Key Benefits:
( Plenary Assembly of 26 June 2014)
1. Following the May 2014 European elections, the European Union (EU) faces major challenges. The Ukrainian crisis, in all its brutality, showed the fragility of the regional security system in a single and free Europe, based on the principles of the Charter of the United Nations of 1945 and the commitments of the Charter of Paris of 1990 for a new Europe. The European diplomacy was on the front line from the beginning of this crisis, which it addressed with some misaddresses and hesitations, before reacting with solidarity in the name of its values and interests. At the same time, the rise of nationalisms across the continent bears witness to a concern about a Europe that is too distant and technocratic, which leads secret negotiations without sufficient democratic control. In addition, some States, by advocating a simple zone of free trade at the risk of sacrificing economic and social rights, question the indivisibility and universality of human rights, while the global economic crisis multiplies the excluded. It is by renewing with its fundamental values of freedom, justice and solidarity, at the internal and external levels, that the Union can see a new momentum, as a centre of democracy and stability, by exercising influence, a "soft power", which passes through active, volontarist, committed and coherent diplomacy in the field of human rights.
2. This year, the EU is experiencing significant milestones, with the election of the European Parliament, the designation of a new European Commission and its President and Vice-President/High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. This new departure goes hand in hand with the renewal of the mandate of the EU Special Representative for Human Rights (1) and reflection on a new plan of action on human rights and democracy (2).
3. After seeking to progressively affirm itself as a full political actor on the international scene, the Union is now fully engaged bilaterally, multilaterally and institutionally, either through its political and diplomatic action, its trade or its humanitarian or development assistance programs. The establishment by the Lisbon Treaty of a high representative position for foreign affairs and security policy and the establishment of a European External Action Service (EFA) (3) have strengthened this political dimension of the Union's external action.
4. In this context, the National Advisory Commission on Human Rights (CNCDH) has decided to consider an important and often unrecognized aspect of the Union's action, namely its foreign human rights policy. This opinion is part of the continuity of his work on diplomacy and human rights (4) which emphasized that if the objectives of diplomacy could not be limited to human rights, they constituted a fundamental element. To update her reflection, she conducted a series of audits of personalities from European institutions, civil society, the academic world and the French administration (5). Study subjects such as human rights in the EU's internal action or the EU's place in international organizations, voluntarily undeveloped within the framework of this notice, may be subject to further in-depth analysis by the CNCDH.
5. The consecration of human rights in the EU's action is the result of a long evolution which the Lisbon Treaty, which entered into force on 1 December 2009 (6), constitutes an important step, reaffirming from Article 2 that: "The Union is based on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, as well as respect for the rights of (...) In addition, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, adopted in 2000, acquired by the Lisbon Treaty a conventional value within the Union (7). It applies to all actions of the Union, including those with an external dimension (8). Thus, the EU Court of Justice and national jurisdictions now have a new source on which to rely to ensure respect for fundamental rights in the interpretation and application of EU law. At the same time, the Lisbon Treaty provides for the EU's accession to the European Convention on Human Rights (CEDH).
6. In the field of foreign policy, the EU Treaty states that "in its relations with the rest of the world, the Union contributes (...) to the protection of human rights" (9) and that "the action of the Union on the international scene is based on the principles that presided over its creation, development and expansion and that it aims to promote in the rest of the world: democracy, the rule of law, universality and freedoms The Union strives to develop relationships and build partnerships with third countries and international, regional or global organizations that share the principles referred to in the first paragraph. (...) The Union defines and conducts common policies and actions and works to ensure a high degree of cooperation in all areas of international relations in order to: (...) consolidate and support democracy, the rule of law, human rights and the principles of international law" (10).
7. In this context, human rights have become an essential component of the Union's external action and an element of its identity. This will has been reflected in recent institutional developments: the adoption of the EU Strategic Framework and Plan of Action on Human Rights and Democracy and the appointment of a special EU representative on human rights. These two advances aim to strengthen the cross-cutting integration of human rights in all EU external policies. They also reaffirm the need to conduct all these policies in a coherent and coordinated manner (I). The indispensable search for coherence, based on the legitimacy of the Union, should lead to a coordinated, effective and followed-up use of the tools of foreign policy. However, the evaluation of these tools demonstrates the existence of possible margins of improvement (II). Coherence also implies that the EU maintains the same language in the various international forums in which it gradually finds its place (III).
8. Despite the growing importance of the Union on the international stage and the strengthening of its external action on the institutional level, the role of the Member States remains dominant in this area. The external action of the EU, and particularly the common external and security policy (11), are largely conditioned by the influence of the Member States and still operate on the intergovernmental method. In addition, States are most often on the front line in responding to crises, either in political, diplomatic or military phases. The EU's external action in the broad sense therefore includes both the policy of European institutions - under the strong influence of States - and that of its member states, some of which are permanent members of the Security Council (12).
9. This opinion addressed to the Government is therefore part of this logic of influence of States, particularly France, on the external action of the Union and of the necessary synergy between national and European foreign policies. It is not intended to exhaustively analyse the institutional mechanisms of the Union's foreign policy on human rights, but rather to identify the main features of this policy and to identify the main challenges, in order to formulate concrete proposals to improve its functioning.
10. At the outset, the CNCDH notes a general lack of legibility of the Union's external action and a lack of transparency on the nature and results of this action, while the financial means mobilized for the EU's foreign policy are very important (13) and would call for a real assessment of its impact, made available to European citizens. Access to information, as in the framework of free trade agreements negotiations (14), is sometimes limited, for reasons of confidentiality, and sometimes hampered by the institutional complexity of the EU and the difficulties of accessing documents in French.
I. - The indispensable pursuit of coherence
11. The coherence of the Union's action with respect to third countries is the condition of its credibility and its effectiveness. It includes both internal-external coherence and external-external coherence. Indeed, it is essential that the human rights requirements of the Union in its relations with third countries also apply to its own internal action as well as to that of its member States, which translates the requirement of exemplaryity that must lead to them. In addition, coherence implies consistency in the conduct of foreign policy, despite the diversity of topics and partners. Policies in respect of third countries, of any kind, should not contradict or harm themselves, but rather strengthen. In this regard, in its last annual report on human rights, the European Parliament considers that "the most fundamental strategic choice for the EU concerns resilience and political determination to remain faithful to the Union's founding values in the face of pressure from other strategic objectives and interests, when times are difficult" (15).
