18 юни 2016

Лятната сесия на ПАСЕ, 20 - 24 юни 2016г.

 На 20 юни се открива юнската сесия на Парламентарната Асамблея на Съвета на Европа (ПАСЕ) .

На сесията ще говорят премиерите на Гърция и Естония, която на заседание на 18 май в София, пое председателството на Комитета на Министрите от България.

Това ще е и първото участие в сесия на ПАСЕ на депутатката от Украйна Надя Савченко, която досега не можеше да участва в работата на Асамблеята поради пленяването и, а сред това и съдебния процес срещу нея в Русия. 

Тя е член на Групата на Европейската Народна Партия/Християндемократи (ЕНП) в ПАСЕ. 

Г-жа Савченко ще участва в понеделник, 20 юни, в открита за журналисти обмяна на мнения по темата "Хуманитарната загриженост към бежанците и разселените" в аспекта за задържаните по време на войната в Украйна. Събитието е организирано от Комисията по миграция на ПАСЕ.

20 June 2016

2.15–3 pm Exchange of views with Nadiya Savchenko (Ukraine, EPP/CD)
Room 1, Palais
Committee on Migration, in the context of the follow-up to Resolution 2112 (2016) on “The humanitarian concerns Refugees and Displaced with regard to people captured during the war in Ukraine” [Rapporteur: Nellija Kleinberga Persons (Latvia, ALDE)]

Open to the press 

 На 21 юни г-жа Савченко ще вземе участие в голяма кръгла маса, открита за журналисти, организирана в Съвета на Европа на тема 
"Украинските затворници в Русия".

Кръглата маса е организирана от делегацията на Украйна в ПАСЕ с ръководител Володимир Ариев (ЕНП).

21 June 2016

1–2 pm , Room 1, Palais

Round table – A meeting with Nadiya Savchenko: Ukrainian prisoners in Russia“
Side-event sponsored by Volodymyr Ariev (Ukraine, EPP/CD), with the participation of:
Nadiya Savchenko (Ukraine, EPP/CD)
Ilya Novikov, Ms Savchenko’s lawyer

Open to the press

Batkivshchyna All-Ukrainian Union
Verkhovna Rada
Grushevsky, 5 UA - 01008 - Kyiv

BE Ukraine

Membership of political groups:

  • Group of the European People's Party (Member)

Assembly Member

  • since 26/01/2015  (Representative)

Working language : English

MP's role(s) in Committee(s) and Sub-Committee(s)

  • Full Member: Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons

Линк към страницата на сесията :

Summer session: Greek and Estonian Prime Ministers to address PACE

Summer session: Greek and Estonian Prime Ministers to address PACE

Strasbourg, 20-24 June 2016

Addresses by Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras and Estonian Prime Minister Taavi Rõivas are among the highlights of the summer session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) taking place in Strasbourg on 20-24 June 2016.

Topics for debate include the functioning of democratic institutions in Turkey, refugees at risk in Greece, violence against migrants, fighting the over-sexualisation of children, transparency and openness in European institutions, and promoting equality and putting an end to gender-based violence among women in the armed forces.
There has been a request for an urgent debate on: "An urgent call for increased solidarity between generations: the right to work versus the right to strike".

Estonian Foreign Minister and Committee of Ministers Chairperson Marina Kaljurand will present the activities of the Council of Europe's ministerial body and answer questions from parliamentarians. Council of Europe Secretary General Thorbjørn Jagland will also take questions from PACE members.

The Assembly is due to elect a judge of the European Court of Human Rights in respect of the United Kingdom.

On the first day of the session, PACE President Pedro Agramunt will launch a Europe-wide iniative to encourage a response to terrorism founded on the twin themes of #NoHateNoFear.

