Przewodniczący. − Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest oświadczenie Wiceprzewodniczącej Komisji/Wysokiej Przedstawiciel Unii Europejskiej ds. Zagranicznych i Polityki Bezpieczeństwa w sprawie praworządności w Rosji.

Bardzo proszę o zabranie głosu w imieniu Wiceprzewodniczącej Komisji/Wysokiej Przedstawiciel pani Enikő Győri.

  Enikő Győri, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, at the request of Baroness Ashton, the Hungarian Presidency of the Council is representing the High Representative and Vice-President of the Commission during this debate. Baroness Ashton, as you may know, is travelling in northern Africa and in the Middle East this week.

I wish to thank you for raising the issue of the situation of human rights and the rule of law in Russia. Despite some very positive signals from President Medvedev last year, the actual human rights situation in Russia and, in particular, in the Northern Caucasus region, remains deeply preoccupying. Violence, harassment and intimidation against activists, lawyers and independent journalists are of great concern to us.

The number of cases to support this statement is unacceptably high. The brutal attacks on Russian journalists Oleg Kashin and Anatoly Adamchuk and environmental activist Konstantin Fetisov are among the latest reminders of the climate of insecurity and intimidation that journalists, activists and human rights defenders in Russia face in their day-to-day work.

Despite assurances at the highest levels, the perpetrators are rarely brought to justice and sentenced. Accountability for violence and intimidation against human rights defenders – let me mention the cases of Mrs Estemirova, Mrs Politkovskaya, Mrs Barburova and Mr Markelov among a great number of others – remains an important test for the independence and efficiency of Russia’s judiciary. As long as the crimes remain unsolved, a climate of impunity will continue to prevail.

There are, however, also positive developments. I should mention here the Moscow City Council’s decision to authorise peaceful and regular demonstrations – which were forbidden until last year – such as those in support of Article 31 or the day of press rallies. We have welcomed this decision. At the same time, we continue to receive reports about arbitrary arrests of peaceful demonstrators, including opposition leaders, at these very same authorised demonstrations, as well as others across the country. This is a matter of serious concern to us.

Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly and association are preconditions for the development of modern societies. All of these freedoms are enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. They also form part of the commitments that Russia has entered into as a member of the United Nations, the OSCE and the Council of Europe. The EU urges Russia to uphold its commitments and guarantee this right to citizens.

President Medvedev has asked his Presidential Human Rights Council to examine the Khodorkovsky, Lebedev and Magnitsky cases. We very much welcome this decision. The EU has made no secret of its serious concerns with the way these cases have been handled.

President Medvedev has often spoken out against what he has termed the legal nihilism prevailing in Russia. The EU stands ready to support Russia’s efforts to overcome this, starting with the reform of its judicial system. Convinced that real modernisation needs established respect for the rule of law and its equal and fair application, we have put the rule of law at the core of our partnership for modernisation.

In this context, concrete activities have already been prepared – for example the setting up of an appeal system for civil and criminal court cases in Russia – in close cooperation with the President’s administration and the Council of Europe. We are ready to work with Russia on this, as well as on new projects on corruption and the Hague Conventions.

The situation in the Northern Caucasus is particularly worrying and needs urgent action. We welcome the new strategy for economic and social development and the efforts by Deputy Prime Minister Khloponin, but much more needs to be done to provide a lasting response to the barbaric acts of terrorism against civilians. The continuing immunity and impunity of security forces operating in Chechnya is fuelling grievances and terror in the region and is a source of deep preoccupation for us.

We pay tribute to all those who have lost their lives and to those who have fallen victim to aggression because of their professions or beliefs, as well as the courageous ones who cannot be deterred from their civil engagement in such a precarious environment.

Overall, the current report has not been a very positive one. However, there are positive signs in the situation of human rights in Russia. These are often offset by backward developments and overall have not been enough to achieve real improvements, but we must not be discouraged.

