Sofia, 15-18 July 1993, Radical Party General Council

ABSTRACT: On assuming the functions of political secretary of the radical party after her election at the Congress of Rome in February 1993, Emma Bonino outlines the programmatic lines of initiatives which are considered a priority in the new transnational dimension. The long report is introduced by three paragraphs (The reasons of the Radical Party; Tasks and priorities of the Radical Party; Scenario of possible initiatives) which underscore the apparent discrepancy between the political situation ("The international events of these last years would seem to have fulfilled most of the political aspirations which the radical party had historically promoted...") and the reality, with the "governments' incapacity to prefigure a new world order based on justice, the rule of law and the capacity to guarantee safety and development to all". Several examples are provided of this world crisis, from Yugoslavia to Somalia. This acknowledgment reveals the need for the transnational radical party to assume the responsib

ility of starting a series of initiatives apt to rectify or modify this tendency.

The report then outlines the fields of intervention which Emma Bonino will privilege during her mandate. They concern a) The United Nations and the need to enhance and democratize it; b) the former Yugoslavia and the possible political initiatives to be taken; c) the environment; d) drugs; e) AIDS; f) the International Language.

A more detailed explanation of this division is provided in the report.

For reasons of space and convenience, please refer to the ABSTRACTS that precede each paragraph for the contents of the chapters corresponding to the above division.

CONTENTS

Radical Party causes

Tasks and priorities of the Radical Party

Possible initiatives

1. UNITED NATIONS:

- Permanent International Court

- Court to judge war crimes in the Ex-Yugoslavia

- A parliamentary body at the UN: the options

- General Assembly of parliamentarians from

UN Member States

- Considering the options

- Redefining the UN's peacekeeping role

and strengthening humanitarian action

- A Civil Guard for democracy

- Abolition of the death penalty by 2000

- Rights of national minorities

2. EX-YUGOSLAVIA:

- Refusing to recognize the Federal Republic of

Yugoslavia

- Protecting Kosovo

- Macedonia

- The Balkan Confederation

3. ENVIRONMENT:

- Campaign for the protection of the environment

and for ecologically sustainable development

in Central and Eastern Europe

- Campaign for efficient energy networks and

for the closure of dangerous nuclear power

stations

- Campaign for the institution of a European

great rivers and waterways community

- Campaign for the right to information

4. DRUGS:

- The Anti-prohibitionist policy

- Campaign for the denouncement of the

international Conventions on drugs

5. AIDS:

- A pragmatic strategy

- Initiative in the ambit of the WHO 6. INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE:

- The right to language

The choices

Which is the right instrument for these

campaigns?

(The motion approved by the XXXVI Radical Party Congress - 4-8 February 1993 - made the Scretary responsible for presenting "the political initiatives agreed with the outgoing organs", at the first meeting of the General Council. The following people collaborated on this document: Angiolo Bandinelli, Giandonato Caggiano, Roberto Cicciomessere, Marco De Andreis, Sergio D'Elia, Gianfranco Dell'Alba, Olivier Dupuis, Giorgio Pagano, Mauro Politi, Danilo Quinto, Filippo di Robilant, Mario Signorino)

Radical Party causes

It would seem that the majority of the Radical Party's political - and historical - aspirations have been realized in the international achievements of recent years.

Many things have changed, in fact, since the first Radicals undertook nonviolent political actions in countries governed by a totalitarian regime and - in total isolation - asserted their right of interference, wherever it wasnecessary, to obtain respect for those rights of the individual protected by the covenants and resolutions which are binding for all UN member countries. The dominant political culture - and not merely communist ideology - affirmed instead that the protection of individual rights had to give way to the principle of national sovereignty. By hypocritically sanctioning the principle of "non-interference in a country's internal affairs", which permitted dictators in Eastern Europe and the South of the World to massacre their own people, the West has stood by and watched - and in so doing condoned - the genocide of entire peoples, and the most brutal violation of the rights sanctioned by international agreements. Today, the right/duty to interfere and protect inviolable and inalienable hu

man rights is being upheld by the most important international institutions. The UN Security Council has also been able to carry out peacekeeping and peace-enforcing actions to affirm this right in numerous countries.

However, ten years after the Radicals presented many requests formalized in acts of parliament, the permanent members of the Security Council have once again indicated population growth, poverty and environmental disasters as being "new threats to peace". In the early Eighties we asked the Security Council, unfortunately to no avail, to take emergency action to stop death from starvation in the South of the World, as it constituted a serious threat to international security.

(After meeting no. 3046 held by the Security Council and attended by Heads of State and of Government, John Major, the then President, issued the following "Statement" on 31 January 1992: "the absence of war and armed conflict between States does not necessarily ensure peace and security. Unstable non-military sources in the economic, social, humanitarian and ecological fields, have become a threat to peace and security. The UN, as such, must through its various Organizations, make every effort to solve these problems"..."The Security Council recognizes that peace and development are indivisible and that lasting peace and stability require efficient international cooperation to eliminate poverty and to promote a better quality of life and greater freedom for all.

The Radical Party's long-standing antimilitarist campaign, whose principal aim is, in the final analysis, to transfer national defence and security privileges to supranational institutions, has begun to stimulate the first political and operational responses. Now that the "enemy" is no longer knocking at the door, many countries are abandoning the formerly upheld military doctrine and considering, more and more, the possibility of using armed forces within the sphere of the UN to further international cooperation. Neither do they exclude the possibility of a nongovernmental UN military force being set up under an international command. There is still a lot of resistance as regards Article 43 of the UN Statute being enforced in full, but the fact that the biggest powers prefer to operate under the umbrella of the United Nations rather than under their national flags is quite significant.

