REPORT FOR THE GENERAL COMMITTEE ON

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN QUESTIONS

Rapporteur: Ms. Gordana Comic (Serbia)

Introduction

Next year, the OSCE will mark its 40thanniversary. The Helsinki +40 process has been aninclusive effort by participating States to provide strong and continuous political impetus toadvancing work towards a security community, and further strengthening our co-operation in theOSCE. This initiative, supported by the Chairmanships of Ukraine (2013), Switzerland (2014)and Serbia (2015), has been welcomed by all 57 participating States. Of course, we are deeplyconcerned about regression in meeting human dimension commitments in entire regions of theOSCE, as well as the most recent violation of the Helsinki Final Act by the Russian Federation’sinvasion of Ukraine’s Crimea, as well as lack of progress in frozen conflicts. All of thisundermines theraison d’etreof this important comprehensive security Organization and itsmandate to protect Eurasian security through co-operation, human rights and democracy.At the core of the Helsinki Final Act, the participating States agreed to “respect human rights andfundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, for allwithout distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.” They recognized “the universalsignificance of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for which is an essential factorfor the peace, justice and well-being necessary to ensure the development of friendly relations andco-operation among themselves as among all States.” They have agreed to refrain from threat ofuse of force, and respect for territorial integrity.1In our resolution this year, the Committee on Democracy, Human Rights and HumanitarianQuestions will focus on key human dimension issues such as rule of law, access to justice,political prisoners, civil society engagement and OSCE human dimension reform, including ourhuman rights tools and field operations. In particular, we will also discuss issues of migrationmanagement and the need to secure and protect the basic human rights of all migrants in theOSCE area – regardless of their legal status.

Migration Management and Human Rights Protection

Migration management traditionally falls into what the OSCE considers the “second dimension” –economic and environmental issues. This Committee in Baku will look at the issue from a HumanDimension perspective: protection of migrants’ human rights, non-discrimination and supportingOSCE countries, including those that host migrants and those which generate migratory flows dueto socio-economic issues and/or conflicts.In this regard, the OSCE PA will review the situation concerning migrants from countries such asTajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, who are hosted by the Russian Federation, Kazakhstanand other participating States. The Committee will discuss the treatment of these migrants in hostcountries, but also at the significant socio-economic impact these heavy migration flows have onthe countries of origin. Along with Moldova, Tajikistan tops global economic surveys ofremittance-dependent states. With regard to host countries, there are deep concerns regarding therisk of human trafficking, respecting national labour regulations (when applied to migrants – both1