The significant body of European Court of Human Rights case law provides an important incentive for the development of Russian law with regard to respect for human rights. We are engaged in a serious dialogue with Russia on human rights. Russia accepts this and, of course, also uses it to criticise what it sees as imperfections in the EU. We will continue with that dialogue. There is no alternative.

  György Schöpflin, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, those who know Russia will know that what passes for a legal system there does not measure up to the normal criteria of the Rule of Law.

This affects Russia’s relations with the rest of the world and equally with its own citizens. It follows that, when the European Union deals with Russia, it must take into account a variety of non-legal factors, notably political interference, corruption, and occasionally violence.

The relationship between Russia and the West, then, is subject to uncertainty, not to mention the complete absence of transparency and accountability. Where Russia’s own citizens are concerned, they lead lives more affected by arbitrariness and violence than can be reconciled with the European Union’s commitment to universal human rights.

Attempts to transform Russia have failed, so the European Union has no alternative but to live with the awkward interface between its own legality and Russia’s non-legality.

  Adrian Severin, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, the model of power-sharing between the state and the members of society determines the content of political decisions, while the predictability of the decision-making process and the correct enforcement of decisions are guaranteed by the honesty, professionalism and independence of the judiciary.

The European Union and Russia can do business together only if there is compatibility between their power-sharing models, their decision-making mechanisms and their judiciary systems. The achievement of such compatibility is an exercise in partnership and cooperation, in consensus, confidence and interoperability-building, not in advocacy, lecturing and finger-pointing.

Russia is a full member of the Council of Europe and a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights. Consequently, it is the Council of Europe that has competence to look into the functioning of democracy and the Rule of Law in Russia. The European Union should therefore rely on the Council of Europe in order to achieve, together with Russia, a common area of freedom, democratic security and justice.

Moreover, since the European Union is itself on the way towards accession to the European Convention on Human Rights, it should use its future status as a party to that convention to accelerate convergence and interoperability with Russia in the field of democracy and the rule of law.

Years ago, when the European Parliament had little more power than a militant NGO, its only tools were the rhetoric of naming and shaming. Today, after Lisbon, we are a powerful political institution. This imposes on us more responsibility, pragmatism and self-restraint. We should not let ourselves be led by emotions. We should not be casual with our values either. We are not allowed to be simultaneously prosecutor and judge. We should not act on the basis of mere allegations, rumours or various interest lobby groups. Our credibility, generated by the fairness and maturity of our approach, as well as our firmness and openness, is the best weapon we have in our dialogue with Russia at a time when our citizens have instructed us to develop a strategic partnership with Russia, not to restart the Cold War.

  Kristiina Ojuland, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, we consider Russia to be an important partner of the European Union. Therefore, we expect Russia to respect her international obligations and implement the constitutional rights of her own citizens.

It is a fact that violations of human rights, civil liberties and the rule of law have become commonplace in Russia. Unlawfulness and widespread corruption led to the emigration of 300 000 citizens from Russia last year alone. It is hard to envisage both foreign and domestic business investments in such a climate.

The Russian authorities are evidently implementing unconstitutional law and order. The situation in the North Caucasus is one of the vilest examples of that. The Russian constitution provides a basis for a multi-party system, but de facto it has become a one-party system with a marginalised parliament.

I would like to ask the representative of the Council which punitive measures and sanctions will be applied against the Russian officials who are directly responsible for human rights abuses and perversion of the rule of law.

The European Union must be consistent in its policy towards third countries. It would discredit the European Union if we turned a blind eye to some severe offences in some countries, while imposing sanctions on other countries for identical offences. We cannot continue normal relations unless concrete improvements are made in Russia. We have to face the truth.

  Werner Schulz, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Die Russische Föderation ist trotz einer einwandfreien Verfassung noch immer kein Rechtsstaat, Verfassungsrecht und Verfassungswirklichkeit gehen weit auseinander. Für einen funktionierenden Rechtsstaat fehlen leider die elementaren Voraussetzungen einer unabhängigen Justiz und einer freien Presse. „Das beste russische Gericht befindet sich in Straßburg“, lautet eine sarkastische Empfehlung. Tatsache ist, dass etwa ein Drittel der beim Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte eingehenden Klagen aus Russland kommt. Die russischen Bürger haben kein Vertrauen in die eigenen Gerichte und bekommen dort nur selten Recht. Das zeigt sich auch an der zurückgehenden Zahl der Berufungen.