(1. In order to contribute to maintaining international peace and security, all Members of the United Nations undertake to put at the disposal of the Security Council, upon its request and according to an agreement or to special agreements, the armed forces, and the assistance and facilities, including the right of way, necessary to maintain international peace and security.

2. The aforesaid agreement or agreements will determine the number and type of armed forces, their degree of preparation and their general dislocation, and the nature of the assistance and facilities to be supplied.

3. The agreement or agreements will be negotiated on the initiative of the Security Council, as soon as possible. They will be concluded between the Security Council and individual Member States, or between the Security Council and groups of Member States, and will be subject to ratification on the part of signatory States, as provided for in the relative constitutional regulations.)

The above examples would appear to indicate the existence of a general agreement to build a new world order based on the effectiveness of International Law and on the capacity of the supranational institutions to defend the rights of individuals and to uphold democracy in every part of the world.

Unfortunately, the real situation is very different - even though there has been certain progress in the direction many people hoped for - and the refusal of the supranational organizations to put a stop to ethnic cleansing and genocide in Bosnia and Hercegovina, and their acceptance of the new borders that Serbia and Croatia have redefined with war, provide the most dramatic evidence of the crisis in which the UN, the CSCE and the European Union find themselves, and also their incapacity to lead governments in developing a new world order founded on justice and law, and guaranteeing security and development to everyone.

The fact is that, on the one hand, the UN is entrusted with greater responsibilities while, on the other hand, it is devoid of the legal, operative and financial instruments to effectively carry out its international role, so that the majority of resolutions passed by the Security Council remain dead letters. It is significant that while the number of peacekeeping missions has increased with respect to the past, only one dollar out of one thousand, five hundred dollars spent on national defence by developed countries is assigned to UN missions. It also looks as if the fight against poverty and death by hunger in the South of the World will also fail miserably, in that national contributions are being progressively reduced and the project to assign at least 0.75% of the GDP to this cause, as provided for by Resolution no. 2626 of the UN General Assembly in 1970, has been abandoned. The Earth Summit held in Rio was a virtual failure and the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna also resulted in very lit

tle being done. In particular, while there is a supranational and, indeed, global awareness of problems concerning the environment and of the urgent need for international "laws" and individual policies on development, democracy, security and international cooperation, there is also a total lack of giuridical and political instruments which permit us to go beyond borders and the power of the State. All the projects devised to control international arms trafficking have also been dumped. Lastly, the problem of the democratization of the United Nations is mostly discussed outside this institution at present. It would appear that governments are more interested in increasing the number of permanent members on the Security Council rather than in reforming the UN and its decision-making procedures, also by creating a parliamentary body within the UN structure.

This crisis at the UN - which we hope is part of a maturing process - and a number of errors that have been committed, like those in Somalia, risk destroying the prestige that this institution enjoys. It is echoed by the failure of the constituent European Union which has clearly demonstrated that it does not wish to be the ultimate authority or federative model for all the countries of the former Soviet Union which, beset by internal and regional nationalist conflicts, are nevertheless trying to develop new democratic systems. Blinded by economic, political and social crises, EC member countries have avoided assuming any kind of role, not only towards the Former Yugoslavia but also towards all those countries which had actually shown interest in progressively becoming members of the Community, in the hope that this would make it easier to resolve national conflicts. The same lack of involvement and indifference are displayed towards the terrible tragedies that are being enacted in so many parts of Central

and Eastern Europe as well as in the territory of the Ex-Soviet Union, starting with Nagorno-Karabakh and Kosovo.

The crisis which the international system finds itself in, is also partly caused by the policy on drugs which increasingly reveals its "self-damaging" character, and seriously damages the individual's rights. The prohibitionist policy imposed at an international level is, in fact, right off target, and countries are powerless to do anything about the devastating effect this policy has had on their respective social and legal systems; neither can they do anything about political and economic systems being corrupted by the laundering of vast profits made by international criminal organizations and local mafia gangs.

Finally, we are witnessing a diminishing interest in international affairs on the part of the "political families" of industrialized nations. Even the parties with a strong Europeanist and Federalist tradition have, in reality, given up their commitment to building the European Union. Thus it happens that public opinion in industrialized countries is more widely informed about international events and, consequently, has a more clear understanding of the interdependence between its own well-being and security, and that of other less-developed countries. Public opinion is, therefore, visibly concerned by the international community's incapacity to put an end to the horrors of war and genocide - now that they can no longer use the Soviet bloc's opposing any act of interference in national politics as an excuse - and to guarantee that fundamental human rights be respected; and by national leaders who behave as if all this had nothing to do with politics, government programmes and economic choices.

This lack of political commitment makes it very easy for emergent nationalist and xenophobic forces to focus political attention on internal crises.