The Assembly will decide its final agenda on the opening day of the session.
Reports and opinions from the agenda

Monday 20 June 2016

Tuesday 21 June 2016

Wednesday 22 June 2016

Thursday 23 June 2016

Friday 24 June 2016

"Семейна снимка" на групата на ЕНП в ПАСЕ при откриването на лятната сесия, Фото: Съвет на Европа

Надя Савченко посрещната от Президента на ПАСЕ Педро Аграмун,  Фото: Съвет на Европа

Надя Савченко с Президента на ПАСЕ Педро Аграмун и Генералния секретар на ПАСЕ Войчех Савицки, Фото: Съвет на Европа

Семейната снимка на групата на ЕНП в ПАСЕ повторена след пристигането на Надя Савченко - член на ПАСЕ и на групата на ЕНП, освободена след международен натиск от руския затвор. От едната и страна е Президентът на ЕНП Жозеф Дол, от другата Президентът на ПАСЕ Педро Аграмун, а до него Аксел Фишер -Председател на групата на ЕНП в ПАСЕ

Вълнуващ момент : ЕНП със своя украински член Надя Савченко

Надя Савченко благодари за подкрепата на заседание на групата на ЕНП,  бурно аплодирана от членовете. В дъното на снимката са българските представители

Снимка на друга част от залата в същия момент

Фото: Съвет на Европа

Първото изказване на Надя Савченко в пленарната зала на ПАСЕ (текстът по-долу), Фото: Съвет на Европа

Руската пропаганда заяви, че е говорила пред полу-празна зала и при липса на интерес. Снимките показват, че "има по-силно оръжие от лъжата - истината"! Фото: Съвет на Европа

Надя Савченко участва в деловата работа на ПАСЕ, Фото: Съвет на Европа

Кръглата маса на Комисията по миграция на ПАСЕ с участието на Надя Савченко

(Third part)

Nineteenth Sitting

Monday 20 June 2016 at 11.30 a.m.

1. Opening of the third part of the 2016 ordinary session
The PRESIDENT – I declare open the third part of the 2016 ordinary session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

2. Statement by the President


   The recent attacks are deplorable acts of terror, intolerance and hatred. Our response must be to uphold our democratic values and freedoms. Terrorism seeks to destroy our way of life by instilling fear and propagating hate. We must not fall into the terrorists’ trap, or allow barbarism to triumph over democratic values and liberties.
      On my election as President of the Assembly I proposed launching an initiative to mobilise politicians, important actors in society and ordinary citizens against terrorism and the hate and fear that terrorists seek to create. Today, shortly before 1 p.m., we are going to launch officially the hashtag initiative #NoHateNoFear. I invite you all to join me at 12.50 p.m. in the Assembly Chamber for the taking of a symbolic photo with the #NoHateNoFear banner that will be found at your seats. A #NoHateNoFear stand is in place outside the Chamber, and I encourage you all to visit it to have your picture taken and express your solidarity with the victims of terrorism. We must set an example and send the clear message to our voters that we shall not give in to fear and hate.
We may be living in difficult times, but not all news and developments are bleak.

 I welcome to our Chamber Ms Nadiia Savchenko, our colleague and member of the Ukrainian delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly. 

A month ago she was released from detention and returned to Kiev. 

Last week two more Ukrainian citizens sentenced in Russia were pardoned and returned to Ukraine. We should welcome that positive step, too.

Ms Savchenko, this house of democracy is now also your house, and we look forward to your contribution to the work of the Assembly. 

Your release, as well as the releases of Mr Afanasiev and Mr Soloshenko, demonstrates that diplomacy can help to resolve even the most complex problems. 

I encourage Ukraine and Russia to use this opportunity to intensify diplomatic efforts in search of peaceful solution to a major conflict and crisis, which is having repercussions throughout Europe and beyond. It is particularly important that both sides fulfil their commitments to implement a credible ceasefire in the east of Ukraine; organise free, fair and democratic elections, according to international standards, in areas outside the control of the Ukrainian authorities; and, finally, return to Ukraine full control of its international borders.

