1NEST/PV/1119948EN.doc AP 102.093

Euronest Parliamentary AssemblyAssemblée parlementaire EuronestParlamentarische Versammlung EuronestПарламентская Aссамблея Евронест

Committee on Political Affairs, Human Rights and Democracy

Minutes of the meeting of Monday, 21 March 2016

Brussels

The meeting was opened on 21 March 2016, at 3:00 pm, with the Co-Chair Mr MichalBONI (EP) in the chair.

1. Adoption of draft agenda

The draft agenda was adopted, without change.

2. Election of the Eastern European component's second Vice-Co-Chair of theCommittee on Political Affairs, Human Rights and Democracy

Members elected by acclamation Mr Dumitru DIACOV (Moldova) as Vice-Co-Chair of theCommittee.

The Co-Chairs thanked the newly elected Vice-Co-Chair for his commitment, and wished afruitful cooperation within the Bureau of the Committee.

3. Approval of minutes of the meeting of the Euronest Committee on PoliticalAffairs, Human Rights and Democracy of 9 November, 2015 in Brussels

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee of 9 November 2015 in Brussels wereapproved as tabled.

4. Exchange of views on the outlook for legal and irregular migration from theEastern European partner countries and for mobility partnerships between themand the EU

Co-Chair Mr TARASYUK introduced the item by noting that, for the first time, theCommittee would address migration and mobility issues, while Europe had been facing anunprecedented migratory crisis. A lot of attention is currently focused on the migration andrefugee challenges, the so-called Western Balkan route of refugees, and the EU-Turkeycooperation in tackling the crisis.

The current situation shows that migration and mobility issues concern both the EU andEastern European partners. Another major concern is the situation of more than 1.5 million

2NEST/PV/1119948EN.doc AP 102.093

people who are now internally displaced or refugees in Ukraine, as a consequence of theconflict and Russia's aggression in the eastern regions of the country as well as the illegalannexation by Russia of Crimea.

Co-Chair Mr TARASYUK also pointed out that priority must be given to the managementof those crises as well as to their prevention. To this aim, the EU and Eastern Europeanpartners should further cooperate to fight irregular migration and to ensure legal and safepathways between them for regular migration. This is the best way to ensure that people donot undertake illegal and perilous journeys. Having in mind demographic evolution, some EUMember States want to make them more attractive for foreign talents as well as for students,researchers and seasonal workers. For these reasons, one should welcome the positive trendswith regards to mobility between EU Member States and Eastern European partners. Theenhanced mobility of citizens in a secure and well-managed environment is one of the coreobjectives of the Eastern Partnership. Along this objective, Moldovan citizens owningbiometric passports can travel visa-free to the EU for short stays, since March 2014.

Co-Chair Mr TARASYUK concluded by welcoming the Commission's proposals forestablishing a visa-regime for the citizens of Georgia and of Ukraine.

- Presentation by Mr Pawel BUSIAKIEWICZ, acting Head of the InternationalCoordination Unit, Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, on EUpolicies for migration, mobility and visas towards Eastern European partnercountries

In his presentation, Mr BUSIAKIEWICZ underlined the very difficult situation with regardsto migration issues within the EU and the Western Balkan route in particular. The EU hadspent a lot of effort to manage the situation, including the enhancement of its cooperationwith Turkey on this matter. With the aim of strengthening mobility, the EU also remainscommitted to Eastern European partners, taking into consideration the partners' willingness tofulfil the requirements linked to visa-free regimes. Mr BUSIAKIEWICZ noted that anydiscussion on strengthening mobility had always been challenging and sensitive. The EUcurrently implements a comprehensive and global approach to migration and mobility. It triesto focus on issues of importance not only to the EU but also to its partners. Moreover, it hasengaged with partners by developing various instruments such as mobility partnerships andvisa liberalization action plans and by signing bilateral agreements on visa facilitation andreadmission. As for Moldova, the EU concluded a mobility partnership, visa facilitation andreadmission agreements and established a visa-free regime. So far, bilateral cooperation hasbeen very fruitful for both parties. Nevertheless, there are some benchmarks which have notreached the level the EU hoped, for example in the field of anti-corruption measures. As forGeorgia, the Commission issued the proposal to establish a visa-free regime and thelegislative process within the EU is on-going. As for Ukraine, a similar proposal is expectedto be released by the Commission in April 2016. As for Armenia and Azerbaijan, thecountries engaged with the EU in a dialogue on mobility and migration later on. So far, visafacilitation and readmission agreements with the EU had been functioning well. TheCommission will closely monitor how these agreements can be further improved. Moreover,in the discussion on the future framework agreement between the EU and Armenia, theCommission will pay specific attention to migration issues. As for Belarus, relations with theEU have been marked by “ups and downs”. On the negotiations for establishing a visafacilitation and readmission agreement, some technical clarifications are still required from

3NEST/PV/1119948EN.doc AP 102.093

Belarusian authorities. In parallel, the EU and Belarus had negotiated a mobility partnership,whose conclusion is still pending.