Tasks and priorities of the Radical Party

This situation of crisis in international politics and in the supranational institutions is worsened by the confusing "foreign policy" of many countries including the US, because of the choices made by the Clinton Administration, and Russia, because of the all-to-obvious problems that abound in home politics. The governments of major powers seem to be quite unaware of the dangers which will threaten the entire world if they accept, once again in the name of "realism", a precarious state of peace in exchange for recognizing regimes which have consolidated their power with racism, totalitarianism and ethnic cleansing; and if they agree to the annexation of territories obtained with acts of war. Neither do these governments show any sign of investing more resources in the strengthening of the UN and other institutions of a supranational nature, in an attempt to avoid even more serious defeats for democracy in the future. Furthermore, there has been no inversion of the prohibitionist policy on drugs, apart fr

om the UNDCP (the UN organization which specializes in this field) changing its mind on a few minor issues; and the attempts to promote, and make binding, certain conventions on the environment during the Rio Summit, actually met with very little success. In the last letter sent to all members of the General Council and to all parliamentarians who are members of the Radical Party, we said: "It is very important to realize that the much-heralded new world order risks creating suffering and injustice, in the same way that the old world order, risks tollerating and provoking death from hunger and war, unless it is founded on new positive international law; new individual laws that are enforced supranationally, and on the democratic reform of the United Nations."

But how can a small Party with just tens of thousands of members, who are mainly from Italy, Eastern Europe and Africa, presume to go against the current and to to modify international policy, even if only by a hair's breadth?

This is the question we must try and answer at our Assembly, knowing full well that the strength of an idea is not always proportionate to the number of people who initially give it their support, but rather lies in being aware that the decisions taken and documents produced will not bring important results simply because they have been approved. In order to be effective, each decision must indicate objectives, procedures, time limits, and resources necessary.

For these reasons, we must adopt specific criteria in choosing of our political campaigns - even if this will sometimes be painful - and resist the urge to deal with every urgent issue regarding the abuse of human rights.

The first criterion to be adopted when choosing our political campaigns, therefore, is that of their being able to produce concrete results within a specific time. In other words, we have to select precise goals, adopt realistic procedures for their realization, and give ourselves the necessary time to do this. We must reist the temptation to limit ourselves to drawing attention to problems and "taking a position" on every human rights issue. We must only engage the party in an initiative if we are sure that it will produce results.

The second criterion concerns the human and financial resources necessary to effect each campaign. It is always work out an approximate budget for a campaign, which should only be undertaken if it can be carried through with the resources available. If further resources are needed, it is necessary to specificy where these will come from before embarking on an initiative.

The third criterion governing the choice of political priorities should not be based on our illuding ourselves that we can resolve the immense problems of this world "globally" but on our being responsible enough to deal with just a number of them, not so much by focussing on increasing the authority, the responsibilities and the power of the supranational institutions, but rather by endowing these institutions with a legal and democratic legitimacy and with the instruments that are indispensable for exercising authority and power, also as regards punishment, at a supranational level.

Possible initiatives

On the basis of the above criteria, I have started to develop the ideas for political campaigns and initiatives outlined in the first letter of April 1993 (sent to all parliamentarians who are members of the Radical Party and to the members of the General Council) in order that we might discuss them at this Assembly, when we have all the necessary elements. The choice of initiatives will also be governed by other elements contained in the Treasurer's report.

These initiatives can be divided into the following five groups:

1) UNITED NATIONS: a permanent International Court and International Court to judge crimes in the Ex-Yugoslavia; a parliamentary body at the UN; redefining the UN's peacekeeping role and strengthening its power to intervene on humanitarian issues; abolition of the death penalty by 2000; rights for national minorites.

2. EX-YUGOSLAVIA: Refusing to recognize the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia; Protecting Kosovo; Macedonia; the Balkan Confederation.

3) ENVIRONMENT: Campaign for the protection of the environment and for "ecologically sustainable development" in Central and Eastern Europe.

4) DRUGS: Denouncement of international conventions which impose prohibitionist policies.

5) AIDS: A pragmatic approach; initiative in the ambit of the WHO..

6) INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE: The right to language.

------------------------------------------------------------UNITED NATIONS

------------------------------------------------------------

Permanent International Court

------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: International institutions have been discussing the idea of a permanent International Court for more than fifty years, but it was only in 1989 that the UN General Assembly passed a resolution asking the International Law Commission (ILC) to develop the relative structure for setting up of an "International Criminal Court, or other form of international legal apparatus." In 1992, given the dramatic situation in the Ex-Yugoslavia and the events in Libya, many nations - including the European Community in its entirety (with the UK and France participating) - declared itself in favour of constituting such a Court, and in November 1992 the General Assembly passed a resolution which conferred a mandate on the ILC, authorizing this body to draw up and give "top priority to a draft "statute", for proposal at the next Session. In September of this year, the ILC has to present its report, if not actually the draft statute, to the General Assembly. If the latter hapens, the General Assembly will be in a po

sition to invite the Member States to summon a Conference in order to negotiate a multilateral agreement for the setting up of the permanent Court.

The statute that the ILC will propose to the General Assembly must list the international crimes that would come under the jurisdiction of the new International Court. The Statute will clearly depart from a "modest and realistic" standpoint; neverthless, it will provide for crimes that can only be commited with the direct or indirect intervention of the State. They are obviously politcally-oriented crimes: acts of aggression, crimes against humanity, genocide and apartheid.

At this point, the priority appears to be to set deadlines and to define conditions for the convening, at a given date, of an International Conference under the auspices of the UN for the setting up of the Court. We could launch a strong parliamentary campaign, involving various actions, along the lines of initiatives with which we are familiar. We have had a lot of experience in organizing these and we can use our talent for mobilization. Our first objective would be to secure the ILC's approval of the draft statute for the Court by September 1994, at the latest.