In addition to the release of Ms Savchenko, there have been other important releases of political prisoners. I welcome the release of the Azerbaijani journalist Khadija Ismayilova. 

The release earlier this year by the Azerbaijani authorities of a large number of so-called political prisoners was a very positive step. With this new release, we are seeing the continuation of that positive trend, which we must support. We should continue to engage in a constructive political dialogue with the Azerbaijani authorities to help them fulfil their international commitments in the field of human rights, democracy and the rule of law.


През априлската сесия на ПАСЕ, Асамблеята искаше освобождаването на Савченко осъдена на 22 години затвор в Русия, а през юни, тя вече говореше в пленарната зала на ПАСЕ. Не е ли чудо ?Момичето, на което Бог се усмихна!, Фото: Съвет на Европа

9. Personal statement

      The PRESIDENT – I understand that Ms Nadiia Savchenko wishes to make a personal statement. I remind the Assembly that under rule 35.6 no debate may arise on a personal statement.
      Ms Savchenko, once again welcome to the Assembly. You have the floor.  You have two minutes.

      Ms SAVCHENKO (Ukraine)* – Colleagues, I thank you for all your support over the past two years. 

I am delighted to see you here.

 I want to see peace in Ukraine as it exists throughout Europe, but we need to work constructively to that end. Ukraine can be useful to Europe, but it is important to understand that, as all Ukrainians know, Putin has not freed everyone; Ukrainians are still being held in prison in Russia. 

The country that guaranteed our country’s security following the Budapest Memorandum and the nuclear agreement has shot us in the back. A delegation that does not respect the rights of others should not be allowed to return to this Chamber.

      I want reconciliation, and I will work to that end, but it is possible to win only if individuals protecting the country are supported. We want peace in Ukraine – that is what we are fighting for – so I call on you to make clear your support, because it is only together that we can win. 

I would not like anyone to find themselves in Ukraine’s situation, and the solution is not simple, as people in the same situation will understand.

      The PRESIDENT – Thank you, Ms Savchenko, for your personal statement.

Надя Савченко в ПАСЕ, Фото: Съвет на Европа

Инициативата на Президента на ПАСЕ Педро Аграмун

В отговор на тероризма : Не на омразата, не на страха!

Избрани снимки :

Фото: Съвет на Европа
Педро Аграмун , Фото: Съвет на Европа

Президентът на ПАСЕ Педро Аграмун с Генералния секретар на Съвета на Европа Тьорбьорн Ягланд , Фото: Съвет на Европа

Разбира се, към инициативата се присъедини и Надя Савченко, Фото: Съвет на Европа

Председателката на Комитета на Министрите и Министър на външните работи на Естония Марина Калюранд с Президента на ПАСЕ, Фото: Съвет на Европа

Ръкъводителят на делегацията на Македония Александър Николоски, ЕНП  (ВМРО-ДПМНЕ), Фото: Съвет на Европа

Pro Domo sua :

Лъчезар Тошев, Фото: Съвет на Европа

Антони Тренчев
The Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) today launched a#NoHateNoFear initative to counter terrorism.

At a special ceremony, parliamentarians stood up to say NO to hate and fear. They committed to follow up on this initiative in their national parliaments.

"We have to prevent the mutual suspicion and hostility that fear of terrorism engenders as an ill in its own right. This is the main purpose of our Assembly’s initiative against terrorism #NoHateNoFear," PACE President Pedro Agramunt announced.

"Terrorism has become a reality of life. Atrocious attacks in Istanbul, Brussels, Tunis, Paris, and recently Orlando have taken the lives of many of our citizens. These heinous attacks have left deep scars that will take years to heal.


Българският депутат Антони Тренчев, задава въпрос на Министър-председателя на Естония относно политиката за трафик на данни

(Third part)
Twenty-third sitting
Wednesday 22 June 2016 at 10 a.m.

