AD HOC WORKING PARTIES

4th Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe

GT-SOM4(2022)1

3 October 2022[1]

Information Note on Council of Europe Summits of Heads of State and Government Item to be considered by the GT-SOM4 at its meeting on 7 October 2022

Introduction

Three Summits have been held so far, in Vienna (1993), Strasbourg (1997) and Warsaw (2005). The Vienna Summit was embodying “outreach to the East” and “democratic security” and the Strasbourg Summit was dedicated to the “consolidation of democracy in the new member States”. The Warsaw Summit was the first to bring together all the countries of Europe (with the exception of Belarus) and is remembered as the “Summit of European Unity”.[2]

I.             First Summit (8-9 October 1993, Vienna): “embodying outreach to the East”

1.      Context, objective, preparation

The First Summit took place in 1992, soon after the democratic changes in Central and Eastern Europe. The main objective was to contribute to democratic security and “confirm the policy of openness and co-operation vis à vis all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe that opted for democracy”.[3]

At the Vienna Summit,[4] the Heads of State and Government cast the Council of Europe as the guardian of democratic security - founded on human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The Summit also marked the start of the outreach to the East, and asserted the Council of Europe political role:

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

2.      Conclusions, results

The Summit set accession requirements for new member States.

It was also decided to improve the effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR); to work on the protection of national minorities, to pursue a policy for combating racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance, to create a consultative organ representing both local and regional authorities in Europe, stimulate the development of European cultural schemes and to adapt the Organisation's Statute as necessary.

The Summit was instrumental in launching institution building resulting, inter alia, in the agreement to establish a single Court, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) and the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM). The follow-up dominated the Council of Europe's agenda for the following three years.

At this Summit, the Heads of State and Government of 29 out of 32 member States were present.

3.      Remarks/lessons learnt

According to a CM document,[5] the success of the Summit was facilitated by the following factors: the idea of a Summit was put forward by a front-rank political figure; the General theme was recognised as of great importance politically (opening up Europe, defining the Council of Europe's contribution, defining a response to national minority issues, etc.) and rapidly taken up by a member State prepared to host the meeting and co-ordinate preparations. The paper also presented advantages and disadvantages of setting-up thematic Task forces (i.e. coordination difficulties). To note also, compromises were finally reached in the first days of October on minority protection and on the question of the single Court, illustrating the sensitivity of these issues.

II.            Second Summit (10-11 October 1997, Strasbourg): consolidation of democracy in the new member States

1.      Context, objective, preparation

Following the Vienna Summit, eight new member States joined the Council of Europe, notably the Russian Federation and Ukraine. The Council of Europe extended from “Iberia to Siberia”.^[6] Early 1997, the then Secretary General stressed the achievements after the First Summit, as well as “many causes for concern” (“Democracy in Europe remains fragile” and “there are many threats to the cohesion of our societies”).[7] He mentioned in particular the need to address “The New Primer of European Security” after the “cataclysms of Albania, Bosnia, and Chechnya”. He considered that the mission of the Summit should be “investments in a stronger democratic culture, in European democratic stability”. The Summit should thus “express its determination to deal with the threats to Democratic Stability”. It should be “an opportunity to demonstrate cohesion and a common determination”.

The Summit originated in an initiative of the President of the Parliamentary Assembly in 1996 and was made possible by the French President’s willingness to host the event. The French government indicated four major subject areas, which were accepted (see below). An ad hoc working party (GT-SOM2) was tasked with examining proposals made in relation to the Summit.^[8]

2.      Conclusions, results

The Summit brought together representatives of 40 member States and of four States which had requested membership. It was considered as the Summit of “consolidationof democracy in the new member States”.

The Heads of State and Government reaffirmed their attachment to the fundamental principles of the Council of Europe and their commitment to comply fully with the requirements. They gave the Council of Europe their full support, with a view to intensifying its contribution to cohesion, stability and security in Europe, and stressed the importance of developing its co-operation with the other European and transatlantic organisations, particularly the European Union and the OSCE.

