03 Jul 17 | Europe and Central Asia, Magazine, News and features, Russia, Volume 46.02 Summer 2017 Extras
The summer 2017 issue of Index on Censorship magazine explores how the 1917 Russian Revolution still affects freedom today, in Russia and throughout the world.
To mark the release of the issue, Index has compiled a reading list for people wishing to learn more about its legacy in the world today. This list includes works from Soviet Russia and post-Soviet Russia, including Russia under Putin today.
Soviet Russia
Alexander Solzhenitsyn, God keep me from going mad*
1972; vol 1, 2: pp.149-151
An excerpt of a longer poem written by Solzhenitsyn while in a labour camp in North Kazakhstan. The camp later became the inspiration for Solzhenitsyn’s novel A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.
Alexander Glezer, Soviet “unofficial” art*
1975; vol 4, 4: pp. 35-40
Glezer was responsible for organising the now famous unofficial art exhibitions in Moscow in 1974. The first exhibition, on 15 September, was ‘”bulldozed” by police and KGB agents, and a number of artists who tried to exhibit their work were arrested. Two weeks later, however, an open-air exhibition did take place, after the authorities gave permission, and some 10,000 people turned up to see paintings and sculptures by modern Soviet artists who did not enjoy official favour.
Michael Glenny, Orwell’s 1984 through Soviet eyes*
1984; vol 13, 4: pp. 15-17
This article examines Soviet interpretations of 1984, including the assertion that George Orwell was actually critiquing capitalism, not the USSR, with his novel.
Natalya Rubinstein, A people’s artist: Vladimir Vysotsky
1986; vol 15, 7: pp. 20-23
This is an article about the musician Vladimir Vysotsky, once called “the most idolised figure in the Soviet Union”. His songs were circulated on homemade tapes, though never officially recorded until after his death.
Irena Maryniak, The sad and unheroic story of the Soviet soldier’s life
1989; vol 18, 10: pp. 10-13
An Estonian reporter’s exposé prompts a call from the army. Madis Jurgen, who brought to light the dark side of the Soviet armed forces, left Tallinn on Friday 13 October, bound for New York and Toronto, from where he decided to await events.
Post-Soviet Russia
Svetlana Aleksiyevich, A Prayer for Chernobyl
1998; vol 27, 1: pp. 120-128
Early on 26 April 1986, a series of explosions destroyed the nuclear reactor and building of the fourth power generator unit of Chernobyl atomic power station. These extracts are not about the Chernobyl disaster but about a world of Chernobyl of which we know almost nothing. They are the unwritten history.
Viktor Shenderovich, Tales from Hoffman*
2008; vol 37, 1: pp. 49-57
As they say, still waters run deep. On 8 February 2000, an announcement was made in the St Petersburg Gazette by members of the St Petersburg State University Initiative Group. Shortly beforehand they had, in competition with others, nominated Putin as a presidential candidate and now wished to demonstrate their enthusiasm for their former pupil. What they published was a denunciation.
Fatima Tlisova, Nothing personal
2008; vol 37, 1: pp. 36-46
Fatima Tlisova was brutally beaten for her uncompromising journalism on the North Caucasus. Here, she recounts the tactics used to intimidate her.
Anna Politkovskaya, The cadet affair: the disappeared
2010; vol. 39, 4: pp. 209-210.
An article on the disappeared in Chechnya, who officially number about 1,000, but unofficially are almost 2,000. They disappeared throughout the war. The author, Anna Politkovskaya, was murdered in her Moscow apartment in a contract killing in 2006.
Nick Sturdee, Russia’s Robin Hood*
2011; vol 40, 3: pp. 89-102
Widespread frustration with the establishment has fostered a brand of political street art that is taking the country by storm.
Ali Kamalov, Murder in Dagestan
2012; vol 41, 2: 31-37
Ali Kamalov, the head of Dagestan’s journalists’ union fears for the future of press freedom following the murder of the country’s most prominent editor. On 15 December 2011, Hadjimurad Kamalov was murdered in Makhachkala, the seaboard capital of Dagestan.