Obwohl mit Präsident Medwedjew und Ministerpräsident Putin zwei Juristen an der Spitze des Staates stehen, die wiederholt angekündigt haben, den Rechtsnihilismus zu bekämpfen, erweisen sich ihre Worte, denen entgegengesetzte Taten folgen, eher als Rechtszynismus. Kein Gericht in Russland traut sich Urteile zu sprechen ohne Rücksprache mit den höheren Instanzen. Diese Telefonjustiz hat abhängige Richter geschaffen, die mehr um die eigene Sicherheit und das eigene Fortkommen besorgt sind als um die Gerechtigkeit. Das zeigt auch der Fall Chodorkowski. Gerade hat eine Justizangestellte ausgesagt, dass dem Richter Danilkin das Urteil von oben diktiert wurde. Mit der wiederholten Verurteilung von Chodorkowski und Lebedjew ist auch der russische Rechtsstaat im Gulag geblieben. Wie zu Sowjetzeiten geschah die Vorverurteilung durch die politische Führung.

So geht die gelenkte Demokratie Hand in Hand mit der gelenkten Justiz. Obwohl die russische Justiz vor allem den strafenden Staat verkörpert, versagt sie völlig, wenn es um die Aufklärung, Verfolgung und Verurteilung von politisch motivierten Straftaten geht. Die Übergriffe und Morde an Journalisten haben ein Klima der Angst und Unterdrückung geschaffen.

Erschreckend sind auch die Zustände im Strafvollzug. Hierfür steht beispielhaft der Fall Sergej Magnitzkis, eines Anwalts, der Korruption aufgedeckt hat und dafür in einem beispiellosen Willkürakt ins Gefängnis kam und dort wegen unterlassener medizinischer Hilfeleistung grausam ums Leben kam.

Ein Modernisierungsabkommen der EU mit Russland wird nur dann Erfolg haben, wenn es im Kern ein Modernisierungsabkommen der russischen Führung mit der eigenen Bevölkerung enthält. Das bedeutet endlich die Einhaltung der verfassungsmäßig garantierten Bürgerrechte und die Erfüllung der in der OSZE und im Europarat eingegangenen Verpflichtungen.

Russland braucht den Übergang von der gelenkten Demokratie zur Entwicklungsdemokratie. Unabdingbar dafür sind freie und korrekte Duma- und Präsidentschaftswahlen, die erleichterte und europäischen Standards entsprechende Zulassung von Parteien und ein fairer Wahlkampf, der allen Kandidaten gleiche Chancen und den Zugang zu den öffentlichen Medien einräumt.

  Charles Tannock, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, Russia is an important partner for the EU on many fronts, but we cannot pretend that Russia is a genuine democracy with a rule of law. Unsolved murders of journalists and human rights defenders to politically-motivated show trials with acquiescent judges say it all in my view. Why, then, is Russia tolerated as a member of the Council of Europe? That is a very good question.

Undoubtedly, the Kremlin treasures this international legitimisation of a government described in the US diplomatic cables recently leaked by WikiLeaks as a virtual Mafia state.

Conversely, the Council of Europe is discredited by its continued acquiescence towards Russia’s authoritarian government. The European Court of Human Rights has a backlog of 27 000 cases from Russia alone, yet a Russian judge on the court is able to order the British Government to give British prisoners the right to vote. This not only exposes the absurdity of Russia’s membership of the Council of Europe, but also encapsulates why the Council of Europe is in my view increasingly ignored internationally. Sadly now, and as a result of this, many Britons, including politicians, think it is time for the UK to review its membership of this organisation and its very intrusive court.

