MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Yelena Shesternina) - Russia was criticized again at the Strasbourg session of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) this week.
Addressing the session, Patriarch Alexy II improved the situation somewhat but could not save the Russian delegation from the attacks of European MPs.
Tensions started building up even before the session opened. PACE refused to discuss the U.S. plans to deploy missile-defense elements on Polish and Czech territory on the grounds that missile defense had nothing to do with human rights and democracy which are the main directions of its activities.
It was clear before the session that the Mikhail Margelov-led Russian delegation would have to explain why Moscow was blocking the reform of the European Court of Human Rights. Russia was the only member of the Council of Europe, which failed to ratify Protocol 14 to the Human Rights Convention.
This protocol determines the gist of the reform. It has changed the procedure of controlling compliance with the convention; it has extended the powers of judges from six to nine years. In addition, it has introduced an additional criterion, which allows the European Court to reject a complaint based on the damage sustained by the applicant. The protocol has also upgraded the procedure for filtering patently unacceptable complaints.
The protocol aims to make the Court's work more effective now that it is receiving many more complaints as new states are joining the Council of Europe. Russia signed it on May 4, 2006 and is the only Council of Europe member not to have ratified it.
Moreover, Russia's failure to ratify the protocol is not due to red tape - State Duma deputies are openly refusing to accept the document. Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin made the first attempt to persuade the lawmakers to ratify it last December. He told them that "without ratification by this country it will not come into force," and that "the refusal to do so will smear Russia's reputation and put it into a politically vulnerable position."
But his arguments had no effect in the Duma. Its profile Committee on Civil, Criminal, Arbitration and Procedural Legislation argued that the protocol did not conform to Russian laws and even violated human rights. It did not like the idea of judges being in office for nine years instead of six, and objected to their right to dismiss an application if they consider that the applicant has not sustained any serious damage. The committee qualified the latter as a violation of human rights. As a result, the overwhelming majority of Duma deputies voted against the protocol, and some even suggested again reducing Russia's contribution to the Council of Europe.
It became clear that this demarche would not remain unpunished when they announced the name of the rapporteur on the court's reform - Mr Christos Pourgourides, a Cypriot lawmaker with 20 years of experience, and a seasoned opponent of Russia. He lashed out at Russia for blocking the judicial reform and exerting pressure on lawyers and NGO members who were defending the victims of human rights violations. He also accused Russia of harassing North Caucasian residents who wanted to appeal to the Strasbourg Court.
Mr. Pourgourides was not alone. Swiss Senator Dick Marty poured more fuel onto the fire. He suggested that the PACE human rights committee should prepare a special report, which would be wholly devoted to Russia's refusal to ratify the protocol. He accompanied his proposal by an emphatically negative remark, saying that Russia's conduct threatened the existence of PACE and the court as such.
As a result, PACE adopted a resolution urging the nations to fully implement their commitments and allowing a flexible approach to cases from the North Caucasus - they no longer have to go through all instances in Russia before emerging in Strasbourg.
In the last few months, Strasbourg judges have given Russia a hard time. Our country ranks first in the number of applications. In 2006 and the beginning of this year, the European Court received more than 20,000 applications from Russian citizens; all in all, Russia paid $1.4 million on won cases. Trying not to make a bad situation worse, European officials are attributing it to "objective factors." However, the explanation is not in the strength of Russia's population but in lack of confidence in the Russian legal system - the chances of getting a positive decision in the European Court are much higher than anywhere in Russia.
Nevertheless, Moscow is working to improve the situation. The Russians may soon be able to sue the state rather than a specific official, like it is done in the United States, Italy and Britain. Work is already underway on the draft law under which such cases will be reviewed by the Supreme Court. If it is adopted, Russians may prefer to apply for justice at home rather than in Strasbourg. Moral satisfaction from the victory will be much higher.
Hopefully, the deputies of the next Duma will come back to the court reform, as the current deputies are too pre-occupied with forthcoming elections. Speaking in Strasbourg, Margelov criticized Russian MPs for being stubborn. He said that their refusal "instills in the minds of Europeans doubts in Russia's European choice." Even Russian MPs do not want to reject this choice in public.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
