EU Rule of Law Initiative for Central Asia
2nd Conference of Ministers of Justice of the European Union and Central Asia
Dushanbe, 14-15 June, 2010
Keynote Speech of H.E. Pierre Morel
Special Representative of the European Union for Central Asia
Introduction
The Rule of Law Initiative is a major building block of the EU's "Strategy for a
New Partnership" with Central Asia, which was adopted at the highest level, i.e. the
European Council in June 2007. It is one of three regional initiatives that we have
established for implementing the Strategy - besides education and environment and
water. The significance the EU attaches to rule of law is not without reason. Rule of law
and good governance are essential to achieve political and social stability as well as
economic development in Central Asia.
It is a field to which we attach special importance; and it is also a field that deserves
special care. We are aware of the differences in tradition - both in cultural traditions
and in political traditions - and the risk of misunderstanding.
This is familiar for us Europeans: also within the EU, enriched by the latest enlargement,
member states have different heritage of political and cultural history. Many member
states in the South and East have experienced a transition from authoritarian rule to full
democracy.
But, let us not forget: beside the differences, EU and Central Asian states also share
legal traditions and values, which are stressed in our bilateral Partnerships and
Cooperation Agreements. We share the same commitment to the principles of the
OSCE, and Rule of Law is indeed a key criterion for the OSCE, first established in the
1975 Helsinki Final Act and furthermore consolidated as a cornerstone of the 1990 Paris
1
Charter for a new Europe. OSCE fostered rule of law in Central Asia from the very day
of the sates' independence, with appropriate procedures. As an outcome of this fruitful
process, OSCE is chaired this year for the first time by a Central Asian state,
Kazakhstan. This is an unprecedented opportunity to bring Europe and Central Asia
closer to each other through their joint engagement for the values they committed
themselves to.
1. Rule of Law Initiative
This sensitive priority of the EU Central Asia Strategy has led to very substantial
implementation. First, through Human Rights Dialogues at national level, which have
been established in all five countries. In these meetings, we could achieve a frank and
constructive exchange: non-polemical, on equal basis, between experts first and then
extended into seminars including also representatives of non-governmental organisations
and civil society.
Second, through the regional Rule of Law Initiative itself, as foreseen in the Strategy,
which was launched in November 2008 and is coordinated by France and Germany with
support of the Commission.
Yesterday, during the Ministerial part of the Conference, we have heard about what was
achieved so far with this Initiative, including the outcomes of the regional seminars that
were held in Tashkent and Bishkek, and the project of the Venice Commission. It was
this project that allowed us to react quickly to the request by the Kyrgyz Interim
government for support for their constitutional reform - but I will return to this point
later.
We also discussed the way forward. One way to address the needs in the region and step
up our cooperation is the EU-Central Asia Rule of Law Platform. Finally, we adopted
a Joint Communiqué, which reflects our joint commitment and efforts to strengthen the
rule of law.
These are encouraging trends. They complement some positive developments in recent
years, such as judicial procedure reforms and the abolition of the death penalty in
2
Uzbekistan. However, we cannot close our eyes to the fact that there are still
enormous challenges. There are areas where more intense efforts might be
appropriate. One of the subjects worth to explore deeper is the protection of migrants.
Many migrants from Central Asia face an insecure right status in the countries where
they work. But also domestically, the national registration system in Central Asian
countries (the so-called "propiska") forces internal labour migrants from rural areas to the
cities to live deprived of basic civic rights and of access to social protection, and
increases corruption. Social marginalisation is a dangerous entry into a vicious circle
of exclusion, frustration and confrontation. Let's remember that rule of law is a precious
instrument of social peace.
This meeting presents today the opportunity to discuss between experts, in an open
manner about the subjects on which we would like to increase our cooperation in the
field of rule of law. Let's take advantage of it.
2. Constitutional Reform
Let me now cover a very topical subject within the field of rule of law: constitutional
reform. Here we certainly look towards Kyrgyzstan, where the population will have to
decide soon on their new Constitution and we are very grateful to the Secretary of State
for Justice Chinara Mamidinova for her presence in such difficult times. This draft
constitution shows the political will to move to a democratic, mixed parliamentarianpresidential regime. It is not purely parliamentarian, because a system in which the
president is still elected directly by the people cannot be parliamentary in full. It provides
regulations that are meant to prevent a regression back to authoritarianism and
corruption as we had to witness already before the 2005 change of power, and alas, again
thereafter. The EU closely followed and supported the drafting process of the
Constitution. I already mentioned the assistance we provided via the Venice
Commission, which has sent several experts to comment the initial version and give
input in the discussion of the drafting group, in full respect of Kyrgyz sovereignty, as it
was has been done before in about 20 countries over our continent.
3
One question evolves from these developments, which was triggered by the Kyrgyz
debate on this draft: is there a specific constitutional model for Central Asia? Is a
"presidential democracy" more adequate for Central Asia than a "parliamentarian" one?
Let's not be trapped by words. The key criterion is not whether we are more on a
presidential or a parliamentarian side, but the effective implementation of checks and
balances. This is paramount, and this can be achieved with both models, if their rules
are applied rigorously.
Also within the EU, we have different ways of ensuring a balance of power. Even
within the respective model, there is room for many variations. Parliamentarianism in
Germany functions in some respects quite differently than parliamentarianism in the
Netherlands, and semi-presidentialism in Poland different than that in France. And
Finland, for example, underwent a constitutional reform in 2000 from a semipresidential to a parliamentarian system.
Thus, let's not be trapped by a too deterministic view on political and institutional
development. Some diversity can exist in Central Asia, models can be mixed, varied
and adapted to specific requirements. The existing diversity of types shows that there is
no “one size fits all”-solution, also not within one region. Together with common
heritage, there are also specific national characteristics, which must be fully
respected. That’s why the European Union, at the request of Central Asian countries,
has defined differentiation as a key guideline for our 2007 “Strategy for a new
partnership”, after in depth consultations with each of them.
Although Kyrgyzstan's constitutional reform is at the moment the most comprehensive
one and the one attracting most attention, reform processes are going on in other
Central Asian countries as well: President Berdymukhammedov of Turkmenistan
announced recently his readiness to introduce a multiparty system. This is a welcome
and timely step. The diversification of societies in Central Asia calls for a diversification
in parliamentarian representation and political debate.
These are encouraging moves. They represent a new political step and departure from
the short-sighted temptation to resist to constitutional changes as a means to restrict rule
4
of law, rather than to enhance it. The EU Rule of Law Initiative provides the framework
to support these developments by request from our Central Asian partners.
Conclusion
This high level meeting gives us the opportunity to exchange on these important and
sensitive questions of rule of law, which will influence and even determine the future of
the region. Today, we will continue to evaluate our experiences in cooperation so far,
and on this base we will identify opportunities for strengthening our further cooperation.
There is no need to shy away from sensitive and contested issues. Our experience
during the last years taught us that we developed a partnership in which we can tackle
them with a sense of mutual respect, and this is in itself a remarkable achievement.
The European Union is committed to deepen the dialogue, since we are convinced that
without a strong rule of law, there will be no long-term and comprehensive stability in
Central Asia.
One final note, a more personal one: this EU – Central Asia Regional Rule of Law
Initiative has created a remarkable community of committed actors - parliamentarians,
lawyers, judges, professors, experts. They are gathered here – most of them – and they
have established an exceptional network, creative and friendly. This is pioneers'
work, and I want to congratulate you all, to thank you and to wish you all the best. We
will need you more and more.
5