Maxim Efimov, Religion and power in Russia
2012; vol 41, 4
Although the Russian constitution enshrines freedom of expression, the authorities routinely clamp down on anybody who treasures this fundamental right. State officials, judges, deputies, prosecutors and police officers serve the ruling regime and control society, rather than defend the constitution or protect human rights.
Elena Vlasenko, From perestroika to persecution
2013; vol 42, 2: pp. 74-76
Elena Vlasenko covers wavering hopes for an open Russia, and the evolution of repressive legislation, state censorship and journalists under threat.
Helen Womack, Making waves
2014; vol 43, 3: pp. 39-41
Helen Womack interviews the founder of the last free radio station in Putin’s Russia. These men are not dissidents, just journalists dedicated to professional principles of objectivity and balance. But in Putin’s Russia, where almost all the media spout state propaganda, that position looks like radical nonconformity, and it seems a wonder that Echo survives.
Andrei Aliaksandrau, Brave new war*
2014; vol 43, 4: 56-60
In the winter 2014 issue of Index on Censorship magazine, Andrei Aliaksandrau investigates the new information war between Russia and Ukraine as he travels across the latter country.
Andrei Aliaksandrau, We lost journalism in Russia
2015; vol 44, 3: pp. 32-35
Andrei Aliaksandrau examines the evolution of censorship in Russia, from Soviet institutions to today’s blend of influence and pressure, including the assassination of journalists.
Andrey Arkhangelsky, Murder in Moscow: Anna’s legacy*
2016; vol. 45, 3: pp. 69-74.
Andrey Arkhangelsky explores Russian journalism a decade on from Anna Politkovskaya’s murder and argues that the press still struggles to offer readers the full picture.
*Articles which are free to read on Sage. All other articles are available via Sage in most university libraries. To find out more about subscribing to the magazine in print or digitally, click here.
13 Jun 17 | Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan Letters, Campaigns, Campaigns -- Featured, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Arif and Leyla Yunus (Photo: HRHN)
Dear Secretary General,
We, the undersigned organisations call on Interpol, and all other relevant bodies and authorities to act with due diligence in accordance with Interpol’s constitution to prevent the misuse of Interpol alerts against Leyla Yunus and Arif Yunus, two prominent human rights defenders from Azerbaijan. The couple currently resides in exile in the Netherlands, where they were granted refugee status in 2016. Detailed information about their human rights activism can be found below. Interpol’s constitution prohibits the misuse of its systems for political purposes and in ways that violate human rights.
Leyla and Arif Yunus were arrested on 30 July and on 5 August 2014 respectively. Azerbaijani authorities prosecuted both on politically motivated charges of large-scale fraud, while also charging Leyla with bogus forgery, tax evasion, and illegal entrepreneurship offences. In August 2015, a court sentenced Leyla Yunus to eight and half years imprisonment, and Arif Yunus to seven, having convicted them of tax evasion and other economic crimes. Authorities also filed treason charges against them both, but later suspended the investigation.
On 9 December 2015, Leyla Yunus was released from detention and her eight-and-a-half-year prison sentence was converted into five-year suspended sentence, following a decision by the Baku City Court of Appeal on the basis of a request from her lawyers with reference to her deteriorating health condition. Similarly, Arif Yunus’s prison term was changed to a five-year suspended sentence. He was placed under house arrest on 12 November 2015. In April 2016 the Azerbaijani government allowed the couple to travel abroad to receive needed medical treatment for conditions they had developed during their prison ordeal.
Due to the politically motivated nature of their prosecution, in spring 2016 the couple received political asylum in the Netherlands.