A. - Coherence at the heart of a consolidated legal and institutional framework
12. In accordance with Article 21 of the EU Treaty, human rights are one of the eight objectives of common policies and actions in the field of international relations. On the legal level, the objective of respect for human rights therefore extends to all EU external policies as well as other objectives such as the interests of Europe, its security, the integration of countries into the world economy, including the progressive removal of obstacles to international trade.
13. Under the Lisbon Treaty, foreign policy competencies are:
- foreign policy and common security (Title 5, Chapter 2 of the EU Treaty);
- the Common Security and Defence Policy (PSDC) (Title 5, Chapter 2, Section 2 of the EU Treaty);
- Common trade policy (Part 5, Title 2 of the EU Treaty on Operation)
- development cooperation (Part 5, Title 2, Chapter 1 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU);
- economic, financial and technical cooperation (Part 5, Title 2, Chapter 2 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU);
- humanitarian assistance (Part 5, Title 2, Chapter 3 of the EU Treaty on Operation).
In addition, several EU policies have an external dimension, for example in the field of transport or justice and internal affairs (16).
14. In addition, these different areas of external relations are themselves subdivided between integrated policies on the one hand, including common trade policy, development cooperation and humanitarian assistance, and common foreign and security policy on the other hand, intergovernmental gasoline, which covers the areas of foreign policy as well as all issues related to the security of the Union.
15. Moreover, despite the appointment of a high representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the consolidation of several of them within the EEAS, placed under its authority, the actors of EU foreign policy are numerous and relatively dispersed. The High Representative must precisely ensure the coherence of the Union's external action, which is facilitated by its dual status as President of the Council for Foreign Affairs and Vice-Chair of the Commission, specifically "in charge of the Commission's responsibilities in the field of external relations and the coordination of other aspects of the Union's external action". The EEAS, the diplomatic corps of the Union, assailant in the execution of its mandate and "ensuring coherence between the different areas of the Union's foreign policy and between these areas and its other policies" (17).
16. If the EEAS is considered as the political organ - at least in terms of common foreign policy and security -, several of the European Commission and European Commissioners are responsible for operational and technical aspects. The Commission is also responsible for the areas of foreign policy outside of foreign policy and common security, for which "it ensures the external representation of the Union" (18).
17. At the political level, the Council's thematic and geographic working groups, and particularly the COHOM, which is dedicated to human rights in external action, prepare the Council's decisions in this area, including the Union's action in international forums and dialogues with third countries (see below). Increasingly, geographical working groups integrate human rights into their agendas - for example, within the framework of the development of country strategies on human rights - in cooperation with the COHOM, which has itself increased the frequency of its meetings and also held meetings with the EU Working Group on Fundamental Rights (FREMP).
18. As for the delegations of the Union in third countries, they are headed by a head of delegation, which receives its instructions from the high representative and the EEAS, but are mostly composed of staff of the European Commission, in addition to one third of the staff, diplomats of the Member States and within which human rights correspondents are appointed. They are responsible for local implementation of the Union's foreign policy, coordinating with the diplomatic missions of the Member States.
19. In addition, the role of the European Parliament in the field of human rights and external action is crucial at the legislative and budgetary levels (19), but also at the political level with the adoption of resolutions and foreign policy statements, the publication of human rights studies, the sending of parliamentary delegations on the ground and the adoption of an annual report on human rights and foreign policy. In addition, the European Parliament carries out electoral observation missions and regularly consults civil society actors. He awards prizes rewarding the personalities involved in respect of human rights, for example the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Mind. In addition, it has a power to approve agreements between the Union and third countries or organizations (20) and attaches great importance to the coherence of the Union's external action and to the integration of human rights. In his last report on human rights, he recalled that "European human rights policy must be consistent with the treaty's obligations and ensure the coherence of internal and external policies" (21). Finally, the High Representative must consult with Parliament on "the main aspects and fundamental choices of common foreign and security policy and common security and defence policy (...)".
20. The appointment of a special representative for human rights and the adoption of a strategic framework and an action plan (see infra) specifically aimed at "strengthening the coherence of the Union's action on human rights and the integration of human rights in all areas of the Union's external action" (22). In particular, the framework states that "the EU will work in favour of human rights in all areas without exception of its external action [and that it] will integrate the promotion of human rights into its policies relating to trade, investment, technology and telecommunications, the internet, energy, the environment, the social responsibility of enterprises and development, as well as in its policy of security and development
21. Thus, coherence, as a legal obligation of the Union (23), is a priority objective in the field of foreign policy and is at the heart of the mandate of all actors in this policy. Nevertheless, the concrete implementation of this objective is facing many challenges.
B. - Persistent difficulties
22. Despite real progress, EU external action officials are aware of the lack of coherence that can sometimes lead to negative impacts on respect for human rights. They continue to seek innovative solutions to address these challenges, which can be explained in particular by the multiplication of priorities and objectives, sometimes difficult to reconcile, and by the diversity of structures, responsible for implementing them, whose articulation and coordination are still too limited. In addition, the complexity of organizing certain instances, like EEAS, and the duplication of several services complicate the situation.
23. These lacks of coherence in the field of human rights are at several levels: between the external and internal policies of the Union and between the different aspects of its external policy.
Internal/external
24. In terms of internal-external coherence, the CNCDH finds differences or even contradictions between the internal policy of the Union and its member States, on the one hand, and the external policy of the Union, on the other. They harm the effectiveness of his action and can sometimes make his speeches on human rights inaudible.
25. European asylum and immigration policy dramatically illustrates this inconsistency. Indeed, the EU Member States, all parties to the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, are obliged to respect the principle of non-refoulement, enshrined in Article 33 and taken up in European law (24). This principle also applies to asylum seekers under the recognitive nature of refugee status. However, the EU's policy of asylum seekers and migrants for years and the many obstacles it poses to access to its territory clearly contravene its commitments. The prevalence of migration control over any other consideration and the Union's (in)action with migrants who perish at its external borders and at sea (25), among which many people fleeing from war and persecution, are indefensible. The European visa policy, the activities of the Frontex agency, the difficulties of accessing the procedure for filing and examining a claim for asylum seem particularly far from the fundamental principles of the EU (26). The Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) has issued a recent report (27) in which it examines the conditions at the southern maritime borders of the EU, relating to the most fundamental rights of a person, such as the right to life and the right not to be returned when there are risks of torture, persecution or inhuman treatment. The report emphasizes that the fact that migrants put their lives in danger by crossing the sea in boats that are unfit for navigation in order to reach the coasts of Europe and expresses an alarming failure to protect the EU from fundamental human rights, which is not resolved. It also states that the EU should adopt clear and precise guidelines on respect for fundamental rights in relation to the principle of non-refoulement.