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI). - Monsieur le Président, notre Parlement croit pouvoir donner à la Russie des leçons en matière de droits de l'homme. Il ferait mieux de balayer devant sa porte, celle de l'Union européenne. M. Tannock parlait, par exemple, de M. Julian Assange, publiciste dissident, fondateur du site WikiLeaks, dont je ne partage pas pour autant les actions. Il est retenu depuis des semaines en Grande-Bretagne sous l'effet d'une demande d'extradition de la Suède, parfaitement odieuse et ridicule, dont on voit bien qu'elle pourrait être une étape de sa livraison aux États-Unis.

En effet, M. Assange est accusé de viol par deux jeunes femmes, dont l'une se plaint en fait d'une rupture de préservatif au cours de rapports sexuels consentis, l'autre d'avoir été surprise dans son sommeil après un premier rapport également consenti. De qui se moque-t-on? Il est évident que si ces deux jeunes femmes ne voulaient pas être violées, entre guillemets, par M. Assange, il ne fallait pas qu'elles se glissent toutes nues dans son lit! Ce n'est pas un outrage qu'elles ont subi, c'est un hommage. On voit à cet exemple à quel point l'extrême liberté...

(Le Président retire la parole à l'orateur mais l'orateur continue hors micro)

  President. − Dear colleague, this is a discussion on Russia. The item on the agenda is the situation in Russia. I am sorry, but we cannot change the topic in the middle of the discussion.

  Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE). - Het debat van vandaag is ook ontstaan omdat de Russische leiders zelf, president Medvedev voorop, het belang van de rechtsstaat voor de modernisering van Rusland al zo vaak heeft onderstreept.

Maar tegelijk stellen wij vast dat er veel concrete voorbeelden te geven zijn van zaken die juist een rem zetten op die modernisering. Als ik bijvoorbeeld kijk naar de corruptie, die volgens bronnen alleen maar toeneemt, ofschoon er ook goede, nieuwe corruptiewetgeving is, of naar de Yukos-zaak. Of het telkens weer oppakken van oppositieleden en verdedigers van mensenrechten die onze Sacharov-prijs gekregen hebben.

Voorzitter, de ernst met de modernisering die in Rusland wordt beleden heeft nog niet zijn beslag gekregen. En als wij dan met Rusland samen bezig zijn met het partnerschap voor modernisering, en we aan het onderhandelen zijn over het EU-Rusland-akkoord, dan vind ik het ongelooflijk naar dat in het voortgangsrapport over het partnerschap voor modernisering slechts vijf zinnen gewijd worden aan de modernisering van die rechtsstaat. Ik denk dat wij ook zelf meer expertise in huis moeten hebben.

Wat ik wil doen, en wij zullen dat ook samen doen in het verslag dat het Parlement over Rusland gaat opstellen, is oproepen om die rechtsstaat te bevorderen.

  Knut Fleckenstein (S&D). - Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bedaure es, dass unsere heutige Debatte so kurzfristig auf die Tagesordnung gesetzt wurde, dass die Hohe Vertreterin für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik nicht hier sein kann. Catherine Ashton hat in den vergangenen Monaten mit dem Rat daran gearbeitet, die EU-interne Abstimmung zur Zusammenarbeit mit unseren strategischen Partnern, darunter auch Russland, zu verbessern. Mit Blick auf ihre Bemühungen um eine koordinierte Position hätte ich es schon für sinnvoll gehalten, diese Debatte nicht ohne sie zu führen.

Kein anderer der strategischen Partner der EU ist uns so nahe wie Russland, geografisch und auch aufgrund historischer Erfahrungen. Deshalb nehmen wir großen Anteil an den innenpolitischen Entwicklungen. Ich möchte an dieser Stelle ausdrücklich auf das Arbeitsprogramm verweisen, welches die Koordinatoren der Partnerschaft für Modernisierung auf russischer wie auf unserer Seite gemeinsam ausgearbeitet haben. Dieses gemeinsame Arbeitsprogramm zur Modernisierung enthält wichtige und richtige Ansätze, um die rechtsstaatliche Entwicklung in Russland tatkräftig zu unterstützen. Es ist auch der richtige Weg, um unserer Partnerschaft tatsächlichen Nutzen zu geben. Nutzen vor allem ganz konkret für die Bürger. Mit seiner Initiative zur Modernisierung Russlands hat der russische Präsident seinen internationalen Partnern die Möglichkeit zu einer fruchtbaren Zusammenarbeit mit Russland gegeben. Also nutzen wir sie auch!