They adopted a Final Declaration and Action Plan[9] to strengthen the Organisation’s work in four areas: (1) Democracy and human rights, (2) Social cohesion, (3) the Security of citizens; and (4) Democratic values and cultural diversity. The Committee of Ministers was also instructed to carry out structural reforms.

To sum up, the mandate given by the 2^nd Summit was to strengthen democratic stability in the member States and to give a new impetus to human rights protection.[10]

Follow-up was entrusted to an ad hoc working party of the Deputies (GT-SUIVI), which would report on follow-up action at each ministerial session up to the 104^th (May 1999), when the 50^th anniversary of the Council of Europe was celebrated.

At this Summit, the Heads of State and Government of all member States were present.

Committee of Wise Persons

The Deputies also established a Committee of Wise Persons (composed of leading European personalities under the chairmanship of Mario Soares) to draw up proposals for structural reforms. In 1998, the latter submitted its final report, entitled “Building Greater Europe without Dividing Lines” to the Committee of Ministers. It recommended, inter alia, a clearer affirmation of the Organisation’s responsibility for democratic stability, of its function as a pan-European political forum related to the “aims of promoting pluralist democracy, the rule of law and human rights”.

The report also stressed that the “overriding priority was to ensure that all member States comply with Council of Europe standards and to reach out to the new members and assist them in their legal, political and social transformation”. It also recommended measures for “A more efficient and effective Council of Europe”[11] with proposals concerning the structures and processes within the Organisation.

As a result, to give a few examples, the Committee of Ministers adopted in 1997 the Additional Protocol on the Prohibition of Cloning Human Beings, as well as guiding principles to be applied in national legislation for the fight against corruption. The new single court was inaugurated, the office of the Commissioner for Human Rights was set up and the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) was established.

3.      Remarks/lessons learned

A number of measures resulting from the 2^nd Summit were in fact only adopted/completed at the Council of Europe’s 50^th anniversary in May 1999 (Budapest Declaration),^[12] e.g. Resolution Res(99)50 on the Commissioner for Human Rights.

In addition, the implementation of the Action Plan proved to be challenging in some parts, e.g. difficulties in strengthening the “Social Development Fund” or in developing a dialogue in the Committee of Ministers to ensure compliance with member States’ commitments.

III.           Third Summit (16-17 May 2005, Warsaw): the “Summit of European Unity”

1.    Context, objective, preparation

The holding of a 3^rd Summit was first suggested by the Parliamentary Assembly in 1999. In 2002, the Deputies instructed their Working Party on Institutional Reforms (GT-REF.INST) “to prepare a report on the proposal to hold a 3^rd Summit”. The basic arguments in favour were summarised as follows:

“In order to continue to play a political role in the architecture of 21st-century Europe, the Council of Europe needs regular input at the highest political level, for three main reasons:[13]

- the Summits in Vienna and Strasbourg have shown that there is no substitute for such input. Without them there would be today no Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, no single Court of Human Rights and no Commissioner for Human Rights, to mention but a few of the more significant examples;

- the main partners of the Council of Europe, in particular the European Union (several times a year) or the OSCE (every two years) receive such input, which is essential to their vitality and development;

- meetings of the political leaders of the member States at the highest level are the clearest, most tangible sign of their interest in - and their support for - the Organisation; they are also an irreplaceable opportunity to enhance the Council of Europe's profile.”

Against this background, the purpose was to set priorities for the Council of Europe and reinforce its position as a key partner within the new 21^st century European architecture. Therefore, the Summit was, inter alia, expected to:[14]

- confirm and strengthen the Council of Europe key mission to safeguard and promote human rights, democracy and the rule of law all over the continent;

- develop pan-European political dialogue at intergovernmental, inter-parliamentary and regional/local level;

- implement the reform of the Court;

- foster Council of Europe action aimed at promoting social cohesion, intercultural dialogue and democratic citizenship;

- strengthen relations and co-operation with the EU, the OSCE and the UN.