When Leyla and Arif left Azerbaijan, their cassation appeal was still pending before the Supreme Court. On 27 December 2016, the Supreme Court sent the case back for re-examination to the Baku Appeal Court. On 17 May 2017, at the hearing at the Baku Appeal Court, the Yunus’s lawyer asked the court to ensure the couple’s participation in the proceedings via internet. The court rejected the petition. The same day, the court ordered the couple to return to the country to participate in the subsequent court hearings in their case. The court hearing was rescheduled from 31 May to 3 July 2017.
The arrest of Leyla and Arif Yunus happened against the backdrop of a rapidly deteriorating human rights situation in Azerbaijan. Since 2014, several dozens of human rights defenders, lawyers and journalists and opposition politicians have been arrested and prosecuted on politically-motivated grounds. The arrests and other steps by the government of Azerbaijan have served to severely close the space for independent activism, critical journalism, and opposition political activity in the country.
Azerbaijan has been ranking as Not Free in the Freedom in the World rankings of the Freedom House for several years, scoring the lowest on the political rights and civil liberties. In the latest Freedom of the Press rankings, Azerbaijan scored the 162nd place out of 180 countries.
The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention recently concluded an official visit to Azerbaijan. In a statement issued at the end of its visit, the Working Group concluded that human rights defenders, journalists, and political and religious leaders continue to be detained on criminal or administrative charges in the country as a way to impair their exercise of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms and to silence them. The Working Group stressed that these practices constitute abuse of authority and violate the principle of the rule of law that Azerbaijan has undertaken to comply with. One of the cases highlighted by the Working Group is that of Leyla and Arif Yunus. In his recent report to the Human Rights Council, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, Michel Forst also drew attention to the legal persecution of human rights defenders in Azerbaijan.
An official request has been made to Interpol on 12 June 2017 by the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC), which represents the couple, to inquire about the existence of any alerts made against Leyla and Arif Yunus by the Azerbaijani Government and to request Interpol to take all appropriate steps to prevent the dissemination of such an alert. Taking into consideration the very poor human rights record in Azerbaijan and the routine practice of politically-motivated prosecutions by the authorities, any attempt by the Azerbaijani authorities to use Interpol alerts against Leyla Yunusova and Arif Yunusov would violate the prohibition in Interpol’s constitution against the misuse of its systems for political purposes and in ways that violate human rights. Interpol should, therefore, refuse any request from the Azerbaijani authorities to use the Interpol Information System against Leyla Yunusova and Arif Yunusov, and we call on all relevant national bodies and authorities not to act on Interpol alerts against them, in case they are issued.
Short biographies:
Leyla Yunus is a long time human rights defender and activist since the late Soviet era. She is the director of the Institute for Peace and Democracy, a human rights organisation in Azerbaijan that focused on political prisoners, women’s rights and other issues. For almost 30 years Leyla Yunus and Arif Yunus have been involved in compiling comprehensive lists of political prisoners in Azerbaijan. Leyla Yunus is a Knight of the French Legion of Honor, winner of the International Theodor Hacker award, Laureate of the Polish Sergio Vieira de Mello Award and a finalist of the 2014 Sakharov Prize of the European Parliament.
Arif Yunus is a prominent Azerbaijani historian and human rights activist. He is the chairperson of the Conflict and Migration departments at the Institute for Peace and Democracy. Throughout his career, Arif has published over 30 books and several articles on the history of Azerbaijan and on Azerbaijani-Armenian relations. In his work, he has promoted dialogue between intellectuals from Azerbaijan and Armenia, and for many years has advocated for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. He has supported numerous victims of torture and spoken out repeatedly against politically motivated detentions.