Background and update

International institutions have been discussing the idea of a permanent International Court for over fifty years. The increase in international crime during the Eighties made it even more necessary to create an international authority to judge such offences. In 1989, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution which requested the International Law Commission (ILC) to develop the relative structure for setting up an "International Criminal Court, or other form of international legal apparatus."

On occasion of the 45th and 46th Sessions of the General Assembly (1990 and 1991) the project lost impetus, owing to new resolutions being passed which simply invited the ILC to continue working on the proposal. The work was slowed down. more than anything else, by the postions take by a number of Western powers, and more specifically, the US, the UK and France.

Then in 1992, many nations were forced by the events in the Ex-Yugoslavia and the controversy over extradition in Libya to publicly take a position - for the first time - and to come out in favour of the consititution of an International Court. These countries included Australia, Canada, Columbia, Japan, Venezuela, Zimbabwe and - quite unexpectedly - the entire European Community, France and the UK included. At this point, the ILC declared that it required a new mandate from the UN in order to develop the relative draft statute. In spite of the resistance put up initially by the US and the sceptical attitude of China, Indonesia and other developing countries, the General Assembly passed a resolution in 1992 which invited the ILC to "continue with its work by giving top priority to the draft statute for a permanent Criminal Court, which would be considered at the next Session."

Consequently, at the end of this working year, the ILC must present a report, or an actual draft statute, at the plenary meeting of the General Assembly in September. In the event that it is a report, the General Assembly must give the necessary guidelines to the ILC, in order that it might have the draft statute ready for presentation at the meeting of the General Assembly to be held in Autumn 1994; if, on the other hand, the draft statute is presented this September, the General Assemby must invite Member States to adopt the necessary procedures for convening a Conference, to be held under the auspices of the UN, in order to negotiate a multilateral agreement for the setting up of a permanent Court. The invitation issued to Member States to send in their comments for evaluation by the ILC during 1994, constitutes an initial step in this direction.

International crime

The statute that the International Law Commission will propose to the UN General Assembly will contain a list of all the international crimes that will come under the jurisdiction of the International Court.

When the Member States meet to discussand approve the Convention or Treaty which will found the Court they will select, from the list, the types of crime they wish to place under the exclusive, or partial jurisdiction of this authority.

It should be noted that the work group set up by the ILC compiled a report, dated 6 July 1992, in which it confirmed that the setting up of the International Court was a realistic objective, and also affirmed that "any attempt to found a practicable international court system should be based on a modest and realistic approach."

(Conventions and International Consuetudinary Law recognize the following 24 categories of transnational crimes: acts of aggression, war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide - the principal crimes that will be judged by the special Court for the Ex-Yugoslavia - slavery and relative practices, apartheid, illegal human experimentation, torture, unlawful use of weapons, piracy, hijacking and sabotage of aircraft, assault or kidnapping of diplomats or of persons who enjoy international protection, use of civlians as hostages, international drug-trafficking, destruction or theft of national treasures, theft of nuclear material, illegitimate use of postal service, damage of international undersea cables, blackmail of foreign public officials, international trafficking in obscene material, certain types of environmental damage, forgery.

A number of these crimes cannot be committed without the direct or indirect intervention of the State. For this reason, they are the most "politically-oriented": acts of aggression, crimes against humanity, genocide and apartheid. It is also necessary to add damage to the environment to this list.)

Possible initiatives

The first thing we must do is to establish the conditions and the precise date for the convening of a Conference, under the auspices of the UN, for the constitution of the permanent International Court. We could achieve this objective by organizing a parliamentary campaign, supported by various actions, relying on the usual type of political initiative.

The first step would be to exert pressure on the ILC to approve the draft statute of the Court before September 1994, at the latest.

------------------------------------------------------------

A Court to judge war crimes in the Ex-Yugoslavia

------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: With Resolution no. 808 of 22 February 1993 and Resolution no. 827 of 26 May 1993, the UN Security Council decided to set up an Internationa Court to judge crimes committed in the Former-Yugoslavia. The Radical Party immediately took action to support this decision. We succeeded in presenting various documents in the Parliaments of Croatia, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Italy, and also in collecting over 60,000 signatures on a petition addressed to the UN (inserted in the Radical Party newspaper "The New Party") and presenting them to Ibrahima Fall, Secretary General of the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna. There are still many problems to be solved, which could jeopardize the setting up of the Court, particularly those of a financial nature, which could be used as the excuse - or an excuse - for the system's not becoming operative.

It is necessary to set reasonable deadlines for the fulfilment of the obligations and the Court's becoming operative, and to ensure that these are respected by organizing - and requesting others to organize - as many parliamentary initiatives and nonviolent actions as possible. Two deadlines are already hanging over our heads: the Security Council has to appoint the General Prosecutor by 31 July 1993; and Member States must propose their candidates for the position of judge by 31 August 1993. The judges may be appointed by the end of September, but it will be necessary to exert considerable pressure at an international level to achieve this.

If, when the various parliaments re-assemble, deputies do not embark on a widespread parliamentary action by presenting motions and other suitable instruments, supported by initiatives and nonviolent actions (for example, a press campaign wherever possible), there is the risk that the UN Resolutions will be blocked and, therefore, not applied. We also feel the need to emphasize that this process is subject to a serious contradiction, in that negotiations are currently underway - under the patronage of the UN! - with those same people who should - or rather must - be judged.