26. Conversely, the fight against the death penalty is a topic for which the Union sends a coherent signal. Indeed, the abolition of the death penalty is a prerequisite for entry into the Union and is one of the main priorities of its foreign policy (28). In this regard, the EU also has legal instruments that give it the means of its political ambitions. Thus, Council of the EU Regulation No. 1236/2005, which entered into force on 30 July 2006, deals with the trade to third countries of certain goods that may be used to inflict capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Under pressure from civil society and the European Parliament, it was revised on 20 December 2011 to fill gaps and expand the list of export-controlled goods. Thus the sale of certain anesthetics that can be used in lethal injections to countries that have not yet abolished the death penalty is now severely controlled. In addition, EU funds allow civil society actors to carry out campaigns against the death penalty.
External/external
27. In terms of external-external coherence, it is mainly between the trade policy of the Union and other aspects and objectives of its external policy such as development or human rights that the shift is the most marked. If trade or investment agreements include human rights clauses (see infra), there are many examples of negative impacts of these agreements on respect for human rights (confiscation of land, violations of trade union freedom, etc.) (29) as well as contradictions between the political discourses and the real actions of the Union on the ground, even though the commercial benefits should be used as leverage to the partner countries. In practice, negotiations continue by the European Commission for the conclusion of trade or investment agreements of third countries, disregarding human rights violations that persist or worsen (30).
28. Conversely, within the framework of the development policy, the EU is gradually building on the rights-based approach to development, in accordance with the 2012 Agenda for Change, which places human rights in the heart of development cooperation (31). This approach, advocated for many years by the United Nations (32), is to take into account the respect and enjoyment of human rights in development actions and to measure the impact of these actions on the reality of rights. The conclusions of the Council of the EU adopted on 19 May constitute an essential step (33), in approving the presentation of a new "toolbox" that provides EU staff and partners with concrete directions for better integration of human rights in development cooperation policies at all stages of project management. These conclusions also call for "a greater complementarity, greater coherence and closer coordination between all EU instruments and policies in the external field" (34). In this regard, and in connection with the previous point, the Council "emphasizes the importance of continuing to conduct analyses of the impact of trade and investment agreements on human rights" (35) (see impact studies infra).
II. - The necessary assessment of external policy documents and tools
29. Based on the analysis of existing tools, this part aims to identify avenues for improvement aimed at strengthening the implementation and articulation of the tools of external action, in order to develop the coherence and effectiveness of the Union's action.
A. - A recent willingness to formalize
The strategic framework and action plan on human rights and democracy
30. In 2012, the EU Council adopted a EU Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy to guide the EU's action over the coming years, with a practical implementation plan. The framework identifies 36 results, divided into seven sub-parts and to be achieved through 94 actions to be implemented by the EU by 31 December 2014. This is the first time the Union has a unified strategic framework in this area. As noted above, it aims to improve the legibility, effectiveness and coherence of European human rights policy as a whole and to integrate human rights in all areas of the Union's external action (36). Several of the expected outcomes of the action plan are mainly aimed at strengthening the coherence of foreign policy (1, 8, 10, 11, 12,13, 14, 15, 25 and 33). In paragraph 9, it is indicated that "the EU will work in favour of human rights in all areas without exception of its external action". The EU Special Representative for Human Rights is responsible for the implementation of the strategic framework and action plan.
31. Since its inception, the EU strategic framework has boosted existing tools and has identified the role of each of the actors involved. However, questions remain within the European authorities on the scope of the action plan (37), which would merit clarification. In addition, the expected results and actions to be implemented are very numerous and sometimes broadly and vaguely articulated. The next action plan should therefore focus on concrete actions and some major priorities and clearly establish responsibilities between the European institutions and the Member States.
32. In addition, the next plan should make a more important role in economic, social, and cultural rights, whose respect and promotion are two of the expected outcomes of the first action plan but which do not fall within the EU's human rights priorities. The EEAS itself recognizes that the Union's economic, social and cultural rights activities "can be intensified" (38). The European Parliament regrets that "the EU's human rights policy continues to largely neglect economic, social and cultural rights, even though the Union has committed itself to the indivisibility and interdependence of rights, and requests the EEAS, the Commission and Member States to intensify their efforts in this regard, including in the field of labour rights and social rights" (39). For example, guidelines could be developed on these rights (see below).
33. In addition, a regular and transparent assessment of the strategic framework, beyond the elements of the EU's annual report on human rights and democracy around the world, which is a useful but too general source of information, and shifted over time due to the slow publication and acceleration of events on the international stage (40). The publication of the report should be an opportunity for a periodic evaluation, in connection with all parties involved. More effective monitoring mechanisms should be established to address the lack of implementation of actions that are critical to the coherence objectives of the strategic framework.
34. In this regard, the strategic framework and the plan of action have not yet been subject to sufficient general appropriation on the part of the Member States, whereas these documents are also addressed to them and are not exclusively intended for European institutions. Parliament calls on the "EAS to redouble its efforts to strengthen the sense of ownership of this action plan by Member States and that a section on the implementation of the action plan by Member States be added to the annual report" (41). For the overall coherence of the EU's external action, it would be necessary for each national diplomatic post to appropriate the strategic framework and action plan and to carry out specific actions to implement them, which they would then report. Similarly, within the Member States, and thus in France, civil society actors seem little or not involved in the evaluation of the plan.
Country human rights strategies
35. The country strategies consist of an analysis of the human rights situation in each country concerned and thus allow for the identification of specific human rights priorities by country, and eventually guide programmes of financial assistance and technical assistance. They engage the Member States, through their adoption by the working groups of the Council, and guarantee a certain transversality, involving geographical groups and using the expertise of delegations on site, in consultation with the diplomatic posts of the Member States.
36. However, these strategies suffer from a lack of publicity and lack of effective information from the European Parliament and civil society actors, because of the strict confidentiality around them. If civil society actors are consulted upstream, they are not kept informed of the final outcome and priorities, which in turn limits its contribution to their implementation. On this point, the process should therefore be improved (42).