The list of signatory organisations:
1. Amnesty International
2. Association UMDPL (Ukraine)
3. Bir Duino
4. Centre for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights
5. Committee Against Torture
6. Crude Accountability
7. Fair Trials
8. FIDH and OMCT under “Observatory for the protection of human rights defenders”
9. Freedom Files
10. Front Line Defenders
11. Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights
12. Human Rights House Foundation
13. Human Rights Watch
14. Index on Censorship
15. International Partnership for Human Rights
16. Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety (IRFS)
17. Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and the Rule of Law
18. KRF Public Alternative
19. Legal Policy Research Centre
20. Public Verdict
21. Regional Center for Strategic Studies
22. The Barys Zvozskau Belarusian Human Rights House
23. The Georgian Centre for Psychosocial and Medical Rehabilitation of Torture Victims
24. The Netherlands Helsinki Committee
25. Women of the Don[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1497944614160-ae286e6b-fd24-9″ taxonomies=”7145″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row_content_no_spaces” content_placement=”middle”][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”91122″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2017/05/stand-up-for-satire/”][/vc_column][/vc_row]
22 May 17 | Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan Statements, Campaigns -- Featured, Digital Freedom, Europe and Central Asia, Statements
Ilgar Mammadov
Today three years have passed since the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered its judgment on the case of political prisoner Ilgar Mammadov, concluding that the Azerbaijani authorities had detained him to punish him for his criticism of the government. In spite of this ruling, and repeated calls for his release by Council of Europe bodies in follow-up to the ruling, the Azerbaijani authorities have persistently refused to execute the decision of the Court and free Ilgar Mammadov. In view of this, we, members of the Civic Solidarity Platform and the Sports for Rights Coalition, call on the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to refer the case back to the ECtHR on the grounds of non-execution of the judgment. This is crucial to ensure justice for this wrongly imprisoned government critic, who has already spent more than four years behind bars, as well as to safeguard the legitimacy of the Council of Europe as the guardian of human rights and the rule of law in the region.
Ilgar Mammadov, chair of the political opposition REAL party, was a well-known opponent of the regime when he was arbitrarily detained in February 2013. He attempted to stand in the 2013 presidential elections, gathering the required 40 000 signatures in support of his candidacy, which the Central Election Commission ruled as invalid.[i] He was also outspoken in his criticism of the policies of the authorities on his blog and in the media. Ilgar Mammadov was detained after monitoring and reporting on street protests in the town of Ismayilli in January 2013, which resulted in clashes with the police. He did not participate in these protests, but travelled to the region after they took place to observe developments and revealed the role of individuals with ties to the authorities in initiating the clashes. In spite of the lack of evidence llgar Mammadov was accused of instigating the Ismayilli clashes and on 17 March 2014, he was sentenced to seven years in prison on trumped-up charges of “organizing mass riots” and using “violence against police officers”. His sentence was upheld on appeal.
In a judgment issued on 22 May 2014, the ECtHR found that Ilgar Mammadov’s arrest and detention violated numerous provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, including Articles 5.1, 5.4 and 6.2 on the right to liberty and security, the right to judicial review of one’s detention and the principle of presumption of innocence, as well as article 18 that limits the applicability of restrictions on rights. The Court concluded that Ilgar Mammadov had been detained without any evidence to reasonably suspect him of having committed a crime and that the actual purpose of his detention was to silence and punish him for criticizing the government and publishing information it was trying to hide.[ii]
In its follow-up to the ECtHR’s ruling, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe — the body responsible for supervising the execution of ECtHR judgements — has repeatedly called on the Azerbaijani authorities to release Ilgar Mammadov. The Committee has examined this case as a matter of priority in its review of the execution of ECtHR judgments by Council of Europe member states and adopted a number of decisions and interim resolutions on it.[iii]
Other Council of Europe bodies, including the organization’s Secretary General, its Human Rights Commissioner and the President of its Parliamentary Assembly have also repeatedly called for Ilgar Mammadov to be released. However, the Azerbaijani authorities have flagrantly ignored these calls and refused to implement the ECtHR’s judgment and release Mammadov.