With Resolution no. 808 of 22 February 1993 and Resolution no. 827 of 25 May 1993, the UN Security Council decided to set up an International Court to judge war crimes committed in the Ex-Yugoslavia.

The Radical Party took action to support this decision by presenting many documents in the parliaments of Croatia, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Italy and by collecting over 60,000 signatures on a petition inserted in "The New Party" newspaper. These signatures were presented to Ibrahima Fall, Secretary General of the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, on the eve of the Conference.

Many problems still have to be solved, particularly financial questions which risk being used as an excuse for the Court not becoming operational.

The addendum to the report presented to the Secretary General of the Security Council - 3 May 1993 - specifies that the Court will cost approximately $31,000,000 to constitute, excluding functional expenses.

This sum covers, amongst other things, the cost of the staff (an estimated 373 persons), the General Prosecutor, the eleven judges and the operational expenses. It does not include the functional expenses, i.e., rent of premises, protection of witnesses, gathering further evidence, conducting further inquiries if necessary, cost of detaining the accused before, during and after the trial, etc.

The financing for the Court will be provided for in the UN's normal budget. This way, no time will be lost in asking Member States to contribute to a Special Fund; however, it is all too clear that "budget restrictions" will soon be imposed.

Once again, we must set reasonable deadlines for fulfilling the various commitments, and a date on which the system will become operational. We must also undertake parliamentary initiatives and nonviolent actions to see that these are respected.

The following terms have been established for the procedure of constituting the Court, as indicated in the report presented by the UN Secretary General, and approved by the Security Council:

Before the end of July, the Security Council must appoint the General Prosecutor, following the guidlines in a proposal made by the Secretary General.

The General Prosecutor must then begin to gather evidence, also examining the elements already collected by the Committee of Five Experts appointed by the Security Council with Resolution no. 780 (6 October 1992).

This Committee is presently collecting and computerizing all available information and data.

On the basis of these or other elements, the General Prosecutor will compile a list of defendants, communicating these names to the judges of the Court who, in their turn, will decide whether or not to uphold the charges and issue the relative warrants of arrest.

Appointment of judges.

UN members must present their candidates for the position of judge no later than 31 August 1993.

Immediately after that date, the Secretary General must propose a selection of names to the Security Council. The Council will approve a list of 22-23 candidates for proposal to the General Assembly, which must appoint eleven judges.

---------------

Some important dates

6 October 1992: The Committee of Experts. With Resolution no. 780 the UN Security Council appointed a Committee of Experts to investigate the violations of international human rights laws in the territory of the Ex-Yugoslavia. Cherif Bassiouni, Professor of Law, Criminologist and member of the Radical Party, sat on this Committee.

2-5 December 1992: The Syracuse Convention. An international convention for the creation of an international criminal court was held at Syracuse. The Convention was organized by "Parliamentarians for Global Action" and the ISISC (Istituto Superiore Internazionale di Scienze Criminali), amongst others, and was chaired by Prof. Cherif Bassioni. The meeting was attended by many jurists and parliamentarians from all over the world.

"In cases of aggression, and also against organized crime on an international scale, for example: drug-trafficking, children sold into slavery, sexual abuse of women and children, and terrorism, an international Criminal Court could act as a deterrent or, at least, provide an instrument for inflicting punishment on those people who seem to fear nothing or no one." This was just one of the proposals made at the Syracuse Convention which Rmma Bonino, who was then President of the Radical Party, asked Giuliano Amato, the Italian Prime Minister at that time, to co-promote.

22 January 1993: The Italian Committee. Following pressure from the European Federalist Group and the Radical Party, the Italian Government appointed a Commission of Inquiry "composed of important magistrates and experts charged with formulating within thirty days," as the communiqué issued by Palazzo Chigi stated - "an Italian Government proposal for presentation to the appropriate international bodies, regarding the creation of an International Court to judge crimes against humanity in the territory of the Ex-Yugoslavia."

17 February 1993: The Italian proposal. On the basis of the findings of the Commission, which was chaired by the present Italian Justice Minister Giovanni Conso, and whose members included Prof. Antonio Papisca, Professor of International Law at the University of Padua, the Italian Government presented a proposal to the UN: an actual draft statute for an International Court authorized to judge crimes against humanity committed in the Former Yugoslavia. France and Sweden also presented similar proposals.

22 February 1993: Resolution no. 808. The UN Security Council, with Resolution no. 808, decided on the "constitution of an International Court to judge those responsible for the grave violations of international human rights laws that have been committed in the territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991." UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali was given two months to formulate a proposal for the actual setting up of the body.

3 May 1993: Boutros-Ghali presented a report to the Security Council, which was incorporated into Resolution no. 827 of 25 May 1993.

Two important conditions put forward in the Italian proposal were included, namely: the death penalty will not be inflicted under any circumstances; no one will be tried in their absence.

The location of the Court will be decided at The Hague. The Court will comprise eleven judges, appointed by the UN General Assembly from 20-30 possible candidates presented by the U.N. Secretary General. The General Prosecutor will be appointed by the Secretary General.

------------------------------------------------------------

Initiative for the creation of a parliamentary body at the U.N.