B. - The diversity of external action tools
37. In addition to specific political statements and approaches, which may relate to human rights, the EU has created a series of tools specifically dedicated to the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of external action.
Conditionality
38. The clauses "human rights", as an essential element of the agreements, have become widespread in agreements between the Union and third countries or organizations (43). Despite their diversity, they generally have the function of subordinating the establishment or maintenance of a relationship with a third State to respect for human rights by the parties to the agreement and, for some, providing for the adoption of appropriate measures in the event of a violation.
39. The latest annual report of the EU Council on Human Rights and Democracy states that "in 2012, the EU continued to ensure that human rights clauses were included in the framework agreements with industrialized countries and non-industrialized countries, even when it was not easy to reach agreement with the partner country. In 2012, agreements containing a human rights clause were signed with Iraq, Vietnam, Central American countries and the Philippines." In 2013, protocols to fisheries agreements with Morocco and Côte d'Ivoire incorporated human rights clauses.
40. In theory, these clauses create a form of conditionality by providing for the possibility of sanctions against the failed State Party, or even a suspension of the agreement. This mechanism sometimes includes a pre- or regular dialogue procedure (44). However, no agreement provides for the establishment of a standing committee to monitor its implementation, contrary to the provisions on other areas that are accompanied by permanent monitoring mechanisms. In general, these human rights clauses are only very little and very unevenly applied, even when serious human rights violations exist (45).
41. Another aspect of conditionality lies in the existence of incentive instruments that condition the granting of aids or benefits to respect human rights or the principles of sustainable development and good governance (see above the financial instruments), in the example of the system of general preference (SPG/SPG+) (46). However, it appears that the incentive of trade preferences is not always sufficiently used to enhance respect for human rights on the ground (47), although improvements have been made by the new regulation by asking the Commission to conduct a regular assessment.
42. Thus, as it had already pointed out in 2008, the CNCDH considers that in order to avoid a sub-exploitation of these conditionality mechanisms, dangerous for "the credibility of the Union as a global player and resolved on the international stage" (48), it would be appropriate to ensure the rigorous and regular monitoring of their implementation, acting in stages with graduated measures and establishing a more thorough follow-up and dialogue. The CNCDH recalls the importance of "ensuring compliance with these conditionalities through a transparent, independent and credible system" (49).
43. On the same line, the European Parliament recommends the establishment of a legal framework to facilitate their effective implementation as soon as the partner infringes on human rights and democracy (50). In this context, it calls for the establishment of "specific mechanisms for non-compliance", the formulation of "commitments related to specific criteria measurable, feasible and time-bound to measure progress" and the establishment of a "specific implementation schedule" (51).
Human rights impact studies
44. In order to complement the provisions and to allow to respond to possible violations of human rights, which may sometimes result from the agreement itself, agreements in all areas of the Union's external action should be systematically accompanied by human rights impact studies, based on independent expertise and consultation with the populations concerned. Significant progress has been made on this point (52), but the impact studies are still superficial and inadequate for human rights. The action plan also provides for "to develop a method to help take into account the human rights situation in third countries as part of the launch of negotiations on trade and/or investment agreements or the conclusion of agreements" (53). The Parliament, in its last report on human rights, "invites (in fact) the EU to define and adopt specific strategic directions on the effective inclusion of human rights in its trade and investment agreements in order to carry out with rigor and method impact studies on human rights" (54).
45. Mechanisms of appeal and alert should also be introduced that allow any person and organization to report any failures and malfunctions in the implementation of the agreement, or any other violation that has an impact on human rights, to result in the adoption of appropriate measures.
Human rights dialogues
46. The human rights dialogues undertaken with many countries (around 40 dialogues with more than thirty third countries have been established so far) and sometimes accompanied by a dialogue with local civil society actors remain a significant tool to address specific human rights violations in third countries. However, they are characterized by a variety of structures, formats, periodicity and methods as well as by the confidentiality of exchanges, which hinders the visibility of this diplomatic tool.
47. Moreover, the effectiveness of these dialogues continues to be debated within European institutions and civil society actors. These dialogues are not an end in itself and must lead to concrete actions and results. However, CNCDH had already noted in 2008 that "their agendas, objectives and indicators are often blurred" (55). There is still no real mechanism for monitoring and evaluating these dialogues, nor indicators of progress. Parliament calls for these dialogues "to be accompanied by clear public criteria for objective measurement of results" (56). As a result, they should be strengthened, periodic monitoring of consolidated results and civil society actors should be more involved.
48. In addition, within the framework of the effective implementation of the action plan and the broader objective of coherence, the integration of human rights in all aspects of the Union's foreign policy should be reflected in the very content of the dialogues. Thus, the impact of economic actors on respect for human rights should be on the agenda of these dialogues.
49. As part of these bilateral dialogues, interlocutors from third countries are increasingly raising human rights violations in Europe. In order to strengthen the coherence and credibility of these dialogues, it is essential that the Union be able to respond in depth and objectively to the inquiry of third countries on the human rights situation in its member countries. Today, efforts are being made to further involve the expertise of Member States in dialogues with third countries. CNCDH considers that the relevant directions of the Commission and the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights could be usefully associated with the exercise (57).
Guidelines
50. The progressive development of guidelines or guidelines (guidelines) is one of the main tools for establishing a practical, conceptual and concrete framework for the EU's human rights action, within the framework of its external policy.
The first guidelines on the death penalty, adopted in 1998, were revised in 2008 and 2013. Since then, ten guidelines have been adopted:
- Guidelines on torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, adopted in 2001 and revised in 2008 and 2012;
- the guidelines on human rights dialogues with third countries of 2001, revised in 2009 (see infra);
- Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict of 2003, revised in 2008;
- the 2004 Human Rights Defenders Guidelines revised in 2008;
- the 2008 guidelines on the promotion and protection of the rights of the child;
- Guidelines on violence against women and girls and the fight against all forms of discrimination against women in 2008;
- Guidelines on International Humanitarian Law 2009;
- the guidelines for the rights of LGBTI people in 2013;
- the guidelines on the promotion and protection of freedom of religion and belief of 2013;
- the "online and offline" freedom of expression guidelines adopted in 2014.