The Parliamentary Assembly made a number of recommendations/proposals in this context.[15]

On 8 July 2004, the member States agreed to hold a Summit in Warsaw on 16 and 17 May 2005, at the invitation of the Polish government, which was chairing the Committee of Ministers from November 2004 to May 2005. Like on previous occasions, the Committee of Ministers established an ad hoc working party to prepare the Summit (GT-SOM3).

The drafting of the Summit documents was particularly difficult, resulting in the setting up of an “Informal, Open-ended Drafting Group on the Third Summit” (DRAFTSUM), which met 10 times between December 2004 and April 2005.

2.    Conclusions, results[16]

The Warsaw Summit was the first to bring together all the countries of Europe (with the exception of Belarus). This is why it was branded as the “Summit of European Unity”.

The Heads of State and Government adopted the Warsaw Final declaration which paved the way for reinforced pan-European co‑operation and solidarity. They also adopted an Action plan addressing four main objectives:

-           promoting common fundamental values: human rights, rule of law and democracy;

-           strengthening the security of European citizens;

-           building a more human and inclusive Europe;

-           fostering co‑operation with other international and European organisations and institutions.

The main messages and decisions/measures taken included:[17]

-           The Heads of State and Government of the 46 member States[18] celebrated the success achieved after the previous two Summits and the Budapest Declaration, in fulfilling the political mandate to “build Europe without dividing lines”. They celebrated Europe’s unprecedented unity.

-           Special attention was given to the long-term effectiveness of the ECHR. A Group of Wise Persons was set up to elaborate a global strategy for the lasting effectiveness of the system.

-           A strong commitment was also made at the Summit to strengthen the other Council of Europe institutions and mechanisms in the field of human rights.

-           The Heads of State and Government also agreed to further develop the Council of Europe action against threats or challenges such as terrorism, corruption and organised crime, trafficking in human beings, cybercrime or bioethics. They recognised the need to promote a democratic culture and to foster intercultural and inter-religious dialogue, building on the work in the fields of social cohesion and cultural co‑operation.

-           Particular emphasis was placed on inter-institutional co‑operation on both the European and global scene. The Summit welcomed the joint declaration for enhanced co‑operation and interaction adopted by the Council of Europe and the OSCE. It also adopted a clear roadmap for strengthened partnership with the European Union. They entrusted Jean-Claude Juncker with the task of drawing up – in his personal capacity – a report on the relationship between the Council of Europe and the European Union.

-           Three conventions, adopted a few days earlier by the Committee of Ministers, were also opened for signature at the Summit.[19]

-           Side events included a Youth Summit which was also held in Warsaw.[20]

The handover of the Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers from Poland to Portugal took place at the end of the Summit.

The follow-up to the Summit was entrusted to a Ministers’ Deputies’ Follow-up Committee on the Third Summit (CM-SUIVI3).

As a result, for example, a Forum on the future of democracy was set up which later developed into the World Forum for Democracy.

At this Summit, the Heads of State and Government of 37 out of 46 member States were present. There were 9 Deputy Prime Ministers/Ministers for Foreign Affairs.

3.    Remarks/lessons learned

The Warsaw Summit provided strong legitimacy for the work conducted by Mr Juncker and by the Group of Wise persons.

In 2006, Mr Juncker delivered the Report Council of Europe - European Union: "A sole ambition for the European continent" ) with paved the way for the preparation of a Memorandum of Understanding between the Council of Europe and the European Union. Co-operation with the EU, main institutional partner of the Council of Europe in political, legal and financial terms, remains a priority.

The Group of Wise persons, set up in September 2005, provided a basis for further reform work to ensure the long-term effectiveness of the system of the European Convention of Human Rights. This work was intense over a 10–15-year period (Interlaken Process) and has remained a priority for the Organisation.