------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Recent international events continue to involve the UN more and more dramatically, and this has speeded up the debate concerning not only its roles and functions but also the very structure of this world Organization, in the light of the renewed and increasingly urgent need of peoples and individuals for democratic representation, within a federalist perspective. Amongst the proposals capable of cancelling or, at least, reducing the UN's "democracy deficit", one in particlar deserves attention: the creation of a parliamentary body (General Assembly of Parliamentarians from Member States).The constitution of such a body would obviously require a formal modification of the UN Statute. Rather than adopt the complicated procedure of summoning a general meeting for the revision of the Statute, it would perhaps be more practical to prepare a draft resolution with the aim of obtaining 2/3 of the votes of the Member States, necessary for its approval. In the short term, however, an idea has been put forward

for an initiative that would function as an intermediate step, i.e., the setting up of a "subsidiary" body of parliamentary representatives. This choice would not require any modification of the Statute. A "subsidiary" organ would certainly have limited, and mostly consultive powers; however, it is not to be undervalued, primarily because it could awaken parliaments and national parliamentary representatives.

This second possibility could be implemented, from a procedural point of view, by its being proposed by a Member State for inclusion on the agenda of the next General Assembly. We still have enough time to do this. As far as content is concerned, the draft resolution for the constitution of the new body would already contain precise indications; therefore, it is neither a complex project nor one that is easily blocked. The most important element, and the one that could pose the most delicate political problems, is, obviously, the structure of the body, which must respect in every way - whatever path we choose to take - the principle of "absolute equality" that is extremely important to many countries, especially those which are still developing.

We have examined these options in more detail in the document that forms the basis for this report, and we naturally refer you to this. However, given that similar parliamentary assemblies - those of the European Counc8l, NATO and the CSCE - only play a marginal role, or are actually used as an excuse not to rigorously control those same institutions, we must decide whether it might not be preferable to request a radical reform of the UN for 1995, to the point of creating a Parliamentary Assembly with real powers.

General Assembly of Parliamentarians from UN Member States

In the light of difficult international relations, the reform of the UN system would require a specific commitment by the Transnational Radical Party to become a reality. A commitment which would give a real democratic thrust to the debate - in the sense of speeding up the demcratization process - which is taking place within this Organization and in the outside world. In a recent reference to the institutional structure of the UN, the Secretary General solicited "that transfiguration of this house which the world hopes to be completed before its fiftieth anniversary, 1995" (S/PV. 3046).

In effect, the recent events in which the UN has been dramatically involved, are extremely relative to the debate concerning the structure and functions of the world Organization, particularly with respect to a renewed need for democratic representation of peoples and individuals, within a federalist perspective.

Amongst the various proposals to "update" the UN and reduce its "democracy deficit", one in particular deserves attention: the creation of a body of parliamentary representatives (General Assembly of Parliamentarians from UN Member States).

1) It is an initiative which if realized in full would result in a formal modification of the UN Statute, in accordance with Art. 108, consisting in: A) an amendment to Art. 7, in the sense of adding a "Parliamentary Assembly" to the principal organs; B) the insertion of a new clause (probably XIII b) determining the structure, functions, powers and procedures adopted by the new organ.

In order not to encounter unsurmountable difficulties, it would be advisable to avoid having to summon a Gneral Meeting for the revision of the Statute, according to the procedure laid down in Art. 109.

It would in fact be better to draw up a draft resolution for discussion at the General Assembly, with the aim of obtaining 2/3 of the votes in order for it to be approved. A modification to the Statute obtained in this way would come into force only after it had been ratified by the parliaments of 2/3 of the Member States, including the five permanent members of the Security Council.

2) We must nevertheless consider, as soon as possible, the possibility of developing an initiative that would constitute an intermediate step, as regards structure and content. It consists in attempting to set up a body of parliamentary representatives, which would act as a "subsidiary" organ to the UN General Assembly, according to Art. 22 of the Statute.

Unlike the setting up of a principal organ, the creation of a subsidiary organ to the General Assemby does not require any formal modification of the UN Statute and, therefore, is not subject to the "power of veto" that Art. 108 and Art. 109 of the Statute confer on the permanent members of the Security Council.

Naturally, a subsidiary organ has limited powers, which are mostly consultative, and cannot, therefore, take the initiative in the same way that a principal organ can. However, apart from supporting the present General Assembly (which given its actual composition we are tempted to call a "General Assembly of Governments"), a body of parliamentary representatives could also have the important function of awakening and coordinating national parliaments, with regard to the needs of the world Organization.

Regarding the authority of this new subsidiary organ (General Assembly of Parliamentarians), the General Assembly could entrust the new body with a number of very significant tasks. According to Art. 10, the GA "can discuss any issue or subject which falls within the aims of the (...) Statute." This wide-ranging authority needs to be modified as regards the General Assembly of Parliamentarians (as it is by law for subsidiary organs), above all, according to Art. 13, which entrusts the following tasks to the GA: a) "to promote political cooperation (...)"; b) to further international cooperation at an economic, social, cultural level, and in the fields of education and public health; and to increase respect for human rights (...)."

Although the GA initially used this power (Art. 22) to create subsidiary organs of a technical nature for study purposes, which were often composed of members who each had a specific function, it must also be acknowledged that it has also created bodies composed of delegates from Member States which perform important political and operational functions, mostly at an economic and social level. These include: the UNIDO (UN Industrial Development Organization), the UNDP (UN Development Program) and the UNICEF (UN Children's Fund).

