CYIL vol. 10 (2019)

EMIL RUFFER CYIL 10 ȍ2019Ȏ “[T]he Committee of Ministers has decided to invite the Commission to participate in the meetings of the Ministers’ Deputies, at A and B level, as well as in all subsidiary groups in which it has an interest, on the basis of communication of relevant agendas, time-tables, venues, etc in good time.” This can be construed as a standing invitation to attend, on a regular basis, the CM (Deputies) meetings. An invitation, surprisingly enough, which was explicitly excluded from the scope of the observer status’ rights to be enjoyed by an international intergovernmental organisation on the basis of a Statutory Resolution (93) 26. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that certain limitations to the EU’s participation in the CM (Deputies) applied and they were explicitly outlined in the Commission’s letter. According to this, the Commission (now the EU Delegation) 39 was not entitled to participate in parts of the meetings dealing with internal functioning of the organisation, namely the administrative, budgetary and financial matters. 40 Now when we have introduced the applicable legal framework, let us briefly consider the practice of the EU’s participation in the CM (Deputies). IV. EU in the Ministers’ Deputies and other CoE’s structures The EU has a standing Delegation (hereinafter as the “EUDEL”) to the CoE, with the Head of Delegation (at the level of an Ambassador) in charge. 41 The EUDEL is in its structure and functions comparable to other Permanent Missions of the CoE member States. The Ambassador (or his/her deputy) attends the regular meetings of the CM (Deputies), and the members of EUDEL also regularly participate in the meetings of rapporteur groups and other CM subsidiary groups. With regard to the right of speak, EUDEL often asks for the floor on different items on the agenda, and is much more active in delivering various statements than observer States, which are more restrained in this respect. The EUDEL requests are normally granted by the Chair, and this practice apparently does not raise any objections from member States. As for the speaking order, it is for the Chair to decide on the most effective conduct of the proceedings. In some situations, given the fact that the EU is an organisation “representing” 28 Member States, the EU countries might wish to support and complement the position presented by EUDEL. Then it is reasonable to give the EU priority. In other situations, the EUDEL might be given the floor only after the CoE member States have finished their interventions. It seems, however, that the EU’s participation does not raise any contentious issues and the current practice is not subject to any major challenges. In terms of the EUDEL participation in the in camera sessions, its position should be on an equal footing with other observer States. This can be supported by the above quotation from the Commission’s letter concerning practical modalities, which limits the rights of 39 Just before the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the CoE Protocol confirmed in an exchange of letters that it would take the necessary steps and record the “Delegation of the European Commission” as the “Delegation of the European Union” in the list of the Diplomatic Missions with effect as of 1 December 2009. 40 The French wording of the letter stated: “ (…) à l’exception, bien entendu, pour les questions concernant le fonctionnement interne de l’organisation et notamment les questions administratives, budgétaires et financières. ” 41 The EUDEL was officially opened in Strasbourg in January 2011, following the changes in the external representation of the EU introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon.

44