Meine Kollegen haben bereits dargelegt: Wenn Modernisierung nachhaltig sein soll, dann kann es nicht nur darum gehen, eine technologische Modernisierung anzustreben. Eine modernisierte russische Wirtschaft baut auf verlässlichen rechtsstaatlichen Prinzipien auf. Erst wenn sich Bürger und Unternehmer auf den rechtsstaatlichen Rahmen verlassen können, haben sie auch den Mut zu Innovation und Investition. Ergreifen wir also die ausgestreckte Hand und helfen wir Russland dabei, diese Modernisierung zu schaffen.

  Jacek Protasiewicz (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Tak jak wielu kolegów, którzy zabierali głos wcześniej, podpisuję się pod tym oczywistym stwierdzeniem, że Rosja jest dla Unii Europejskiej strategicznym partnerem zarówno w wymiarze geopolitycznym, bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego jak i również w wymiarze gospodarczym. Nic też dziwnego, że tak bardzo interesujemy się sytuacją u tego najważniejszego naszego sąsiada. Tymczasem okazuje się, że pojawiają się tam tendencje bardzo niepokojące. Ostatnie badania społeczne, które chciałbym przytoczyć, mówią, że tylko 3% Rosjan uważa, że ma wpływ na życie polityczne w swoim kraju, 61% uważa, że nie może skutecznie bronić swoich praw, a 82% uważa, że państwowi uczestnicy nie przestrzegają obowiązującego ustanowionego w Rosji prawa. To jest smutny obraz sytuacji w kraju, którego rozwój tak bardzo leży nam na sercu, ale rozwój tylko w wymiarze gospodarczym, modernizacja ekonomiczna w najmniejszym stopniu nie powinna wyczerpywać relacji europejsko-rosyjskich. Prawa człowieka, rządy prawa, to jest również ważny obszar, na którym powinniśmy się koncentrować, tak jak wobec innych naszych sąsiadów, wliczając w to choćby Białoruś.

  Michael Gahler (PPE). - Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Neben den breiten Bereichen der Zusammenarbeit auf wirtschaftlichem Gebiet, aber auch bei den globalen Herausforderungen halte ich es für wichtig – und das ist auch hier zum Ausdruck gekommen –, dass wir die Situation der Rechtsstaatlichkeit in Russland immer wieder auch in Gesprächen auf der Tagesordnung halten.

Wir haben in den letzten Wochen sehr viel über Stabilität auch im Mittelmeerraum gesprochen und definiert, was Stabilität nicht ist, nämlich autoritäre Strukturen. Aber gleichzeitig heißt das dann auch für Russland, dass Stabilität sich nicht auf die politische Einflussnahme auf Gerichte, auf die Verfolgung von Journalisten und von Menschen, die sich für Menschenrechte einsetzen, gründen kann. Daher ist es aus meiner Sicht immer eine richtige Zeit, dieses anzusprechen.

Ich hoffe, dass wir in den operativen Beziehungen, die wir mit Russland in der nächsten Zeit auch eingehen werden, Russland klar machen können, dass es seine eigene Zukunft aufs Spiel setzt, wenn es seine eigene Rechtsstaatlichkeit nicht wirken lässt.

IN THE CHAIR: DIANA WALLIS
Vice-President

  Tunne Kelam (PPE). - Madam President, there has been a sequence of tens of independent journalists and civil activists being murdered in Russia – for example Politkovskaya, Estemirova and Magnitsky – but not one crime has been cleared up and not one murderer has been brought to justice. The Kremlin regime, by its unwillingness to bring about justice and transparency, can be seen as complicit in these crimes.