legal and illegal), but also serious non-discrimination issues against migrants of different race,religion and cultural heritage. Asylum applications from sexual minorities have increased inEurope – so our Committee will also discuss the treatment of the LGBT communities in thecountries of origin, generating asylum seekers in Europe and North America.West of Vienna, the Committee will focus on issues of discrimination against migrants of allkinds: asylum seekers and refugees, but also labour migrants. Particular attention will be paid toprotecting labour rights, integration and legalization, as well as migration burden-sharing withinthe European Union states. The OSCE is built on principles of international co-operation. TheCommittee will look at ways migrants contribute to host countries: both economically andculturally through a diversity of views, cultures, religions, and traditions.The OSCE must look at ways to ensure that overly restrictive migration management policies onthe rise in the West do not undermine human rights, including labour rights of migrants. Inparticular, the Committee will look at women and children among migrants, who are at high riskof falling victim to human trafficking for sexual exploitation, as well as exploitation for labour.The OSCE will mark ten years since the Ministerial decision on gender equality. Regrettably, wecan see both inside the Organization and the geographical area it spans that progress towardgender equality has stalled, and in some areas has begun to regress. This particularly affectswomen in the West at times of financial crisis and austerity, and there is ample evidence of this inthe European Union. Participating States East of Vienna are impacted as countries in transitionstruggle with heavy gender-based discrimination in society in general, but in the workplace inparticular. The OSCE has evidenced this in our election observation work, where candidates forparliament, party leadership and government posts are rarely gender-balanced. At times ofhardship in transitioning, as well as established democracies, it is the women who bear the bruntof the economic burden – often forced to leave the workplace and return to caring for thehousehold as equal pay for equal work remains a major issue across the OSCE area. Migrantwomen are particularly affected, as uprooted families are especially vulnerable.Treatment of migrants as a “threat” is unacceptable. The OSCE should work harder torecommend national policies for more tolerant and understanding societies that appreciate thecontribution multi-culturalism can make to human development. Parliamentarians serve thepeople of their constituencies (in many cases, this includes migrants – both refugees/asylumseekers and economic migrants). Through the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, legislators shouldwork hard to deepen the understanding of what migrants give to host countries through diversityand plurality of cultures, views and traditions. In particular, we should treat counter-terrorismmeasures with caution to ensure we do not neglect to protect the basic human rights of thoseaccused. The OSCE should not allow policies to develop in participating States that undermineaccess to justice of those accused, who are often migrants. Legislators have a particularresponsibility in this regard.Detention facilities meant for processing migrants must be improved. This is connected toburden-sharing of migration issues in Europe, in particular. Some OSCE participating States areoverwhelmed by migrants – some seeking better economic conditions, some fleeing persecution.Treating both with dignity is significant to the future of Europe, and the OSCE area at large.Wealthier nations in Europe should contribute more to migration management in the area.Looking at developments East of Vienna, it is not likely that migration flows East-to-West willreduce in volume in the coming years, and we need to look at new ways to preserve humandignity in managing these migratory flows.

At its Annual Session in Baku, the OSCE PA will also debate the rise of extremism andxenophobia – this is an important topic when we discuss migration and non-discrimination issues.Europe should lead by example in the OSCE area. Discrimination is an issue which concernseveryone. As we have seen in previous global conflicts, discrimination against one particularsocial group, such as migrants, or LGBT for example, has previously led to major global conflict,including genocide. Given the important historical lessons on our Continent, the rise of any suchtendencies both East and West of Vienna should be treated with extreme caution.

Human Dimension Reform: Field Presences, Their Mandates and Our Operational

Response

The OSCE PA has consistently called for full and long-term mandates for OSCE field operations– the flagships of our Organization. In particular, the Assembly has called for the re-opening ofthe OSCE field operations in Belarus and Georgia. It is deeply regrettable that in Azerbaijan, themission has been downgraded to a Project Co-ordinator’s Office, which means it will have nomonitoring and reporting mandate. The Committee resolution calls on Ukraine to upgrade itsOSCE presence to a full-scale mission. The issue of field missions is linked to the over-relianceof the OSCE on the consensus mechanism in its decision-making body – the Permanent Council.The trend is not positive, and greatly reduces the effectiveness of our Organization.Our Committee will again raise the issue that the one-country veto obstructs the work of thisOrganization. We see this in regard to setting the Human Dimension Implementation Meetingagendas, field operations, key staffing positions and response to human rights crises in the OSCEarea. Examples of inadequate and/or delayed response to crisis, include Georgia, Kyrgyzstan andUkraine. In Ukraine, a large-scale OSCE monitoring mission has been deployed with a two-weekdelay due to a one-country veto in the Permanent Council, with zero presence in or access toUkraine’s Crimea. This calls into question how far the OSCE has come in 40 years since theHelsinki Final Act and whether this Organization can continue to exist in this framework. AnOSCE constituent put it best: “What is the point of the OSCE if the aggressor has a veto?”Tools such as the Moscow Mechanism are heavily under-used by the OSCE. The ViennaDocument has been applied in a new way to the crisis in Ukraine, including attempts to apply toCrimea – which have been met with heavy push-back from one participating State, leaving accessto the area an outstanding issue for our Organization. The OSCE guards human rights, democracyand Eurasian security. In order for the OSCE’s ultimate goal – comprehensive security – toremain relevant for the OSCE area, we must work hard to further develop such diplomatic humanrights tools and apply them more frequently – both East and West of Vienna.