In view of the continued failure of the Azerbaijani authorities to implement the ECtHR’s decision on Ilgar Mammadov’s case, the Council of Europe’s Secretary General Thorbjørn Jagland launched an official inquiry into Azerbaijan’s implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights in December 2015.[iv]Under Article 52 of the Convention, the Secretary General may initiate an inquiry into how the domestic law of member states ensures the effective implementation of the Convention. This was the first time that Secretary General Jagland had taken such a measure and his initiative was welcome and important.
However, in November 2016, Azerbaijan’s Supreme Court nevertheless rejected an appeal submitted by Ilgar Mammadov on the basis of the ECtHR ruling and upheld his seven-year prison sentence. Thus, Ilgar Mammadov remains behind bars for no other reason than speaking out critically about those in power. This continued defiance by the Azerbaijani authorities leads us to conclude that further action is urgently required.
Therefore, we call on the Committee of Ministers to refer the case back to the ECtHR under Article 46.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which obliges the parties to the Convention to abide by the final judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties. The Convention authorizes the Committee to take action to this end. Article 46.4 states: “If the Committee of Ministers considers that a High Contracting Party refuses to abide by a final judgment in a case to which it is a party, it may, after serving formal notice on that Party and by decision adopted by a majority vote of two-thirds of the representatives entitled to sit on the committee, refer to the Court the question whether that Party has failed to fulfil its obligation under paragraph 1.”
Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan has become a test case of the legitimacy of the Council of Europe. When commenting on the Supreme Court’s failure to uphold Azerbaijan’s obligation to execute the ECtHR judgment last year, Secretary General Jagland stated: “Azerbaijan’s flagrant disrespect of the European Convention on Human Rights undermines the entire scope of our cooperation” [and] “affects the 46 Member States of the Council of Europe who have a collective responsibility for the implementation of the Convention”.[v]
By resorting to the ultimate mechanism for addressing non-compliance of judgments set out by the European Convention on Human Rights, the Committee of Ministers can take resolute action to safeguard the Council of Europe’s integrity and ensure that the Azerbaijani authorities finally abide by their obligations under the Convention, implement the ECtHR ruling and free Ilgar Mammadov.
Signed by the following members of the Civic Solidarity Platform and the Sport for Rights Coalition:
1. Association of Ukrainian Human Rights Monitors on Law Enforcement (UMDPL, Ukraine)
2. Barys Zvozskau Belarusian Human Rights House
3. Bir Duino-Kyrgyzstan
4. Bulgarian Helsinki Committee
5. Center for Civil Liberties (Ukraine)
6. Center for Participation and Development (Georgia)
7. Center for Regional Strategic Studies (Azerbaijan)
8. Center for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights (Russia)
9. Civil Rights Defenders (Sweden)
10. Committee Against Torture (Russia)
11. Crude Accountability (USA)
12. Fair Trials (UK)
13. International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH, France)
14. Freedom Files (Poland)
15. Freedom House (USA)
16. Freedom Now (USA)
17. Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (Poland)
18. Human Rights Center of Azerbaijan
19. Human Rights Club (Azerbaijan)
20. Human Rights Monitoring Institute (Lithuania)
21. Humanrights.ch (Switzerland)
22. IDP Women Association “Consent” (Georgia)
23. Index on Censorship (UK)
24. Institute for Reporters Freedom and Safety (Azerbaijan)
25. Institute Respublica (Ukraine)
26. International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR, Belgium)
27. Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and the Rule of Law
28. Kosova Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims
29. Libereco – Partnership for Human Rights (Germany)
30. Moscow Helsinki Group (Russia)
31. Netherlands Helsinki Committee
32. Norwegian Helsinki Committee
33. Notabene (Tajikistan)
34. PEN America (USA)
35. PEN International
36. Promo LEX Association (Moldova)
37. Public Alternative (Ukraine)
38. Public Association “Dignity” (Kazakhstan)
39. Public Verdict Foundation (Russia)
40. Swedish OSCE Network: signed in personal capacity by Olof Kleberg and Anki Wetterhall
41. Truth Hounds (Ukraine)
42. Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union
43. Women of the Don (Russia)
44. World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) (Switzerland)
[i] In several rulings against Azerbaijan, the ECtHR has found that the practices of the Central Election Commission with respect to the validation of signatures violate Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to free elections.