2. Address by Mr Taavi Rõivas, Prime Minister of Estonia

Mr TRENCHEV (Bulgaria, Spokesperson for the Group of the European People’s Party) – My question to you, Mr Rõivas, is about what you frequently refer to as the fifth fundamental freedom in the European Union – the free movement of data. In these times of big data, hybrid wars and ever more evasive technology, how do you see freedom of data operating amid the realities and challenges that confront the European Union? Do you think that it can help to prevent the disintegration processes in Europe and give new meaning to the very essence of the word “unity”?

Премиерът на Естония Роивас, Фото: Съвет на Европа

      Mr RÕIVAS: Let me start by saying that freedom of movement in Europe has made all of our countries more prosperous in many ways, and not just in the fiscal sense of being prosperous. Digital is one of the areas where there should not be any state borders. We know that, in practice, it is still not fully possible to provide digital services from my country to your country. There still exist some kinds of legal barriers, which I believe are actually keeping us from mutual development, and I am a strong believer that abolishing those virtual borders between our countries will give us the opportunity to provide cross-border services for our citizens. That might extend to public services and it will definitely extend to all kinds of private services, including telecommunication, banking and so on. As we well know, digital is the easiest way to go global and our challenge as legislators and decision makers is to make sure that we do not create virtual wars between our countries, which would prevent us from experiencing these kinds of developments.

(Third part)

Twenty-fourth sitting

Wednesday 22 June 2016 at 3.30 p.m.


5. Current affairs debate

      The PRESIDENT – The next item of business this afternoon is a current affairs debate on

“Reaffirming the role of the Assembly as a pan-European forum for inter-parliamentary dialogue and co-operation”.

I remind you that we have agreed that the speaking time until the end of today will be limited to three minutes. The Bureau has decided that the debate will be opened by Mr Axel Fischer, who has 10 minutes.

Аксел Фишер, Президент на групата на ЕНП в ПАСЕ, Фото: Съвет на Европа

      Mr FISCHER (Germany)* – Our Organisation, the Council of Europe, was founded on 5 May 1949 on the basis of the Treaty of London. Initially we had 10 member States; today we have 47. The Council of Europe was founded to pursue one objective in particular, namely to promote unity and co-operation in Europe in the areas of economics, social affairs, culture and science. In particular, our purpose was to make our contribution towards greater democracy and the implementation of human rights.

      If we are talking about the very beginnings of the Council of Europe, it is important to recall Sir Winston Churchill. You may remember his famous Zurich address of 1946, just one year after the end of the Second World War. In that address, Mr Churchill spoke of his clear vision for the future of Europe, saying: “Our constant aim must be to build and fortify the strength of the United Nations Organisation. 
Under and within that world concept, we must re-create the European family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe. The first step is to form a Council of Europe. 

If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can.” 

Similarly, the French Foreign Affairs Minister at the time, Mr Robert Schuman, said: 

“The Council of Europe is, to be sure, the laboratory in which experiments in European co-operation are conducted”.  

That quotation still applies to this very day. If you look at our debates or our inter-parliamentary dialogue, you will find that the Council of Europe is indeed still very much a laboratory – a laboratory where we try our best to defend the interests of our citizens.

      Following the creation of the Council of Europe, the first task we set ourselves was to work on the most important pillar, namely the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. 

It was signed in Rome in 1950 and entered into force as a convention in 1953. To this day, more than 60 years down the road, the judgements handed down by the European Court of Human Rights are based on the convention. For citizens of member States of the Council of Europe, the European Court of Human Rights is the last legal instance they can turn to.