Role of Civil Society and the OSCE

The OSCE’s Human Dimension reform is moving along, but the lack of progress regarding theparticipation of civil society in the decision-making process is missing from the agenda. Severalproposals have been made by non-governmental organizations and coalitions, such as the CivicSolidarity Platform.The OSCE PA has repeatedly called for the OSCE Permanent Council to organize meetings withregard to the violation of OSCE commitments in the Human Dimension, to conduct thesemeetings in a way that is open to the public, the media and civil society representatives, wecannot see any improvements in this regard. We do welcome the work of the Human Dimension

Committee in Vienna, in this regard, as well as the strong emphasis that the 2014 SwissChairmanship has placed on civil society engagement.The Assembly has also called for a civil society advisory board within the OSCE PA – in order toengage civil society in a consistent and constructive manner. While this issue remains on thetable, civil society has been present in recent OSCE PA meetings, including the Winter Meeting –where it has become a tradition to invite guest speakers from among civil society to address theparliamentarians, and engage in an open, transparent and constructive debate. The Assembly’sWinter Meeting this year saw a record number of civil society representatives observing theMeeting, engaging with diplomats and parliamentarians from across the OSCE area.

Rule of Law and Political Prisoners in the OSCE Area

As stated in the 1990 Copenhagen Document,2all human beings should have access to a fair trialand tribunal, which also applies to political activists and those accused of terrorist activities. The1991 Moscow Document indicated that participating States committed themselves to treat allpersons deprived of their liberty with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of thehuman person and to respect the internationally recognized standards that relate to theadministration of justice and the human rights of detainees. Therefore, all participating Statesshould co-operate with international institutions regarding visits to all prisoners – including thosethe international community considers to be incarcerated on political grounds.The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has defined the term “political prisoner.”The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly supports this effort, and encourages its application to OSCEparticipating States. Individuals and sometimes whole groups from among civil society, politicalparties and human rights defenders languish in prisons without adequate access to justice. Thereare political prisoners in many OSCE participating States – primarily East of Vienna, but there aredeep concerns about the prison in Guantanamo Bay, the use of extraordinary rendition – and whatlessons the West has drawn from these human rights violations. No justice system is perfect, butthe OSCE must strive to ever improve standards for rule of law and access to justice for all. ThisCommittee has heard testimonies over the years from former political prisoners, their relativesand legal counsel, and we hope to continue this tradition – highlighting important human rightsissues by first-hand sources.The OSCE has not developed binding standards in the field of prison conditions and thesystematic inspection of prisons is still limited. Austria recently ratified the Optional Protocol tothe UN Convention against Torture, and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment orPunishment, which provides for an international inspection system, while many others still havenot ratified this important protocol (Andorra, Belarus, Belgium, Canada, Finland, Georgia,Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Monaco, Mongolia, Norway,the Russian Federation, Slovakia, San Marino, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, the UnitedStates and Uzbekistan).3This issue also remains outstanding.

Conclusion

As the OSCE looks to its 40-year anniversary, it is a time to look back and to look forward.Continuous violations of the Helsinki Final Act and regression in meeting Human Dimensioncommitments call into question the effectiveness of our Organization and with it – the future ofEurasian comprehensive security. The Helsinki +40 processes should review the achievementsand the violations that were observed since the 1975 Helsinki Final Act, note the general trends,make clear recommendations on further integrating human security into the overall agenda of theOSCE and find more effective ways to ensure respect for States’ human rights commitments,including follow-up on concrete human rights issues. The OSCE must not be afraid to cite States– East and West – which violate the Organization’s core principles, and to cite cases whichhighlight the level of human rights abuses in our area.In particular, we must not forget the most vulnerable segments of the population, who are affectedby all the challenges that our Organization has failed to address. In this case, the Committee willreview the plight of migrants, especially migrant women in the OSCE area, and look at waysparliamentarians can contribute to improve policies of non-discrimination and migrationmanagement in our respective countries.