European Human Rights Law Review 1997 Russia's accession to the Council of Europe and human rights: compliance or cross-purposes? Bill Bowring Subject: Human rights Keywords: Council of Europe; Human rights; Russia *E.H.R.L.R. 628 This article analyses the development of human rights law and practice in Russia from its application to join the Council of Europe in 1992 to the present day. The author considers the benefits of Russia's accession for Russia itself and for other member states of the Council of Europe. He outlines the obligations assumed by Russia upon entry to the Council of Europe, and assesses the problems of implementation of certain of the Council of Europe's recommendations (especially in relation to the treatment of detained persons and the abolition of the death penalty). He concludes that Russia's non-compliance with the Convention would have major consequences for the legitimacy of the Council of Europe. Russia became a full member of the Council of Europe on February 28, 1996. This paper gives an account of Russia's accession to the Council of Europe, and explores some of the complexities of subsequent Russian compliance with Council of Europe human rights standards. The “new” Europe now extends to Kamchatka and the Bering Straits, and takes in much of Asia. The process has been completed whereby the Council of Europe, which began life in 1949 as “a sort of social and ideological counterpart to the military aspects of European co-operation represented in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation … inspired partly by interests in promotion of European unity and partly by the political desire for solidarity in the face of the ideology of Communism”, 1 now includes almost all the formerly “communist” states. This fact, itself an irony of history, raises three important questions. First, to what extent is it reasonably to be expected that Russia will be assimilated to Western European cultural and legal traditions? Second, to what extent is Russia's accession, in Russian opinion, purely a matter of national self-interest? Third, will continued Russian membership be possible given the existence of systematic human rights violation which appears to be inextricably linked to Russian legislation and practice? Examples are given later in this paper. Already, serious concerns have been raised, despite many positive steps taken by the Russian government. Human Rights Watch argues that the Council of Europe itself bears much of the responsibility for Russian non-compliance. 2 First, the Council offered Russia membership before adequate guarantees for improvement on some issues were *E.H.R.L.R. 629 secured, and failed to censure and impose sanctions as soon as flagrant non-compliance became apparent. Second, it failed to condemn and take action to combat abuse of which it was well aware, in contradiction to the findings of its own experts. This, it is said with force, poses the question of whether the Council of Europe's human rights admission requirements are in reality negotiable; and sends a message to other applicants and to members that the Council of Europe may be prepared to turn a blind eye to abuse. What is at stake, therefore, is the continued legitimacy and integrity of the Council of Europe system. Senior officials of the Council of Europe are well aware of the nature of the problem. Rolv Ryssdall, President of the European Court of Human Rights has pointed out 3 that with the accession of Russia and Ukraine, “the Convention community will be exposed to new influences and traditions. It is no secret that despite the best efforts of these States their legal systems are not yet in a position to meet the standards required by the Convention. When the Convention was drafted, the rights selected for protection… were presumed already to be guaranteed in the legal order of those States. The Convention was thus based on existing constitutional rights. For many of the new Member States the situation has been inverted; their new constitutions, in so far as they concern human rights, have often drawn heavily on the Convention.” This is certainly the case with the comprehensive human rights provisions in the new Russian Constitution. 4 However, the problem with effective implementation and protection of human rights is Page1