ESI: Debates at PACE on Straesser’s report showed that Azerbaijan
manipulates that organization
12:10 23/02/2013 » REGION
The European Stability Initiative (ESI) non-profit research and policy
organization states in its report titled `Azerbaijan debacle: The PACE
debate on 23 January 2013′ that the presented debates prove how Baku
manipulates PACE.
In particular, the organization underlines that Representatives of
Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev’s regime had long waged a campaign
against Christoph Straesser, who was appointed as rapporteur in March
2009. `Most egregiously, Azerbaijan refused to issue Straesser a visa
to visit the country on a fact-finding mission, although he applied
for it three times. Straesser was openly and repeatedly accused of
being part of an anti-Azerbaijani lobbying effort,’ ESI writes.
The document says that, On 23 January 2013 a record 224 members of the
parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) participated in
a debate on Azerbaijan. There have never been more members voting on
any resolution in the history of PACE. `The vote was also historic
because of its outcome: PACE rapporteur Christoph Straesser’s
resolution on political prisoners in Azerbaijan was defeated – 125
votes against 79 votes, with 20 abstentions – sending a very strong
signal of support to the authoritarian regime in Baku,’ the authors of
the report say.
According to the document, the vote on 23 January was remarkable in
terms of who voted with Azerbaijan and who voted with Straesser. All
18 Russian members were present and sided with Azerbaijan. So did 10
Turks, 9 Spaniards, 9 Italians and a majority of members from the
United Kingdom (7), Ukraine (7) and France (7). On the other hand, 11
German members from all political families supported Straesser’s
resolution. They were joined by all 6 Swedes, and most Swiss, Finns,
Norwegians and all Baltic members and Armenia.
`In total, 54 people spoke in the debate. Straesser was accused by his
critics of the following things: He was also accused of not checking
the facts, rushing the issues, unfairly focusing on Azerbaijan,
implementing double standards. The critics decided that if the report
is approved real terrorists can all announce themselves to be
political prisoners,’ ESI notes.
`Another disturbing twist in this debate was the fact that in addition
to the vote on Straesser’s resolution, a second, concurrent resolution
on Azerbaijan had also been put on the table which was presented by
its authors as a clear alternative – in contradiction no less – to the
resolution drafted by Strasser,’ the report says.
`I ask members to support the first report, but I will vote against Mr
Straesser’s report, for obvious reasons: it contradicts our report and
encroaches on the authority of the Monitoring Committee,’ Pedro
Agramunt Spanish, co-rapporteur of the monitoring committee told PACE.
The organization calls this debate a striking one that is likely to be
remembered for many years, and certain to stand as a reminder of just
how successfully Azerbaijan has been able to capture and manipulate
PACE.
According to Strasser a resolution was adopted in 2005 about
Azerbaijan which stated that the issue of political prisoners has not
been finally resolved.
`We in the Parliamentary Assembly must take our own commitments
seriously. We have committed ourselves to follow up the process, so we
have a responsibility to do so. Only a few months ago, we agreed on a
definition of ‘political prisoner’. We do not want to pillory any
country in particular, and that definition applies to all 47 member
states of the Council of Europe. What is the current situation?
Unfortunately, on the basis of information gained via co-operation
with a number of Azerbaijani non-governmental organisations, it is
clear that this issue has not been addressed since our last report,’
Strasser said.
`Only a few weeks ago, there was a presidential amnesty for more than
40 detainees, 14 of whom appeared on the list I submitted, but others
who are clearly political prisoners are still in prison in Azerbaijan,
so we must get to grips with this issue yet again,’ he stated.
German MP Viola von Cramon-Taubadel noted that the problem of
political imprisonment in Azerbaijan has still not been solved, even
following the amnesty of 26 December. According to her, it is a
cat-and-mouse game for Azerbaijani Authorities, in which people are
arrested, released and then re-arrested shortly afterwards. `Everybody
clearly knows that next time it could be them, which is a tactic of
intimidation,’ she said.
Another German MP Marina Schuster stressed that there is a lack of
freedom of the media, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly
and independence of the judiciary in Azerbaijan. Besides that she
noted that there are no free and fair elections, and journalists and
opposition politicians are intimidated at every turn. Speaking on
Straesser’s report the MP noted that unfortunately, Mr. Straesser
could not even visit Azerbaijan. `The Assembly should not tolerate our
rapporteurs being denied access to a country, as it is essential to be
able to see the situation on the ground,’ Schuster noted.
Source: Panorama.am