[ii] The judgment is available at: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-144124
[iii] The most recent decision on this case adopted by the Committee of Ministers is available at: https://rm.coe.int/16806c4554
[iv] See press release at: http://bit.ly/2q8CRNI
[v] His statement is available at: https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/azerbaijan-statement-by-secretary-general-jagland-on-the-decision-of-the-supreme-court-today-rejecting-the-appeal-by-ilgar-mammadov
21 Apr 17 | Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan Statements, Campaigns -- Featured, Statements
We, representatives of international and national non-governmental organisations, issue this appeal prior to a discussion of the investigation into allegations of corruption at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) in connection with its work on Azerbaijan, at the Assembly’s April 2017 session and a meeting of the Bureau of the Assembly before the session. We call upon you to support a full, thorough and independent investigation into the corruption allegations, with full civil society oversight.
We are extremely concerned about credible allegations presented in a December 2016 report by the European Stability Initiative (ESI), “The European Swamp: Prosecutions, corruption and the Council of Europe” building on previous findings by ESI and others published in 2012-16, detailing improper influencing of Assembly members by representatives of the Azerbaijani government. In particular, the reports include credible allegations that PACE members from various countries and political groups received payments and other gifts with a view to influencing the appointment of Assembly rapporteurs on Azerbaijan, as well as reports and resolutions of the Assembly on Azerbaijan, most notably the PACE vote on the draft resolution on political prisoners in Azerbaijan in January 2013.
The allegations regarding improper conduct of PACE members are serious, credible, and risk gravely undermining the credibility of the Assembly, as well as the Council of Europe as a whole. It is essential that these allegations are investigated thoroughly and impartially. Calls and recommendations for independent investigation into these allegations put forward by ESI have been echoed by many civil society actors, including Amnesty International, Transparency International, and a group of 60 members of Azerbaijani civil society actors and 20 international NGOs.
We welcome the decision of the PACE Bureau on 27 January 2017 to set up an independent investigation body to shed light on hidden practices that favour corruption. The Bureau has also committed to revising the Assembly’s Code of Conduct and invited GRECO (the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption) to provide advice to the Rules Committee, charged with the investigation.
On 3 March, Wojciech Sawicki, PACE Secretary General, presented the Assembly Bureau with a draft terms of reference for the external and independent investigation at the Bureau meeting in Madrid. The proposal is credible, defining a wide mandate and competences and including strong guarantees for the independence of the investigation and safeguards against non-compliance with its work.
Unfortunately, the proposal was met with resistance at the meeting, and no agreement was made on its substance. The proposal was further discussed at a meeting of the heads of the PACE Parliamentary groups on 28 March in St Petersburg: again, no consensus was reached on its content, and whether it should be adopted.
A thorough investigation is essential to restore PACE’s credibility and allow it to effectively address human rights violations across the Council of Europe, including in Azerbaijan. The chairman of Azerbaijani NGO the Institute for Reporters Freedom and Safety, Mehman Huseynov is already facing reprisals for raising the corruption allegations during the January PACE session. A day after his NGO sent a letter about the corruption allegations to PACE members in January, he was abducted and tortured by police and later sentenced for 2 years on defamation charges for allegedly making false allegations about torture. For PACE to be in a position to respond to such violations, it must be seen as independent and not under the influence of states wishing to influence their conduct.
We call upon members of the PACE Bureau to commit to the Sawicki proposal and to call for a full plenary debate on the proposal at the April session of PACE. We also call on the PACE Bureau to include a mechanism of civil society oversight of the investigation to ensure its full independence and impartiality.