- Presentation by Mr Pasquale DE MICCO, European Parliament, Directorate forExternal Policies of the Union, on the study: "Mobility and migration within theEastern Partnership"

Mr DE MICCO gave an insight into the study on EU-Eastern Partners interaction onmigration and mobility policies, noting that Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia should work onthe inclusion of benchmarks in the legislative, policy and institutional framework. Heexplained that some final steps were to be completed under the EU-Ukraine VisaLiberalisation Action Plan, regarding public order and security, including fight againstorganized crime and corruption. Some examples of missing parts are the election of theprosecution office and the appointment to the national agency on the prevention ofcorruption.

Mr DE MICCO then showed statistics and data regarding the migration choices of the EUMember States as destination for citizens from Eastern European partners, the comparison ofmigration flows to Russia and the EU, migrant remittance inflows and their correlation toeconomic trends. Economic, cultural and linguistic considerations play an important role inthe choice of migrants. The most important consideration is the economic one. The largestcommunities of Armenians, Belarusians, Georgians, Moldovans and Ukrainians arerespectively in France, Poland, Greece, Italy and Germany. In 2015, the EU was hosting asignificantly smaller diaspora of partner countries’ citizens than Russia (at the exception ofMoldova). Since 2013, outward remittances from Russia has declined following the decreaseof oil prices. In conclusion, Mr DE MICCO stressed the decrease of Moldovan illegalmigrants within the EU and an expected more regular temporary migration from Ukraine andGeorgia as positive developments following the future establishment of visa-free regimes. Healso expressed the opinion that Russia’s attractiveness to migrants, although strong, wasdeclining.

Mr POGHOSYAN (Armenia) pointed out that bringing together Armenia and Azerbaijan inthe same group was not correct since they reached different stages in visa facilitationprocesses. Following internal discussions and reviews, Armenia could indeed move towards avisa liberalization plan with the EU by the end of 2016. Mr POGHOSYAN commented onthe impact of remittances, pointing to incorrect figures of remittances from the EU, which, inhis view, do not include the remittances of Armenians who acquired the citizenship of an EUMS. He also underlined the relation between migration and development, which is includedin bilateral agreements.

Mr DOLIDZE (Georgia) welcomed the support of the European Parliament to theestablishment of the EU-Georgia visa-free regime. Notwithstanding technical oradministrative considerations, this is a very significant political step forward. A positivedecision on the EU-Ukraine visa-free regime is also crucial for Ukraine, in the currentcontext.

In his answers, Mr BUSIAKIEWICZ explained that in his approach, grouping Armenia andAzerbaijan in the same category resulted from the chronological order of their engagement.He agreed on the political importance of the visa liberalisation processes for Georgia andUkraine and argued that the Commission had to follow up them closely in order to prevent

4NEST/PV/1119948EN.doc AP 102.093

negative results. With regards to the migration and development nexus, he noted the necessityto properly consider risks, such as brain drains from partner countries.

Mr DE MICCO agreed that the collection of statistical data regarding remittances toArmenia needed further exploration. The bank sector is the main provider of those data.

5. Exchange of views on the amendments and adoption of the draft report on"Common positions and concerns of the EU Member States and EasternEuropean partner countries over foreign policies and external threats to theirsecurity"

Co-Rapporteur Ms KALNIETE (EP) outlined the key messages of the report, whichconsists of common positions and concerns of the EU MS and Eastern European partnersregarding foreign policies, external threats and security. She expressed gratitude to Co-Rapporteur Mr ZAKARYAN and the Members for the constructive work on the report andcompromise amendments. 15 compromises cover most of the key individual amendments.They strengthen shared commitments to common values, underline the responsibility of eachcountry for the execution of solid reforms and fight against corruption, express support to theEU strategic communication in countering propaganda and disinformation, call for jointactions to deter and counter threats to security. Co-Rapporteur Ms KALNIETE emphasizedthat the report included the condemnation of any military actions and aggression in Europe,undermining the European security order, and the need for peaceful settlement of disputes. Italso calls the parties to the Minsk agreements and other cease fire agreements concerningregional conflicts to fulfil their commitments.