51. This enumeration alone shows the flexibility and adaptability of the mechanism, with a permanent assessment of the results and regular revisions, but also its rise, with new priorities. It would not be necessary for the guidelines to introduce an apparent selectivity in the human rights system, whereas the principles of universality and indivisibility are essential. In this regard, the selection process for selected themes and the development of the guidelines lack transparency. While some vulnerable groups are taken into account, economic, social and cultural rights are not treated as such, even though trade union freedom is fundamental to the guarantee of all social rights and that the right to education could be a component of the policies of development and support to the rule of law. (Besides these shortcomings, it can be noted that some issues, however priority for French diplomacy, such as the issue of enforced or involuntary disappearances are not addressed as such, while they are related to the guidelines against torture and international humanitarian law, with preventive and repressive elements which it would be very useful to promote. )
52. France should mobilize its European partners to complement the guidelines, with an overall vision, by articulating this programme of work with the use of EU financial instruments, but also strengthened support for some United Nations funds, such as the Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture. Better readability would be achieved through harmonization of guidelines that should systematically include objectives, criteria, means, schedules, indicators and integrate a regular and comprehensive assessment. On this point, the European Parliament recently recommended the implementation of the "effective and results-based" torture guidelines (58).
53. In addition, the development, evaluation and revision of the guidelines should be made in a more transparent and participatory manner, involving civil society actors more widely. An effort to disseminate and raise awareness among "users", European officials and national diplomats, for a more systematic application of the guidelines should find its continuation in public information, within the EU, as in third countries.
Financial instruments
54. The Union has several financial instruments to support various actions and projects in third countries. In the field of human rights, the European Institute for Democracy and Human Rights (IEDDH) is the first to provide financial support to human rights defenders, civil society and human rights actors around the world and illustrates the EU's desire to encourage the development of an active and independent civil society. The new instrument for 2014-2020 reinforces previous priorities regarding support for democracy, including through the sending of electoral observation missions, the fight against the death penalty, torture and all forms of discrimination, and provides an increasing budget (1.3 billion euros, compared with 1.1 for the previous instrument). It also improves its response capacity to respond more flexible and faster to emergency situations, especially for defenders at risk (59).
55. In addition, as part of the pre-accession aids supporting the stabilization and association process of candidate countries and potential candidates to the EU, the financial instrument for pre-accession assistance (IAP) is a useful tool in the implementation of the EU's foreign policy. It provides assistance to countries engaged in an accession process for the period 2007-2013 and aims to strengthen the capacity of public institutions, cross-border cooperation, economic and social development and rural development. The recipient countries of these IPA funds are required to align themselves with the democratic principles of the rule of law, human rights and minorities.
56. Geographical financial instruments such as the European Development Fund, the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (IEVP) and the Development Cooperation Instrument (ICD) are all useful instruments for the promotion of human rights in third countries.
57. However, the European Court of Auditors has made a severe assessment of the use of funds in some countries and has recommended that it improve its transparent and effective management (60). It is also pointed out the current failure of the EU to develop the best possible interaction between dialogue, incentives, support measures and sanctions (61), as ordered in point 33 of the action plan ("Effective use and interaction of the EU's external policy instruments").
III. - The European Union in multilateral forums
58. The EU's multilateral action in the various international forums has developed considerably in recent years. In 2013, "the various decisions of the Council and proposals of the Commission concern the participation of the European Union in international organizations and multilateral conventions [...] and the diversity of the areas and organizations concerned and the number and variety of these acts confirm the EU's desire to continue to develop its multilateral activity, whether to enrich its internal policies or proximity or, more generally, to meet the cross-cutting objectives of its international action, including that of "to promote an international system of cooperation".
59. The EU's multilateral action is manifested in the right to conclude international human rights treaties and agreements (63). In December 2010, the EU acceded to the International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (64). This possibility is not sufficiently exploited in the field of human rights, which can in particular be explained by reserve of some EU Member States who fear that this will result in an extension of EU human rights skills to the detriment of national competences. In general, however, the Union would gain to be a party to a greater number of multilateral conventions in order to strengthen its role and credibility and to submit itself to the assessment of the implementation of these instruments by independent bodies.
A. - The United Nations Organization
The United Nations Organization itself
60. The EU Treaty states that the EU "facilitates multilateral solutions to common problems, especially within the United Nations" (65). If the EU enjoys observer status in the "General Assembly of the United Nations, its committees and working groups, the international meetings and conferences organized by the General Assembly and the United Nations conferences" (66), the respective contribution of the EU and its member states remains different according to the bodies (see above).
61. The ongoing dialogue between the diplomatic missions of States and the representation of the Union usually ensures a great coherence of the positions taken and the participation of the EU as the spokesperson of its Member States has the advantage of giving great visibility to the position of the 28 States. However, the counter-part of this cohesion is not always allowing the immediate reactivity that would be required. It would also be necessary to encourage the speeches of the Member States, in the agreed common line, in order to animate and expand the debates, allowing each State to highlight its good practices and priorities.
62. In addition, the EU would be more effective, if it were more present on the ground, in the context of United Nations-sponsored peacekeeping operations. In general, a systematic reflection is needed on the articulation of the means available to the EU and the priorities set for peacebuilding, the reconstruction of the rule of law, the fight against impunity and cooperation with international criminal justice.
63. In addition, there is a certain contradiction between the rise in power of the EU on human rights, based on its expanded competence, and the fact that it does not reflect, in the same way as States, within a multilateral framework, the fulfilment of international obligations in this field. This is the result of a lack of overview and systemic analysis of the EU's action, despite the responsibility assumed by the Member States when submitting their national reports to the monitoring bodies. Thus, within the framework of the Universal Periodic Review, it would be legitimate and augur well that the EU submits, on a voluntary basis, a report on respect for human rights in its internal and external policies. While the Agency for Fundamental Rights has been providing, since early 2013, at the request of the Office of the High Commissioner, excerpts from the relevant reports it has published in recent years, this information concerns the Member State under review and not the Union itself. At a minimum, the EU should be ready to respond to requests from independent monitoring bodies for the transmission of information useful to the analysis of human rights. As such, contacts have already been held between the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the European Commission on the issue of discrimination against Roma populations. The most recent international conventions are aimed at the cooperation of the monitoring bodies with the "intergovernmental regional organizations or institutions concerned" (67), which pave the way for very flexible formulas for an effective contribution of the EU, based on its own priorities and shared competences in the area concerned.