      That brings me to the important role played by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe – although I am not forgetting the importance of another body in our Organisation, namely the Committee of Ministers. When it comes to appointing judges to sit on the European Court of Human Rights, it is the Parliamentary Assembly that elects individuals to sit on the Court. That is the most visible expression of the Parliamentary Assembly’s true calling, namely to protect and implement the most fundamental values of the European Convention on Human Rights, democracy and the rule of law.
      We all know, of course, if we look at the situation in many member States of the Council of Europe, that that protection was and continues to be very much needed. In the meantime, the role of our Assembly has extended well beyond that. You can see that quite clearly in our reports, resolutions and recommendations, which touch upon various areas in the lives of our citizens around the Council of Europe. It did not go without saying at the beginning, when we were first created, that the Parliamentary Assembly would do so much. In fact, our Assembly was initially an advisory assembly of the Council of Europe. It was meant to be a consultative body advising the Committee of Ministers, but over the years the Parliamentary Assembly developed and, against the resistance of the Committee of Ministers, decided to call itself a Parliamentary Assembly proper.

      Of course, that meant that our Assembly became an important forum for direct, face-to-face dialogue between members of parliament from various member States, with their different cultural traditions and political backgrounds, bringing all of us together. That is a true asset of our Assembly – something that we need to make the most of. What we are talking about is trying to understand the other, trying to get a hearing for our own views and wherever possible working towards a viable and balanced solution to any problems. That is not something we can always achieve and it is not always a success – sometimes it is, sometimes it is not – but we constantly attempt to do so, and in my view the mere fact that we try to achieve balanced solutions is important in itself. This Assembly is also a unique forum for dialogue and inter-parliamentary co-operation. It is there to create trust. Very often we are involved in exploratory talks that do not necessarily make the headlines, but which help us out of critical situations and conflicts – what one might call parliamentary diplomacy.

      To conclude, I would like to quote another founding father of Europe, the leader of my political party, the CDU, and also Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, Konrad Adenauer.  

On the occasion of the Federal Republic of Germany joining the Council of Europe, Mr Adenauer said: “it is…greatly significant that here…there is a place where almost the whole of Europe gathers together.” At the time, we were talking about 10 countries altogether. Today we are talking about 47 member States. What a breath-taking development we have witnessed! Members of parliament from these 47 member States need to build on our achievements and should continue to dedicate their work to our common European values and objectives.

      Colleagues, our doors are very much open even to countries outside Europe – countries that are willing to share our values with us; countries that are willing to engage in inter-parliamentary dialogue; countries that are happy to discuss things with us and talk about our values, namely human rights, the rule of law and democracy. It is important to do that with the clear objective in mind of promoting those values.

 These values and principles are so important for Europe, so we should never underestimate them. We need to consistently defend them. The rule of law, democracy and human rights are important for our Organisation and the people in our countries.

      Of course we can have political discussions and there will sometimes be conflicts with neighbouring states or between member States – it can happen. Nevertheless, I am quite convinced that if we all stand together, engage in dialogue and remain willing to talk to one another, then we stand a good chance of achieving a good result. The one thing we need to remember is that dialogue is always preferable to not addressing a conflict and then ending up with a much worse situation. It is always better to talk. 

Therefore, I am delighted that this item has been placed on the agenda and that we are about to have a discussion on this basis.

Аксел Фишер и Лъчезар Тошев

   Mr NICOLETTI (Italy, Spokesperson for the Socialist Group)* – This debate is all about the pan-European idea. That is not some bizarre notion; rather, it is about a Europe made up of all its parts, a Europe that we have painstakingly built through history, as Axel Fischer recalled. We have people here from Lisbon, from St Petersburg, from Iceland, from Lampedusa and from Istanbul, and we would not have a Europe without all its individual components.
      That Europe came about as a result of a call to Europeans in 1948, when our founding fathers said that the biggest danger for Europe would come about as a result of its division. Tomorrow, of course, there is an important referendum in the United Kingdom. The Council of Europe’s history is one of success – it has been the driving force behind greater and greater unity. It would certainly be sad if our generation were to pass a smaller Europe on to its descendants. Europe is not just a geographical fact but is about our very identity. It is about democracy, the rule of law and respect among equals. Each individual country has to respect all other countries on an equal footing. It is self-evident that we do not want to see imperialism of any sort.
      As we build Europe, we also put in place a legal underpinning. The Council of Europe is not just a forum for debate. We have a Committee of Ministers, a Court and a Parliamentary Assembly. We have a genuine European civil society, even though we are not a state. Let us not do anything to weaken that.
      We need to draw a distinction between loyalty to institutions and the instruments that we use. There are some pretty hard-hitting instruments – Mr Tspiras was right to remind us that we used them back in 1969, when Greece was expelled because it had a fascist dictatorship. The situation today is quite the opposite. The Parliamentary Assembly is the prime forum for dialogue with our partners, who are also in the Committee of Ministers and the Court. That is why I believe we should reiterate the call for peace and reconciliation. It was with great pleasure that I listened to our colleague Ms Savchenko inaugurating this session with words of such peace and reconciliation. We cannot do away with all suffering and discrimination, but we can point the way ahead.

