Vol. 535 No. 5
43 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his response to the criticism by Amnesty International that Ireland failed to use its position during its presidency of the Council of Europe to take effective action against the Russian Federation during the Chechen war; and the steps being taken to ensure a more effective input at the Council of Europe level for the future. [13062/01]
The Government welcomes any independent analysis of Ireland's human rights policies, domestic and international. There are many issues highlighted within Amnesty International's audit of Ireland's compliance with international human rights standards with which we agree and I would be happy to provide a list of these to the Deputy. NGOs are important partners for the Department of Foreign Affairs in the examination of human rights issues on which I would welcome any contribution to a constructive dialogue.
The Minister, Deputy Cowen, strongly rejects, however, the claim in the report that Ireland failed in its chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to deal adequately with the crisis in Chechnya, the dominant political issue during our chairmanship. It received the constant personal attention of the former Minister, Deputy Andrews, and the Minister. The Council of Europe is now playing a significant role in Chechnya, including by maintaining human rights experts on the ground to register and follow-up on human rights violations. This role was initiated under Ireland's presidency. Our role was acknowledged at the time and subsequently, including by the Council's Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Alvaro Gil-Robles. In an interview with The Irish Times on 26 March the Commissioner said that “it was in large measure due to Ireland's interest that so much has been achieved.” In a statement issued following publication of the Amnesty International report, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Mr. Walter Schwimmer, expressed surprise at the criticism of Irish involvement with the Chechnya conflict in the report and said: “Ireland made a significant impact on these issues during its term in office and to now accuse it of failing to take action is, in my view, mistaken and misdirected.”
During the period of Ireland's chairmanship of the Council, the Parliamentary Assembly decided to withdraw the voting rights of the Russian members of the assembly. This sent a clear signal to Russia that the Council of Europe would not be prepared to tolerate violation by Russia of its commitments as a member of the organisation. Unlike the Parliamentary Assembly, however, the Committee of Ministers acts on the basis of consensus of its members. Ireland's approach as chairman of the committee was to maintain maximum pressure for fulfilment by Russia of its obligations to the Council and, at the same time, ensure a meaningful response by the Council of Europe, including a concrete contribution on the ground to protecting the human rights of individual Chechnyans. Ireland's view was, and remains, that the Council could not make that contribution unless Russia remained a member of the organisation. No member state supported the suspension of Russia from the Council.
Additional information.Ireland used its chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers to highlight the concerns of the international community over Chechnya; to maintain effective political pressure on Russia to fulfil its obligation; and to provide concrete assistance for the victims of the terrible human rights violations on the ground. Today, the Council is making that contribution, notably by maintaining its experts on the ground pursuing reported cases of human rights violations. The Council remains the only international organisation present in Chechnya.
While there have been in the period since our presidency some positive developments in Chechnya, the Government continues to have serious concerns over the situation there. These concerns were echoed in the resolution recently adopted by the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. Ireland continues to be actively involved in pressing Russia to fulfil its commitments, including those secured during our Council of Europe chairmanship.
I regret the absence of the Minister and hope he is recovering from his accident. We send him our good wishes. Does the Minister of State accept that Amnesty International is a recognised international body with a fine reputation? How is it that those aspects of the report the Government considered complimentary were welcomed while it rejected the report's cutting criticism of its record during its presidency of the Council of Europe? Does the Minister of State agree that there is a factual basis for the accusation that the Government failed to use its position during its presidency to take effective action against the Russian Federation during the Chechen war? Under the Irish presidency, the Committee of Ministers failed to take any action against the Russian Federation, a member of the Council of Europe. Does the Minister of State agree that it is a fair and independent criticism? How does Ireland intend to do better in future in view of its dismal record on the issue?
I accept that Amnesty International is a credible organisation with which we work closely together with NGOs in evaluating Ireland's compliance with its international human rights obligations. However, with regard to our role during our presidency of the Committee of Ministers, it is factually incorrect to state that Ireland failed to take action. When Ireland took over the presidency it quickly became clear that the situation in Chechnya was deteriorating rapidly. At our insistence, Chechnya was included in the formal agenda of every meeting of the Committee of Ministers, that is, every week, during our presidency despite the strong opposition of the Russian Federation.
As the Chechen crisis deepened during the first months of our presidency, we were convinced, as were other members, that no useful purpose could be served by suspending Russia's membership of the Council of Europe. No other member state supported suspension or expulsion of Russia. On taking office as chairman of the Committee of Ministers, the then Minister, Deputy Andrews, instructed that every effort should be directed to dealing with the issue, an instruction which continued when Deputy Cowen succeeded him. This resulted in intensive discussion of Chechnya at every meeting of the Committee of Ministers during our chairmanship. It also resulted in the visit of the Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Gil-Robles, to the region, sustained political pressure on Russia to respond to deepening concerns about the situation, a decision to place Council of Europe human rights experts on the ground in Chechnya – they are still there – and a commitment by the Russian Foreign Minister, in a ministerial level communiqué, to the establishment of independent investigation of human rights violations.
The six minutes for this question are concluded.
Most of them taken up by the Minister of State. I have one more question.
The Deputy took some time asking the earlier question. During ordinary questions the Deputy is entitled to one minute, but—
So the Minister of State can ramble on, but I am precluded from asking a question.
There should be a bell for the Minister of State.
In priority questions the Minister has two minutes for the initial reply and there are four minutes remaining for further questions between the Deputy and Minister.
All of which the Minister of State took.
The six minutes are concluded.