We call upon all Members of the Assembly to support in the strongest possible terms an independent, external and thorough investigation. This can be done by signing a written Declaration on the Parliamentary Assembly Integrity introduced on 25 January 2017 by PACE members Pieter Omtzigt (The Netherlands, Christian Democrat), and Frank Schwabe (Germany, Social Democrat) urging the PACE President Pedro Agramunt (Spain, EPP) to launch a “deep, thorough investigation by an independent panel” that makes its findings public. More than one fifth of the Assembly members have joined the declaration. More voices in support of the Assembly integrity are needed. Moreover, PACE members must insist on their right to discuss the Sawicki proposal at the April session of the Assembly, to ensure that PACE has the mechanisms in place to adequately deal with corruption allegations.
We call on the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Thorbjorn Jagland to make a very strong statement to affirm that there will be no tolerance of any corruption, including bribery, trading in influence or taking up of roles that imply a conflict of interest, in the Parliamentary Assembly and the Council of Europe in general.
Commitment to the rule of law, integrity, transparency, and public accountability should be effectively enforced as the key principles of the work of the Parliamentary Assembly. If such a decision is not made now, reputational damage to PACE may become irreparable, preventing PACE from fulfilling its role as a guardian of human rights across the Council of Europe region.
Signatures:
1. The Netherlands Helsinki Committee
2. International Partnership for Human Rights (Belgium)
3. Centre for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights (Russia)
4. Freedom Files (Russia/Poland)
5. Norwegian Helsinki Committee
6. Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union
7. Analytical Center for Interethnic Cooperation and Consultations (Georgia)
8. Article 19 (UK)
9. The Barys Zvozskau Belarusian Human Rights House (Belarus/Lithuania)
10. Index on Censorship (UK)
11. Human Rights House Foundation (Norway)
12. Human Rights Movement “Bir Duino-Kyrgyzstan”
13. PEN International (UK)
14. Crude Accountability (USA)
15. Legal Transformation Center (Belarus)
16. Bulgarian Helsinki Committee
17. World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) (Switzerland)
18. The Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and the Rule of Law
19. Belarusian Helsinki Committee
20. Center for Civil Liberties (Ukraine)
21. Promo LEX (Moldova)
22. Libereco – Partnership for Human Rights (Germany/Switzerland)
23. Public Association “Dignity” (Kazakhstan)
24. Human Rights Monitoring Institute (Lithuania)
25. Swiss Helsinki Committee
26. Human Rights Information Center (Ukraine)
27. Public Verdict Foundation (Russia)
28. Albanian Helsinki Committee
29. Kharkiv Regional Foundation “Public Alternative” (Ukraine)
30. Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (Poland)
31. Women of Don (Russia)
32. DRA – German-Russian Exchange (Germany)
33. Association UMDPL (Ukraine)
34. European Stability Initiative (Germany)
35. International Media Support (IMS) (Denmark)
36. Civil Rights Defenders (Sweden)
37. International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) (France)
38. Sova Center for Information and Analysis (Russia)
39. Kosova Centre for Rehabilitation of Torture Victims (Kosovo)
40. Truth Hounds (Ukraine)
41. People in Need Foundation (Czech Republic)
42. Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum (Belgium)
43. Macedonian Helsinki Committee
44. International Youth Human Rights Movement
45. Human Rights First (USA)
46. Regional Center for Strategic Studies (Georgia/Azerbaijan)
47. Human Rights Club (Azerbaijan)
48. Institute for Reporters Freedom and Safety (IRFS) (Azerbaijan)
49. Media Rights Institute (Azerbaijan)
50. Public Association for Assistance to Free Economy (Azerbaijan)
51. Institute for Peace and Democracy (Netherlands/Azerbaijan)
52. Turan News Agency (Azerbaijan)
53. Democracy and NGO development Resource Center (Azerbaijan)
54. Youth Atlantic Treaty Association (Azerbaijan)
55. Monitoring Centre for Political Prisoners (Azerbaijan)
56. Azerbaijan without Political Prisoners (Azerbaijan)