Mr ARIEV (Ukraine) – Dear God, we should respect ourselves: we should respect the values of the Council of Europe and the Council of Europe itself. I want to remind the Assembly of Article 3 of the Statute of the Council of Europe when it was established more than 60 years ago: “Every Member of the Council of Europe must accept the principles of the rule of law and of the enjoyment by all persons within its jurisdiction of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and collaborate sincerely and effectively in the realisation of the aim of the Council as specified in Chapter I.” Article 8 states: “Any Member of the Council of Europe which has seriously violated Article 3 may be suspended from its rights of representation”.
      After the annexation of Crimea in 2014, we demanded that the Russian Federation reverse its illegal annexation, and we repeated our demand in 2015, when we asked that it refrain from harassing and putting pressure on Tatar institutions and organisations in Crimea, implement the Minsk agreement fully and withdraw all its troops from Ukrainian territory. We then suspended its representation under Article 8, but what rights were suspended? We first suspended Russia’s voting rights. In the Assembly, we vote on resolutions about democracy, human rights and democratic values. If, after all it has done, Russia is able to participate in such votes in the Assembly, that would be like inviting a murderous maniac as an expert to a humanism conference. The next right that was suspended was the right to participate in monitoring elections. Imagine allowing Russia to monitor future elections in Ukraine when it is occupying the territory of part of that state. The same applies in relation to Georgia.
      We are in favour of dialogue, but what kind of dialogue should that be? It should mean talking, not parroting. Has anyone heard that Russian officials are ready to discuss reversing the annexation of Crimea? No. They say, “Crimea is ours.” Has anyone heard that they intend to discuss withdrawing Russian troops from Ukrainian territory? No. They say, “We have no troops there.” They said that they had no troops in Crimea in 2014, but they brutally lied to all of us. We should respect ourselves in this Assembly, uphold democracy and maintain our principles. Otherwise, this will be the beginning of the end of the Council of Europe, as has happened to many international organisations in the past.