Other United Nations family organizations
64. Diplomacy of human rights cannot be confined to certain United Nations bodies and the EU's action in this area should have more legibility in large organizations that have a direct impact on human rights, such as UNESCO, with its skills in education, culture and science (bioethics), etc. Within this organization, the human rights sector has been increasingly overlooked in order to achieve budgetary savings, while it should be a priority in the face of the challenges of new technologies and information and communication sciences.
65. The same is true of the International Labour Organization (ILO) in which the EU should strengthen the protection and promotion of the fundamental rights of workers around the world by fighting social dumping. The EU must above all overcome the divorce between the positions within the framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations or bilateral trade negotiations and the commitments made in the field of human rights. The lack of coherence often noted between the various European policies finds its continuation in the multilateral forums, without attempting to sum up their focus on human rights.
66. This is also the case for many specialized organizations, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World Health Organization (WHO): too often European States adopt a managerial approach, dominated by commercial interests or accounting priorities, without taking into account the impact of policies on human rights, and in particular the negative effects on the most vulnerable populations, which joins the concern.
C. - European organisations
Council of Europe
67. The relationship between the EU and the Council of Europe, beyond protocol meetings, had to be strengthened. Already in 2006, the report of Jean-Claude Juncker recommended, on the one hand, the short-term accession of the Union to the ECHR, on the other hand, in the medium term, the accession of the Union to the Council of Europe as such (68). From now on, it would be useful to make an inventory of European conventions open to EU membership and the justifications for its non-participation. The draft EU accession agreement to the ECHR - finalized on 5 April 2013 and currently submitted to the Court of Justice of the European Union (69) - itself includes limits by excluding certain important additional protocols, such as protocols Nos. 4, 7 and 12. A fortiori, a more systematic commitment could be desired in different areas reflecting the indivisibility of human rights, such as the revised European Social Charter.
68. With regard to the EU's accession to the ECHR, this accession should not, a priori, have an impact on the EU's foreign policy, since the purpose of EU accession to the ECHR is the monitoring of respect for human rights "in" or "in" the EU. However, it could, on the margins, affect the foreign human rights policy of the EU, to the extent that individuals can submit to the European Court of Human Rights any "acts, measures or omissions attributable to EU institutions, its agencies or agencies" that could affect the rights of such persons (70). This could be the case, for example, in the event of actions taken or sanctions imposed by the EU that would have an impact on the rights of persons or groups of persons, who could then turn to the European Court of Strasbourg after having previously exercised an appeal before the Luxembourg court (71).
69. On an institutional level, EU member states should abandon the "zero growth" policy that paralyses the Council of Europe, while its activities and programmes have a stabilizing role across the continent. The legitimate concern to avoid duplication should also involve closer cooperation with the Council of Europe's Commissioner for Human Rights (72), by strengthening its human and financial resources.
CSCE-OSCE
70. The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) which was marked by the signing of the Final Act of the Helsinki Conference in 1975 and the Paris Charter for a New Europe in 1990, remains essential for the cooperative security of participating States in a space from Vancouver to Vladivostok, bringing together the United States and Russia. It is in this flexible diplomatic framework that, from the beginning of the 1990s, the diplomacy of human rights of the European Union was expressed in one voice. The progressive institutionalization of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) since the Paris Charter has enabled the establishment of clean institutions, such as the Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (BIDDH) and the Centre for Conflict Prevention. The originality of the CSCE-OSCE is to closely associate the human dimension, including the protection of the rights of national minorities, and confidence- and disarmament measures, in a global concept of cooperative security based on the principles of the United Nations.
71. The EU's action within the OSCE is decisive, especially in a period of regional crisis, and Member States should mobilize to strengthen the OSCE institutions and their means of action on the ground. The articulation between the OSCE's current Presidency - provided in 2014 by Swiss diplomacy - and the action of the High Representative for Foreign and Security Affairs was crucial to addressing the Ukrainian crisis, but the EU Member States should ensure that the preventive measures available to the OSCE are strengthened. This is the case of the Stockholm Convention of 1992 creating the Court of Conciliation and Arbitration of the OSCE which France had originally been. Since then, despite a significant number of ratifications and a high-level composition in its two colleges - that of conciliators and that of arbitrators - the Court has never been seized, even though its original vocation was to resolve border conflicts and disputes relating to national minorities. A campaign of ratification could only strengthen the authority of the Court. The same is true of the various mechanisms of good offices, investigation and fact-finding, which have been put in place within the framework of the OSCE's human dimension, such as the "Moscow Mechanism", which allows States to reach consensus or 10 participating states in emergency to initiate an independent investigation procedure.
72. As the OSCE prepares for 2015 to take stock of its 40 years of existence, a comprehensive reflection is required on the EU member states on the synergy of the various international organizations in crisis management and the protection of human rights. The recent signature of a statement between the Director of the IDBH and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to illustrate this need for a dialogue to strengthen cooperation between these two institutions and cooperation at all levels (73). The priority given to the adoption of strong common positions within the 28 must go hand in hand with a committed attitude of the Union towards other States as in the various multilateral forums where the EU can play a key role in raising awareness, vigilance and training.
Recommendations
The CNCDH's recommendations on the EU's foreign policy on human rights are aimed at improving the effectiveness of this policy and better articulation with French foreign policy, at the service of promoting and respecting human rights.
CNCDH highlights four major imperatives:
1. The necessary appropriation of the EU's foreign policy on human rights and its various tools (country strategies, guidelines...) by all actors.
2. France's active support for this policy, its bilateral and multilateral action and its involvement in European institutions.
3. The transparency, visibility and legibility of the Union's action, its objectives and results, as well as the consultation of civil society actors - including non-governmental organizations and national human rights institutions - at all levels.
4. The coherence of the Union's external action, condition of its credibility and effectiveness, which implies the coherence of EU policies vis-à-vis third countries and between EU foreign policy and internal human rights policy. Within the framework of coherence, the mandate of the Agency for Fundamental Rights should be strengthened on human rights situations in member states and on the external action of the EU (74).
5. The strict observance of international commitments, including those of the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.
Strategic framework, action plan and country strategies for human rights and democracy
6. Work towards the effective implementation of all actions of the action plan.
7. Contribute to the evaluation of the implementation of the action plan, reporting on actions to achieve the desired results.
8. To actively contribute to the development of the future action plan, which will need to focus on a list of targeted actions, indicating precisely the implementation schedule and the monitoring indicators.