3)

a) The initiative referred to in par. 2) could be implemented, from a procedural point of view, by one of the Member State's proposing that it be put on the agenda of the next General Assembly. According to regulation no. 20 of GA procedure, a proposal of this kind must be accompanied by an explanatory document.

As the provisional agenda of the GA is communicated to the Member States, by the Secretary General, around mid-July, that is, at least 60 days prior to the annual Session of the GA, it might be opportune to present our proposal before said date (in the form of a written communication delivered to the Secretary General by a permanent member from one of the States). Neverthless, we do have some leeway in that the procedural regulations of the GA also stipulate that a Member State can request that a supplementary item be put on the agenda 30 days before the GA's annual Session.

If said proposal was "adopted" by the General Committee of the GA and the subject put on the agenda of the GA, the most suitable place to discuss same would be the Plenary Meeting of the GA, rather than its going to one of the seven main Committees.

b) As far as content is concerned, the composition and functions of the "parliamentary body" will be specified in detail in the draft resolution regarding the setting up of said body. However, as it is not necessary for a draft resolution to be enclosed with the reguest for the inclusion of an item on the agenda, it is more feasible for details concerning the composition and function of the subsidiary organ to be outlined in a broader and more flexible manner, aaccording to various options, in the explanatory document that must accompany the proposal for the inclusion of an item on the agenda of the GA. This would give us two possibilites for negotiating the text, and also give us time, between the first and second phases of the negotiations, to muster as many co-sponsors as possible from amongst the delegations to support the draft resolution for the creation of the subsidiary organ in question.

It must be born in mind that, to whatever extent the creation of the body necessitates a financial commitment which is either totally or partially provided for by the normal budget of the UN, according to regulation no. 153 of GA procedure, the draft resolution cannot be put forward without a an estimate of the cost of setting up said organ being presented by the Secretary General or by the VI Committee (Administrative and Budgetary Committee) of the GA.

Regarding the actual proposal, the most important element and the most delicate, politically speaking, is the actual composition of the parliamentary body.

On the one hand, in keeping with a formal interpretation of the principle of "absolute equality" (Art. 2, par. 1), constantly referred to by numerous developing countries, one could imagine an arrangement which, as well as providing for the fact that the body will be composed of representatives from all the Member States, also provides for each Member having "x" representatives appointed from its own parliamentary assembly, at least "x" of whom must belong to a group which is not represented on the Executive of the Member State in question. The ratio specified in Art. 9 par. 2 ("each Member can only have five representatives in the General Assembly") indicates that each Member State has to include amongst its representatives in the GA elements that do not belong to the Executive; however, the States have not followed this indication which, on the other hand, is not preceptive.

Another alternative could be to give each individual representative the right to one vote, which is the same as saying that the body would be composed of individual people, with each Member State having the right to appoint "x" members. If, for example, each Member State was officially empowered to appoint 3 members, the parliamentary body in question would be composed of 540 representatives.

On the other hand, while remaining faithful to the principle of the subsidiary organ being composed of individual members designated by Member States, a variation on this could be developed, with each Member State appointing a larger or smaller number of members, according to such criteria as: size of population, extent of territory, GDP, financial contribution to the UN.

Considering the options

The need to alter the consensual and "interstate" aspect of the UN system and the need to promote a parliamentare body with real powers gives rise to a number of reservations regarding an Assembly which is merely consultive. Similar parliamentary assemblies (European Council, NATO, CSCE) play a marginal role and are sometimes even used as an excuse to prevent the effective control of the institutions of which they are part.

We must. therefore, decide if it might not be more opportune to propose, in spite of the enormous difficulties involved, the highest option, that is, a reform of the UN, including a Parliamentary Assembly with real powers.

We must also decide if it is really necessary to exclude those countries which are not governed by a parliamentary system or are not democratic, from the UN parliamentary body.

------------------------------------------------------------

Action to redefine the UN's peacekeeping role and to strengthen humanitarian intervention - The creation of a Civil Guard for Democracy

------------------------------------------------------------

For a new "international" order to support democracies with a vital contribution being made by permanent UN military forces (under the direct control of the UN) and the humanitarian intervention of volunteers and conscientious objectors ("a Civil Guard for democracy").

SUMMARY: The mainstay of the regulations governing world order, as laid down in the UN Statute, consists in the ban on the use of force (Art. 2 par. 4) and in a collective security system (Chap. VII), which gives the Security Council a monopoly on the international military force. Art. 43 of the Statute STILL makes the provision that Member States must place their armed forces at the disposal of the Security Council. When the international community was still divided into two opposing blocs, the accord for the creation if military contingents was never finalized; during the period that followed, with one war being waged after another, an "evolving statutory practice" was at least adopted which made it possible to create ad hoc subsidiary organs responsible to the Security Council, which became operative under certain circumstances, subject to the agreement of the parties engaged in conflict and with extremely limited possibilities of self-defence.

A little more progress has actually been made during the war in Bosnia.