      Mr KIRAL (Ukraine) – I want to share my reflections on reaffirming the role of the Assembly as a pan-European forum for inter-parliamentary dialogue and co-operation, but what about reaffirming the role of the Assembly in the release of political prisoners and the protection of human rights in conflict areas? What about enforcing the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights on states that have joined the Council of Europe, holding those who do not respect international law and agreements to account, rather than appeasing them? What about reaffirming the role of the Assembly to punish those that annex their neighbours’ territories by using regular military forces, shooting down civilian aircraft, killing hundreds of people or to punish those that boycott the Assembly and its respected institutions? What about reaffirming the role of the Assembly to protect the rights of ethnic minorities, those of people such as women and children who are regularly harassed and abused, and those of the media used for covert propaganda purposes? Finally, what about reaffirming the Assembly’s role as a highly reputable authority that can enforce the implementation of its resolutions on its member States?
      Our delegations are working hard to reaffirm the Assembly’s important role, and I think we have made significant progress, despite the hybrid warfare launched against western societies, the divide-and-conquer strategy of meddling with European Union affairs, using NGOs to campaign against European Union leaders and dividing us over Brexit or how to deal with Syria or Ukraine. There are times when we need to stand up, harden our hearts against hostile behaviour and protect our values, rather than trade them away or dilute them. That does not mean we should stop interacting on other levels, whether bilateral, cultural, humanitarian or educational. There is no point in turning our backs, letting up on the pressure and, in the eyes of ordinary people, undermining the basic right of an individual or a country to be free and independent. We should not underestimate the effect of our moves and decisions, or how the signals we send are interpreted.
      We have heard many quotations today – as if we had already lost our minds – but Winston Churchill also said that ambiguity in foreign policy is a sign of weakness. The ambiguity of British pre-war policy under Chamberlain did not stop the Second World War. A forum for dialogue, with debates between different parties, is the most fundamental instrument for seeking compromise and reconciliation, but one essential precondition must be met, which is that all parties have the desire for dialogue. Boycotts, speaking from a position of force, continued humiliation whether in words or actions, such as passing contradictory laws, and so on are definitely not good preconditions. I remind you, Mr President, of what Mr Naryshkin told you in Russia: “Crimea is a closed question. Forget about it.” That shows complete and open disrespect of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and its resolutions.

      Mr HERKEL (Estonia) – During this discussion, we are using nice words such as “inter-parliamentary dialogue” and “inter-parliamentary diplomacy”. Of course, nobody is against dialogue, but there are questions about conditions being placed on dialogue, and about whether the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe framework is the only possible way to develop dialogue. To my mind, this Assembly is very much about values and principles, and it is therefore very important.
      Mr Fischer, like other speakers, mentioned Schuman and Konrad Adenauer, and Mr Kiral quoted Winston Churchill, so let me develop the idea. For example, did Winston Churchill really have the idea of developing inter-parliamentary dialogue in the Soviet Union within the framework of the Council of Europe? I do not think so. Unfortunately, given what the Russian Federation is doing – the annexation of Crimea, the occupation of the territory of their neighbours, such as Georgia, and so on – it is becoming more and more similar to the Soviet Union. Therefore, the parliamentary dimension that I see here is that those acts were strongly supported by the State Duma.
      Let me make another point. If we are to have a dialogue, there needs to be partner, and there needs to be a genuine parliament. If there is a genuine parliament, there must be free and fair elections in the country. Unfortunately, that was not the case in the last elections in the Russian Federation. Mr Kox said that the State Duma would probably have a new composition, so let us assume that we will begin from a new point. Elections are coming. Let us see how they will do. I have not, unfortunately, yet seen the conditions for free and fair elections in the Russian Federation.

Г-жа Надя Савченко, Фото: Съвет на Европа

 Ms SAVCHENKO (Ukraine)* – Any war has to be brought to an end. Now we are talking about dialogue, but unfortunately there is not just one party to this. Europe has always said that it wants to talk to Russia and that that has always been in the interests of both, but we can no longer see the periphery. Europe stretches to the Urals. All the countries that have ever been socialist republics under the Soviet Union are living worse than the rest of Europe. Why is this? It is because, even now, there is a system of totalitarian laws and the influence of Russia on that whole sphere. Russia has shown what it is worth in the way that it treated me. It continues to blossom under its draconian laws – laws that lead to people being stripped of their citizenship, for example, if they are against the Kremlin.
      Russia is not here at the moment, because it is not concerned with European values at all. People in Europe are not condemned or sent to prison for crimes that they are sent to prison for in Russia, and we seem to be forgetting Abkhazia, Ossetia, Chechnya and now Crimea. How long are you in Europe prepared to wait? Are you not afraid that you will become a nice little titbit for the Russian bear? France, Germany and Britain – are you prepared to do the same as Russia has done? Ukraine has given up its nuclear weapons. If you are not the same as Russia, teach it to talk to us in our language. We want this dialogue to be a dialogue of values.

Надя Савченко на кръглата маса организирана от  Украинската делегация в ПАСЕ