9. Work to ensure that more action is devoted to social and cultural economic rights in the next action plan.
10. Consult, for the evaluation of the first plan and the preparation of the second, civil society actors in France.
11. Request that priorities identified in national human rights strategies be made public or, at the very least, communicated to the competent subcommission of the European Parliament.
12. Report on the evaluation of these strategies to the European Parliament in order to learn from them.
13. Seize the opportunity for the publication of the report on the EU and human rights to present to the relevant French actors an assessment of the EU's foreign policy.
Human rights clauses, essential elements of agreements between the EU and third States
14. Request that all EU agreements with third countries, in any area, be incorporated into a human rights clause involving the adoption of appropriate measures for non-compliance.
15. Request that each clause be accompanied by a legal enforcement mechanism, through the establishment of a standing committee to monitor the effective application of the clause.
16. Ensuring effective monitoring of compliance with these clauses and foreseeing mechanisms graduated from measures, preceded by political dialogue.
17. Encourage the development of specific indicators on respect for human rights enabling the activation of these clauses, in accordance with the human rights and democracy action plan (75).
18. Require the realization of systematic human rights impact studies, upstream of an agreement between the EU and a third State, and regularly during the implementation of the agreement, in accordance with the action plan on human rights and democracy (76).
19. Encourage the improvement of the quality of impact studies in the field of human rights, ensuring that they follow a methodology that ensures the rigour, expertise, independence and transparency of the analysis.
20. Contribute to the definition of a methodology for human rights impact studies for acts of foreign policy, based on operational guidance on the integration of fundamental rights into the Commission's impact analyses (2011), as well as the guiding principles for the study of the impact of trade and investment agreements on human rights, developed by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food.
21. Examine the possibility of mechanisms for alerting, appealing and establishing open facts to any person who would be injured by an EU foreign policy and, where appropriate, provide for adequate redress.
Human rights dialogues
22. Encourage a more systematized European approach to human rights dialogues, ensuring that they are held at a high political level and are conducted in a harmonized format, including a seminar with civil society actors.
23. Contribute to the implementation of the action plan on human rights and democracy (77) by clarifying the objectives of each dialogue and systematically evaluating its results, in the light of the objectives identified, in consultation with the European Parliament and civil society actors.
24. Study the possibility of entrusting a specific role to the EU Fundamental Rights Agency in the context of the dialogues, in order to strengthen internal-external coherence.
Guidelines
25. Clarify the process of selecting the themes covered by the guidelines, defining the criteria of choice with the involvement of the European Parliament and civil society actors.
26. Support the development of new guidelines in the field of economic, social and cultural rights.
27. To clarify the adoption of guidelines on enforced disappearances, in accordance with France's priority on this issue.
28. Work to harmonize the content and format of the guidelines.
29. Call for a comprehensive and regular assessment of the implementation of the guidelines, with measurable and specific criteria.
30. Ensure that the guidelines are advertised by EU delegations and French embassies.
Financial instruments
31. In general, contribute to a better articulation of the use of the various tools of the external action of the EU in order to make use of all the levers they offer (incentives as coercives) and to enable their mutual reinforcement and their effective impact, in accordance with the action plan on human rights and democracy (78).
European actors of EU foreign policy
32. Ensuring to give more visibility to the function of the special representative for human rights who can have more leadership and public voice power, using the various services within the EU institutions to ensure their better coordination and the development of a common culture.
33. Encourage cross-cutting human rights mainstreaming by all EU external actors, regardless of the area, including through regular training on human rights for relevant officials.
French actors of EU foreign policy
34. Strengthen the role of Parliament in monitoring and implementing the EU's foreign human rights policy and the mandate of the European Affairs Committees of the National Assembly and the Senate on this issue.
35. Strengthen the vigilance of the French Parliament on the insertion and respect of human rights clauses in the ratification of EU agreements with third countries.
36. Promote synergies between the French diplomatic network and EU delegations, contributing to the reflections of human rights working groups in third countries.
37. Provide more visibility to the EU's external action by systematically demanding French-language documents and by adding up-to-date information on the Orsay dock site on the EU's tools and actions in this area, and by introducing links to the relevant sites of European institutions.
EU Multilateral Action
38. Encourage the EU's accession to international human rights instruments, through additional protocol, if necessary.
39. Ratify and encourage ratification by member States of the universal treaties not yet ratified, beginning with the Convention of all migrant workers and members of their families.
40. Ensure the EU's accession to the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention and Control of Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention).
41. Consider the feasibility of an assessment of the EU's human rights action at the United Nations in the context of the Universal Periodic Review or in a similar framework.
42. Encourage the strengthening of EU ties with the Council of Europe and the OSCE.
(Not adopted unanimously, 1 abstention.)
Relevant Articles of the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Treaty on the European Union
The Union is based on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to Member States in a society characterized by pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men.
In its relations with the rest of the world, the Union affirms and promotes its values and interests and contributes to the protection of its citizens. It contributes to peace, security, sustainable development of the planet, solidarity and mutual respect among peoples, free and fair trade, the eradication of poverty and the protection of human rights, in particular those of the child, and to the strict respect and development of international law, including respect for the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
1. The Union recognizes the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as amended on 12 December 2007 in Strasbourg, which has the same legal value as treaties.
The provisions of the Charter do not in any way extend the powers of the Union as defined in the treaties.
The rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter shall be interpreted in accordance with the general provisions of Part VII of the Charter governing the interpretation and application of the Charter and taking duly into account the explanations referred to in the Charter, which indicate the sources of these provisions.
2. The Union adheres to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This accession does not alter the competence of the Union as defined in the treaties.
3. Fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and as a result of the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, are part of the Union's right as general principles.
The Union has an institutional framework to promote its values, pursue its objectives, serve its interests, those of its citizens and those of the Member States, and to ensure the coherence, effectiveness and continuity of its policies and actions.
The European Parliament, together with the Council, exercises legislative and budgetary functions.
It exercises political and consultative oversight functions in accordance with the treaty requirements. He elects the Chairperson of the Commission.
The Commission promotes the general interest of the Union and takes appropriate initiatives to that end. It ensures the application of the treaties and the measures adopted by the institutions under them. It monitors the application of EU law under the supervision of the Court of Justice of the European Union. It executes the budget and manages the programs. It performs coordination, execution and management functions in accordance with the conditions laid down in the treaties. With the exception of common foreign and security policy and other cases provided for by treaties, it ensures the external representation of the Union. It takes the initiatives of the Union's annual and multi-year programming to reach inter-institutional agreements.