Co-Rapporteur Mr ZAKARYAN (Armenia) also expressed his gratitude to Co-RapporteurMs KALNIETE for the joint work, noting the responsible manner to find compromises oncomplex matters. Security, peace, dialogue, finding acceptable political solutions are themain principles enshrined in the report. He argued that parliamentarians should be supportiveto confidence building processes, constructive atmosphere and mutual understanding. Thereis no interest to aggravate already complicated conflicts and potential problems, as stated bythe report. The countries of the Eastern Partnership region need security most of all and everyside to conflicts has to consider all hazards and risks and perceive the interest of all partners.In addition, every country of the Eastern Partnership must not allow to take the steps againstany neighbour. Co-Rapporteur Mr ZAKARYAN concluded by expressing his confidencein reaching the objective of a final report acceptable to all delegations and political groups.

Mr VOLSKI (Georgia), Ms HAUTALA (EP) and Mr KORCHYK (Ukraine) and MrDOLIDZE (Georgia) expressed objections to the amendment n°110 tabled by Ms GRAPINI,MEP, which included the wording “flourishing of organized crime and corruption in EasternPartners”. The Co-Chairs and Co-Rapporteurs noted that the organised crime was a greatconcern, but that it would be more correct to simply recognise the issue, avoiding thewording "flourishing".

Mr POGHOSYAN (Armenia) raised the issue of refugees and stressed the effort of Armeniain hosting refugees. He argued in favour of discussing common approaches and methodsbetween the EU and Eastern European partners, dealing with the integration of refugees.

The report was adopted with 17 votes in favour for, 0 against and 0 abstention.

5NEST/PV/1119948EN.doc AP 102.093

6. Exchange of views on topics for the next report of the Committee

Co-Chair Mr TARASYUK informed that the Committee should issue a draft version of itsnext draft report during the autumn 2016. He then put forward the following topics as amatter of discussion:

The development of media space in the EU and Eastern European partner countries:media freedom, diversification of media sources and rise of new media;

The participation of young people and civil society in policy-making. Ensuring trustin politics among younger generation of the EU and Eastern European partnercountries;

Enhancing judiciary and police cooperation within the Eastern Partnership;

Improvement of electoral legislation in the Eastern European partner countries inaccordance with the latest reports of international observation missions;

Anti-corruption reforms in the Eastern European partner countries and commonapproaches to fight corruption;

Members reached a consensus on singling out the topic addressing media freedom. The Co-Chairs concluded by agreeing on proposing this topic to the Euronest PA Bureau, andsuggesting to hold hearings on other topics, in particular on anti-corruption reforms.

7. Planning and preparation of the Committee's activity for 2016

Co-Chair Mr BONI noted that at the plenary session the Committee would hold a debate onthe measures which could allow the Assembly and Committees to work more efficiently. Aspart of the proposed measures, the holding of joint meetings of the Social Affairs Committeeand the Political Affairs Committee could be envisaged in the future.

As to the frequency of meetings, the Committees have so far met twice a year, but statisticalevidence have showed that, unfortunately, the European Parliament's Members of theEuronest PA have encountered difficulty, in all the four Committees, to follow that pace. Areflection is therefore ongoing in seeing whether a better option would be to meet in a morerestricted setting instead, such as Working Group, focusing on specific issues directly linkedto the country or the Euronest PA component organising or hosting the meeting.

Given that, the Ukrainian Delegation had already proposed to host the next meeting of thePolitical Affairs Committee in the second half of 2016.

The Co-Chairs pointed out that the Euronest PA Bureau would make a decision on thisproposal.

8. Any other business

None. The meeting was closed at 5:15 pm.

Encl. list of attendance

6NEST/PV/1119948EN.doc AP 102.093

Euronest Parliamentary AssemblyAssemblée parlementaire EuronestParlamentarische Versammlung EuronestПарламентская Aссамблея Евронест

Committee on Political Affairs, Human Rights and Democracy

21 March 2016Brussels

List of participants

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

Members (9)Ms Andrea BOCSKOR (Hungary, EPP)Mr Michal BONI (Poland, EPP) - Co-ChairMr Knut FLECKENSTEIN (Germany, S&D)Ms Heidi HAUTALA (Finland, Greens/EFA)Ms Sandra KALNIETE (Latvia, EPP)Ms Agnieszka KOZŁOWSKA-RAJEWICZ (Poland, EPP)Mr Kati PIRI (Netherlands, S&D)Mr Sergei STANISHEV (Bulgaria, S&D)Mr Nils TORVALDS (Finland, ALDE)

ARMENIA

Members (3)Mr Tevan POGHOSYANMr Artak ZAKARYANMr Vahe ENFIAJYAN

GEORGIA

Members (4)Ms Eka BESELIAMr David DARCHIASHVILIMr Victor DOLIDZEMr Giorgi VOLSKI

7NEST/PV/1119948EN.doc AP 102.093

MOLDOVA

Members (1)Mr Dumitru DIACOV

UKRAINE

Members (3)Mr Oleksander KODOLAMr Vitalii KORCHYKMr Borys TARASYUK - Co-Chair