Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis:

The Council of Europe is important to me for a number of reasons, including because many members of the council who are not members of the European Union are a focus of mine. To be able to engage with them on the basis of the commitments to which they have agreed or what has been asked of them by the institution to which they belong, namely, the council, as opposed to stating what the European Union thinks, can be effective. Second, the Council of Europe has expertise that can be welcomed in countries in transition. I refer in this regard to European Union support for the Council of Europe to open offices in north Africa and the Venice Commission's engagement in discussions on a number of new constitutions. This engagement has attracted a lot of good will on the part of many countries in the region which view the Venice Commission as an objective, scientific-type body, as opposed to being political. That is the capacity building I want to continue.

Other organisations, including the African Union, were mentioned and on which I will touch. First, I thank members' for their congratulations. Most people wish me good luck.

On the question of how I engage with the African Union, I will give a classic example. First, we engage in dialogue. Second, there are a number of important issues which the Africa Union promotes around the world that are also important for us. For example, there is positive promotion by the African Union as an institution of the issues of tackling violence against women and female genital mutilation. The African Union also has a number of institutions in the area of human rights, including the African Court on Human and People's Rights, the African Commission for Human and People's Rights and the African Expert Group on Children's Rights, the only children's expert group in the world that can give binding opinions to member states of the African Union. All of these institutions receive a tremendous amount of support from us. It is important for us to be able to engage in a way that empowers others around the world who wish to establish human rights institutions to do so. We do not engage in telling them what to do with these institutions but support them in setting them up. We do this not only in the African Union but worldwide. We have much to learn from some of these institutions, including from the African Expert Group on Children's Rights which I mentioned. It could be argued that in this regard the African Union is ahead of other countries.

On my engagement with countries such as Russia, Ukraine, Uganda and others, I am not willing to be lenient in my negotiations on human rights issues. It is my job not to do so. It is the job of others to be a little more realpolitik about it. Members will understand I do not approach this job wearing rose coloured glasses but with absolute consciousness of the difficulties experienced in many countries in approaching human rights issues, the specific arguments and circumstances in that regard and the leverage the European Union may have on human rights issues in terms of being listened to, which, again, will differ from country to country. One, therefore, needs to adjust one's approach. At the end of the day, I must ensure human rights are at the centre of the debate rather than a foot note and that not only what I say should happen but also what is in the strategic framework for human rights agreed to by the 27 member states should happen.

I have engaged extensively with Russia and intend to continue to engage with it. It has many disturbing laws in relation to NGO and human rights activists, including on the funding of NGOs which are funded as foreign agents which in Russia carries a negative connotation; the imposition of fines for demonstrating and the recently introduced law on treason, under which any person who consults a foreign state in a way that violates the security interests of Russia can be accused of being a traitor. This is so broad and could be used against any Russian official or member of the Russian Duma who speaks about anything to anybody that it causes me to wonder why those who voted for it did so. Many NGOs are afraid that it will be used against them. The collective effect of all these laws, whether they are or how they are applied in practice, is the creation of a chilling environment, a chilling of speech, interaction and suspicion. This is counterproductive and a terrible way to deal with NGOs in a democracy.

As I stated previously, NGO space is shrinking and we must defend it. The true test of a democracy is not whether it is perfect in terms of its human rights record because no country is, although some are worse than others, but if it can give to people who criticise and suggest changes therein the space to do so without intimidation or the threat of imprisonment. On behalf of the European Union, I will be fighting for this around the world, with as much commitment as I can give. Sharia law, female genital mutilation and freedom of religion and beliefs are big and difficult issues. Guidelines on freedom of religion and belief are being developed at European Union level. There are in place EU guidelines on eight major topics, including violence against women, human rights defenders, the death penalty, human rights dialogue and how embassies around the world should address particular issues. The guidelines on freedom of religion and beliefs are the ninth set of guidelines. It is a complicated topic to address. As stated, there are people travelling around the world saying their religion tells them they must treat women in a particular way. In most cases, this is not true. This is a case of religion being used as legitimate cover for traditional discriminatory practices that everybody, having signed the human rights agreements in place, considers to be illegal. There can be many arguments about what is provided for in a particular religion, but there is no human right that can be imposed in violation of others' human rights. That is one of the principles of human rights universality and inter-relatedness. No one can say his or her religion states women must be beaten every day and that this is okay under international human rights law. It is not.

On what I propose to do about women's rights, on assuming office, I put this question to a number of NGOs, Members of the European Parliament, EU ambassadors and Foreign Ministers. I underlined it as a major issue.

I also said I do not want people to tell me women are being abused throughout the world because I already know. I do not want people to tell me women cannot vote or are excluded from democratic life because I know this also. I want people with experience of these situations to tell me precisely what the EU can and should focus on to make a difference. Simply cleansing our souls by pointing out a particular problem is not enough. In Egypt the EU participates in a programme to register women to vote. In many cases it involves giving them ID cards which can then be used for a number of other purposes. This is huge because many countries throughout the world do not have birth certificates particularly for girls but this also affects boys, and many countries do not issue ID cards, particularly to women. A similar programme in countries throughout the world could mean that in a matter of months or perhaps a few years millions of women would be registered to vote and given ID cards. Because this takes time and is not something one can celebrate with fireworks, some politicians may seek something else to do which would have an impressive public relations appeal. I do not care, and we are now focusing on this programme to see whether we can make a difference.

The issue of violence against women is huge and I intend to discuss it at the Commission on the Status of Women session in New York in March. Committee members may be aware that this year's topic will be violence against women. I hope to gain much expertise from it.