Yesterday, the young assistant judge, Natalya Vasilyeva, dashed the network of falsehood around the Khodorkovsky trial by declaring that the verdict was not reached by the judges, but was dictated to them from above.

Issuing a visa ban for the officials responsible for Magnitsky and other cases is one concrete measure to show that the EU is serious about the improvement of the rule of law and transparency in Russia. The fact that the Russian authorities have become so nervous about the very idea of a visa ban shows what a huge positive potential the EU really has to bring about changes in the situation.

  Graham Watson (ALDE). - Madam President, many of us in this House see Russia as part of the great family of European nations and had hoped that after the fall of the Berlin Wall we would see Russia moving closer to the European Union. Sadly, that has not been the case. The current Russian leadership has chosen its own path, and it is one which causes great distress to those of us who wish to see freedom and democracy and the rule of law for the Russian people.

The Commissioner here today has more experience than most of us in dealing with Russia, and no doubt will have his own experience there, but I hope that the Commission will put pressure on the High Representative to adopt a new policy towards any country whose leaders constantly flout the values we hold dear. Let us talk to them and engage with them on trade, as we need to. Let us endeavour to discuss with them human rights, as we should, but let us not allow their leaders to launder their money through Europe’s banking systems, to educate their children in our schools or universities, or to take holidays in our holiday resorts. If we applied that equally to all authoritarian leaders across the world, we would start moving towards what one could call an ethical foreign policy.

  Heidi Hautala (Verts/ALE). - Madam President, I join with colleagues who are saying that we need smart measures to deal with authoritarian regimes which violate human rights.

I would like to ask the Council and Commission Representatives here whether they are prepared to take measures against those who violate human rights, in the manner indicated in Parliament’s resolution of 16 December 2010, which called for an asset freeze and visa bans on those 60 officials implicated in the case of Mr Magnitsky, who unfortunately died in prison in Russia.

Would there be one or two courageous foreign ministers – or indeed Ms Ashton’s representatives – who would take up this initiative, and if it proved to be true that Judge Viktor Danilkin did write the verdict on Khodorkovsky and Lebedev taking direct orders from the Moscow city court, would such a judge be on their list?

  Jaroslav Paška (EFD). - Rusko je jedným z najvýznamnejších a najbližších partnerov Európskej únie. Je to krajina, kde demokracia nemá veľmi dlhú tradíciu, a dá sa povedať, že Rusko si na demokratickú správu stále iba zvyká. Musíme si tiež uvedomiť, že je to krajina, ktorá stále zápasí s pretrvávajúcim islamským terorizmom, a preto postavenie silových bezpečnostných zložiek je v spoločnosti významnejšie ako u nás. Z tohto pohľadu aj občasné odchýlky od našich zaužívaných štandardov demokratického fungovania štátu treba posudzovať aj principiálne a citlivo. Je dobré s ruskými priateľmi korektne hovoriť o všetkých veciach, ktoré nás pri spravovaní krajiny ruskými úradmi trápia. Tento dialóg však musí byť vecný, partnerský, motivovaný úsilím o zlepšenie fungovania demokratického systému v Rusku a nie poučovaním akéhosi samozvaného dozorcu nad demokraciou vo svete. Hovorme s Ruskom ako s priateľom, korektne, otvorene a slušne. Mali by sme mať totiž spoločný záujem na pokoji, miery a prosperite Európy.

  Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE). - Madam President, in my opinion Mr Werner Schulz has drafted a resolution which is very well founded with arguments and draws correct conclusions. However, I am not sure that I understood the point made by Mr Fleckenstein. If the Rules of Procedure do not allow me to ask a question any more I would still like to put this to him. Was he suggesting that we should refrain from supporting this resolution, or was he expressing the opposite, namely wholehearted Socialist support for adopting it right now?

  Knut Fleckenstein (S&D). - Madam President, I am sorry, I was not listening.

(The speaker agreed to take a question under the blue-card procedure (Rule 149(8)).

  Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE). - Madam President, I was not sure whether Mr Fleckenstein was suggesting we support this resolution by Werner Schulz and others, or calling for us to refrain from adopting it at this part-session?

  Knut Fleckenstein (S&D). - Madam President, I will vote for the resolution, yes.

  Enikő Győri, President-in-Office of the Council. − Madam President, first of all I wish to thank all the Members for the pertinent questions they raised during the debate.

I very much share the concerns expressed here by many of you. I believe that the European Union as a whole will have to continue raising these concerns at all levels with our Russian interlocutors. We should not shy away from speaking directly when we have real and concrete issues to raise. If we are to act as strategic partners – and I believe that we are strategic partners of Russia – we must also be prepared to tackle difficult issues.

Two things in particular delighted me during this discussion. The first is that nobody questioned the fact that Russia is an important strategic partner for the European Union. Second, there was a general consensus in this room that modernisation and the establishment of a fully-fledged democracy and the rule of law has not yet finished in Russia, and there are many problems with the workings of democracy there.

I will certainly bring all the points raised to the attention of the High Representative in order for us to follow through the various means at our disposal. I am sure the coming visit of the Russian Government to Brussels on 24 February will provide us with a good opportunity to reiterate our concerns.

Russia is a permanent issue on the agenda of the Foreign Affairs Council. You may know that since last year a regular European Council meeting has been dedicated to discussing issues with our strategic partners. This happened first – and most recently – in September 2010, and I think Mr Van Rompuy will do the same in the course of this year.

I shall now answer some of the specific questions Members have put to me. First, on Ms Hautala’s question on human rights, I would point out that the High Representative takes Parliament’s resolution of December 2010 very seriously. The circumstances surrounding the deaths in pre-trial detention of Sergei Magnitsky and Vera Trifonova must be duly investigated and the Foreign Affairs Council will of course pay special attention to that. We continue to raise these and other concerns at all levels, not only in the twice-yearly human rights consultations, but up to summit level, insisting on Russia upholding international commitments. Any decision on restrictive measures would be for the Council to take. Such instruments should be wielded wisely on the basis of clear evidence. First of all we keep calling on Russia to ensure a proper investigation.

I would say to Ms Oomen-Ruijten that human rights are at the core of the negotiations on the new agreement and will be addressed on a number of fronts. We can assure you that the commitments of the EU and of Russia to uphold human rights, including those of persons belonging to minorities, will figure very prominently in this agreement and indeed constitute an essential element of the future agreement.

In conclusion, I will briefly sum up some of my previous points. The rule of law and independence of the judiciary must remain an integral part of the modernisation effort currently under way in the Russian Federation. The European Union must stand ready to support Russia in these efforts. Freedom of speech, assembly and association are the building blocks on which all Western democracies rest. Russia should uphold the legal commitments which it has entered into as a member of the Council of Europe, the United Nations and the OSCE.

The North Caucasus region remains a source of deep concern for us. We must encourage Russia to seek a sustainable solution to this endemic problem in the region. The important thing to bear in mind is that, in spite of the many concerns we have and the number of challenges Russia is currently facing, there have also been a number of positive developments. We must take President Medvedev at his word and continue to engage in a serious dialogue with Russia on human rights. So if there are cases, we have to be alerted and we have to follow what is happening in Russia very closely.

Thank you very much for your valuable comments. The High Representative will be duly informed of your opinion.

  President. − The debate is closed.

The vote will take place at midday on Thursday, 17 February 2011.