1. The Union's action on the international scene is based on the principles that have presided over its creation, development and expansion and aims to promote in the rest of the world: democracy, the rule of law, universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity and respect for the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
The Union strives to develop relationships and build partnerships with third countries and international, regional or global organizations that share the principles referred to in the first paragraph. It promotes multilateral solutions to common problems, especially within the United Nations framework.
2. The Union defines and conducts common policies and actions and works to ensure a high degree of cooperation in all areas of international relations in order to:
(a) To safeguard its values, fundamental interests, security, independence and integrity;
C 83/28 EN Official Journal of the European Union 30.3.2010
(b) To consolidate and support democracy, the rule of law, human rights and the principles of international law;
(c) To preserve peace, prevent conflicts and strengthen international security, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, as well as the principles of the final act of Helsinki and the objectives of the Charter of Paris, including those relating to external borders;
(d) To support the economic, social and environmental sustainable development of developing countries with a view to eradicating poverty;
(e) To encourage the integration of all countries into the world economy, including the progressive removal of obstacles to international trade;
(f) To contribute to the development of international measures to preserve and improve the quality of the environment and the sustainable management of global natural resources, in order to ensure sustainable development;
(g) To assist populations, countries and regions facing natural or human-made disasters; and
(h) To promote an international system based on enhanced multilateral cooperation and good global governance.
3. The Union respects the principles and pursues the objectives set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 in the development and implementation of its external action in the various areas covered by this title and in the fifth part of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and its other policies in their external aspects.
The Union ensures coherence between the different areas of its external action and between them and its other policies. The Council and the Commission, assisted by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, ensure this coherence and cooperate in this regard
1. The Union's jurisdiction over common foreign policy and security covers all areas of foreign policy as well as all matters relating to the security of the Union, including the progressive definition of a common defence policy that can lead to a common defence.
Common foreign and security policy is subject to specific rules and procedures. It is defined and implemented by the European Council and the Council, which decide unanimously, except in cases where the treaties otherwise have. The adoption of legislative acts is excluded. This policy is implemented by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and by the Member States in accordance with treaties. The specific roles of the European Parliament and the Commission in this area are defined by the treaties. The Court of Justice of the European Union is not competent with respect to these provisions, with the exception of its jurisdiction to monitor compliance with Article 40 of this Treaty and to monitor the legality of certain decisions referred to in Article 275, second paragraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
2. Within the framework of the principles and objectives of its external action, the Union conducts, defines and implements a common foreign and security policy based on the development of the mutual political solidarity of the Member States, the identification of issues of general interest and the realization of an ever-growing degree of convergence of the actions of the Member States.
3. The Member States actively and unconditionally support the Union's external and security policy in a spirit of mutual loyalty and solidarity and respect the Union's action in this area.
Member States work together to strengthen and develop their mutual political solidarity. They refrain from any action that is contrary to the interests of the Union or which could affect its effectiveness as a force of cohesion in international relations.
The Council and the High Representative ensure respect for these principles.
1. The high representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, who chairs the Council for Foreign Affairs, contributes by his proposals to the development of common foreign and security policy and ensures the implementation of the decisions adopted by the European Council and the Council.
2. The High Representative represents the Union for Materials under Common Foreign Policy and Security. It conducts political dialogue with third parties on behalf of the Union and expresses the Union's position in international organizations and in international conferences.
3. In fulfilling his mandate, the High Representative relies on a European service for external action. This service works in collaboration with the diplomatic services of the Member States and is composed of officials of the relevant services of the General Secretariat of the Council and of the Commission and of personnel seconded from the national diplomatic services. The organisation, and the functioning of the European service for external action are determined by a decision of the Council. The Council shall decide on a proposal by the High Representative, after consultation with the European Parliament and approval by the Commission.
1. Member States coordinate their activities in international organizations and at international conferences. They defend the Union's positions in these chambers. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy is organizing this coordination.
Within international organizations and at international conferences in which all Member States do not participate, those participating in them defend the positions of the Union.
2. In accordance with Article 24, paragraph 3, the Member States represented in international organizations or international conferences to which all Member States do not participate shall hold them, as well as the High Representative, informed of any matter of common interest.
Member States that are also members of the Security Council of the United Nations will consult and hold other Member States and the high representative fully informed. Member States that are members of the Security Council shall defend, in the exercise of their functions, the positions and interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
When the Union defined a position on a theme on the agenda of the Security Council of the United Nations, the Member States that sit there requested that the High Representative be invited to present the position of the Union.
The high representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy regularly consults with the European Parliament on the main aspects and fundamental choices of common foreign and security policy and common security and defence policy and the inform of the evolution of these policies. It ensures that the views of the European Parliament are duly taken into account. Special representatives may be associated with the information of the European Parliament.
The European Parliament may issue questions or make recommendations to the Council and the High Representative. It conducts twice a year a debate on the progress made in the implementation of the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy.
The Union may enter into agreements with one or more States or international organizations in the areas covered by this chapter.
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
The Union ensures consistency between its various policies and actions, taking into account all of its objectives and conforming to the principle of attribution of competence.
1. The Union may enter into an agreement with one or more third countries or international organizations where the treaties provide for it or where the conclusion of an agreement is necessary to achieve, within the framework of EU policies, one of the objectives covered by the treaties, is provided for in a binding legal act of the Union, or still is likely to affect common rules or alter its scope.
2. The agreements reached by the Union bind the institutions of the Union and the Member States.
The Commission, on the proposal of the negotiator, adopts a decision concluding the agreement.
Unless the agreement deals exclusively with common foreign and security policy, the Commission adopts the decision to conclude the agreement:
(a) After approval by the European Parliament in the following cases:
(i) Association agreements;
(ii) Agreement to accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
(iii) agreements establishing a specific institutional framework by organizing cooperation procedures;
(iv) agreements with significant budgetary implications for the Union;
(v) agreements covering areas to which the ordinary legislative procedure or special legislative procedure applies when the approval of the European Parliament is required;
The European Parliament and the Council may, in the event of an emergency, agree a deadline for approval.
(b) After consultation with the European Parliament, in other cases. The European Parliament shall issue its opinion within a time limit that the Council may determine on an emergency basis. In the absence of a notice within this time limit, the Commission may decide.
