity of the EU supranational institutions in case of human rights violations in the EU by the lack of appropriate powers. What is more, the governing bodies of the Union show indulgence, to say the least, towards violations of human rights by Member States. For example, the European Commission demonstrates stubborn reluctance to interfere in the situation regarding large-scale violations of rights of the Russian-speaking population of Latvia and Estonia. At the same time, according to Article 2 of the EU Treaty, the European Union is based on such values as human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights. The scope of this article is not limited to the EU legislation; therefore, any violations of human rights by Member States are equivalent to violations of the EU basic regulations. In case of a serious violation of these values by a Member State, Article 7 provides for the suspension of some of its rights, including the right to vote in the 6 EU Council. However the European institutions are reluctant to apply this provision. As a result, all the words about the EU commitment to human values remain on paper only. In the EU there is no effective mechanism to ensure prompt and uniform response to the actions of Member States, which tolerate disrespect for human rights. In this context, attracted attention the letter sent by the foreign ministers of Germany, Netherlands, Denmark and Finland of March 6, 2013 to the President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso, which called on the EU to launch its own monitoring mechanisms to control the situation in the field of human rights, the rule of law and democracy in Member States. The authors of the initiative, in particular, suggested that the European Commission be authorized to monitor the compliance of fundamental rights by Member States and impose sanctions against violators and cease their funding from the European Union as well. This initiative received a mixed response and has not gained any traction yet. The existing EU legal mechanisms are not effective enough to prevent and combat violations of fundamental rights. Citizens are still poorly informed both about their rights, and organizations, which provide assistance to the victims of such violations. The conceptual development of human rights and the consequences of their arbitrary interpretation receive little attention in the EU information space. The crisis is affecting more severely the compliance issues in respect of the entire range of fundamental rights, it becomes a breeding ground for these problems to take the root. Far right and extremist movements are strengthening worldwide, the number of racist, xenophobic and antisemitic crimes is increasing. Social guarantees are under attack. Equal access to employment, education, health services is guaranteed neither at the national nor at the European level. 7 In times of crisis the situation with vulnerable segments of society, such as national minorities and migrants, is far from ideal. In various Member States the unemployment rate among them is in large excess over the rate among representatives of the titular nation, moreover, the foreigners, as a rule, usually occupy low-wage and temporary jobs. Public opinion in the European Union clearly underestimates the neo- Nazi threat, the existence of which in some Member States is justified by a virtual need for freedom of expression. Meanwhile, nationalism and its ideas and practice in some countries of the European Union have already affected negatively various aspects of life of the entire EU, including foreign policy (the situation with the glorification of former Waffen-SS legionaries in Latvia and Estonia and anti-Semitic rhetoric of the far right create problems for the EU in its relations with third countries). In his comment (which has the status of a high-level expert opinion) "Europe must combat racist extremism and uphold human rights", the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Nils Muižnieks, directly refers to the opinion of "some commentators" that the upsurge of this phenomenon “reached the point of an early form of far right terror". To confirm these words he draws attention to the situation in the countries of the European Union – in the Federal Republic of Germany (the high-profile case of the National Socialist Underground), Sweden (the increasing popularity of the Sweden Democrats party with neo-Nazi roots), Austria (activities of the neo- Nazi organization Object 21), Greece (racist attacks and the neo-fascist Golden