(The sitting was suspended at 11.45 and resumed at 12.00)

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Cristian Dan Preda (PPE), în scris. – Presa internațională a tratat pe larg cazul lui Mihail Hodorkovski şi, într-adevăr, totul pare să indice că acest caz a fost instrumentalizat politic. Recentele declarații ale ofițerului de presă al judecătorului Danilkin indică în mod clar lipsa de independență a justiției în Rusia. Pe de altă parte, este important de subliniat că acest caz nu este unul izolat. Dimpotrivă, ONG-urile care activează în Rusia semnalează în mod regulat faptul că standardele de proces echitabil nu sunt respectate în această ţară. Mai mult decât atât, în septembrie 2010, Adunarea Parlamentară a Consiliului Europei a cerut autorităților de la Moscova să adopte reforme pentru a asigura independența justiției şi să pună capăt hărțuirii avocaților. În fine, este important să subliniem situaţia critică din Caucazul de Nord, regiune în care domneşte un climat de impunitate şi unde, mai rău decât atât, victimelor le este teamă să se apere, pentru a nu se pune şi mai mult în pericol. Este clar că, dacă doresc să fie credibile în intenţia anunţată de a respecta statul de drept, autorităţile ruseşti trebuie să depună mai multe eforturi decât au făcut-o până în acest moment.

  Traian Ungureanu (PPE), in writing. – The rule of President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin is not compatible with the rule of law. For more than 10 years Putin and Medvedev tolerated, and possibly protected, an appalling catalogue of abuses and crimes, including stage-managed trials, press control and political murder.

The horrendous record of lawlessness in Russia is not a question of private delinquency. The real problem is state-sponsored lawlessness. The Russian justice system, and indeed the Russian state, never dealt with crimes aimed at journalists, human rights campaigners and whistle-blowers in the army or in the judiciary. The lawlessness in Russia was regarded for too long as an accident or as a problem beyond state control.

EU policy should hold the Russian authorities responsible for their collusion with criminal elements. Recent developments seem to indicate that the second Khodorkhovsky trial was conducted at the behest of high political figures. The extrajudicial record of the Russian state is already a tradition. The EU policy should take stock of this deplorable practice.

The usual soft EU rhetoric is not appropriate. It should be replaced by a resolute policy, including credible warnings that future cooperation with Russia requires an immediate improvement in Russian law enforcement.

  Krzysztof Lisek (PPE), na piśmie. – Szanowny Panie Przewodniczący, Drogie Koleżanki i Koledzy! Dimitrij Miedwiediew na początku swej kadencji obiecywał Rosjanom „dyktaturę prawa” i pełną demokrację. Prezydent Rosji jest, myślę, świadomy tego, że jego kraj ma trudności ze zbudowaniem demokratycznego państwa prawa i stworzeniem nowoczesnej gospodarki odpowiadającej na globalne wyzwania. Ostatnie wydarzenia w Rosji, w szczególności liczne ataki na dziennikarzy i przedstawicieli niezależnych organizacji pozarządowych oraz wyrok w sprawie Michaiła Chodorkowskiego dają podstawę do zastanowienia się, czy aby za pięknymi postulatami stoi faktyczne rozumienie praw człowieka i podstawowych wolności. Również przestrzeganie przez Rosję jej zobowiązań międzynarodowych może budzić liczne kontrowersje. Nierozwiązane konflikty obejmujące rejony Górnego Karabachu, Naddniestrza oraz Abchazji i Osetii Południowej powinny jak najszybciej zostać zakończone z poszanowaniem prawa międzynarodowego i podjętych przez Rosję zobowiązań. Rosja powinna bezwarunkowo wypełnić wszystkie postanowienia porozumienia z 2008 roku między Rosją, Unią Europejską i Gruzją. W szczególności przedstawiciele Misji Obserwacyjnej Unii Europejskiej w Gruzji (EUMM Gruzja) muszą mieć zagwarantowany nieograniczony dostęp do gruzińskich regionów Abchazji i Osetii Południowej w celu zagwarantowania pokoju i stabilizacji w tych regionach.

  Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE), in writing. – The problem of independent courts and the imitation of democracy, free speech and rule of law seems to be understood by a wide audience. After all, the EU should know how to recognise such a problem. Nonetheless, it seems bizarre, that at the same time some Member States wish to override common understandings and even agreements, such as the EU Common Position 2008/944/CFSP. Ceterum censeo – France has decided to sell a Mistral class warship to Russia; we believe that it will sincerely regret its action.

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ROBERTA ANGELILLI
Vicepresidente