The UNPROFOR (UN Protection Force) employs three different peacekeeping methods: a) protection of the population and maintenance of the cease-fire in Protected Zones in Croatia (UNPAS); b) protection of humanitarian aid convoys in Bosnia-Hercegovina; c) prevention of conflict and monitoring of borders in Macedonia. This Protection Force constitutes an important new departure in peacekeeping. Today, UN peacekeepers are not so much - or not only - concerned with putting international crises on hold, but also have to be able to intervene rapidly and effectively in the most diverse situations; and to respect international opinion. In Angola, Cambodia, Namibia and Mozambique, the UN peacekeeping forces also have to carry out non-military functions, to the point of helping local authorities to run democratic elections. The UN has been less successful in upholding peace at a "regional" level. For example, the EC contents itself with maintaining a symbolic, or "political" UN presence (but we don't quite know w

hat the latter means) in the Ex-Yugoslavia.

However, current events are producing some new developments. The Secretary General of the UN Boutros-Ghali has put forward a series of important proposals in his document "An Agenda For Peace", which includes finally putting in into effect Art. 4 and subsequent articles in the Statute, by setting up military contingents that would be permanently at the Security Council's disposal, with a General Staff which would be the "military arm" of the Government of the international cmmunity. A second proposal offers an intermediate solution, that is, the formation of Peace Enforement Units, composed of police, and civilian and military personnel. In the interim, while we are waiting for these proposals to be put into effect, it must be noted that crises such as those in the Ex-Yugoslavia and Somalia, which require "humanitarian" action, have slipped dangerously out of the UN's control, precisely because international structures are both inadequate and insufficient. Problems and difficulties are multiplying. Besieg

ed by ethnic or social conflict, many countries are torn apart by requests for autonomy and self-government, and fragmentation, in situations in which there is a great risk of human rights and democratic principles being violated. It is a widespread, and devastating, problem that is often part of a vicious circle of poverty, demographic pressure environmental damage. We are convinced - and we are not the only ones - that all this cannot be put at the mercy of uncontrolled forces but requires a more determined commitment from the UN in the area of humanitarian action.

A few hestitant steps have, however, been taken in this direction, for example: the setting up of a Department for Humanitarian Affairs (DHA) and the appointment of an Undersecretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and the Co-ordination of Emergency Aid. This will most certainly serve as a basis for furthering UN intervention, but we must bear firmly in mind that Emergency Aid must not only be of an economic nature but also linked to development, in order to create a stronger bond between emergency aid and democratic growth.

It is necessary to have a Resolution passed by the General Assembly, and we must take the action required to bring this about, which proposes a restructuring of the Department for Humanitarian Affairs and establishes as its main objective the creation of operational units, composed of volunteers and conscientious objectors, which would comprise a permanent institional force that the UN could call on whenever help was requested, under whatever circumstances. In particular, we recommend the formation of a Civil Guard of "blue helmets" - to support the military forces under the direct control of the UN - composed of volunteers and conscientious objectors, which would occupy itself with "humanitarian" intervention and actions, the protection of human rights and the furthering of democracy. This force could be responsible for effecting "aggressive" pressure, and carrying out "preventive" actions and "nonconventional warfare", which would render actual war unnecessary, or at least make it less of a foregone con

clusion. This proposal will be presented to the Department for Humanitarian Affairs (DHA) as this is the most suitable structure for putting it into effect.

1. The actual UN structure for international government and cooperation between States in maintaining world peace.

The mainstay of the regulations governing world order, as laid down in the UN Statute, is a ban on the use of force (Art. 2. par. 4) and a joint security system (Chap. VII) which gives the Security Council the monopoly on the international military force.

Art. 43 of the Statute still formally makes the provision - which has remained a dead letter - that Member States put military forces at the disposal of the Security Council, via agreements (between individual Member States and the Secuirty Council) which "shall determine the number and types of armed forces, their degree of preparation and their general dislocation (...)".

Owing to the fact that the international communit was split into two opposing military and ideological blocs at that time, the accords for the formation of UN military contingents were never finalized. To give you an idea of what this force might have consisted in, the US had originally agreed to put three hundred thousand troops, one thousand fighter-bombers and two thousand jet fighters at the disposal of the UN.

The impossibility of reaching an agreement as to how the regulations of the original Statute were to be interpreted, became evident during the Arab-Israeli conflict. From that point on a "minimalist" solution was adopted which was not provided for by the Statute, but which was justified as being an "evolving constitutional practice". This practice involved the creation of a special subsidiary organ (which was only done occasionally, but sometimes as a long-term arrangement) responsible to the Security Council. The organrequired the previous consent of the parties engaged in the conflict and had extremely limited capacities for self defence.

There has been a little progress, in that a Resolution on protected zones in Bosnia was recently passed, which gives the UN more power to effect its mandate.

With regard to the financing of UN forces, it is important to remember that, since 1973, all operations have been financed by Member States, according to a variable scale based on specific parameters. Nevertheless, a Member State, which particpates in a mission with its own men and military equipment has to pay the normal quota, plus an additional cost per man-month (for example, Italy has to pay a total of 9,000,000 lire per man-month with a recoupment by the U.N. of $800 per man-month; while Pakistan has to pay $30 per man-month with the U.N. recouping $800 per man-month). Even though a limited number of peacekeeping operations have been carried out, Member States were in arrears to the tune of $800,000,000 at the end of December 1992.

Concerning the improvement of peacekeeping forces -one of the more recent innovations at the UN - the UNPROFOR (UN Protection Force), the latest peacekeeping "model", employs three principal methods for "keeping the peace": a) protection of different populations and enforcement of cease-fire in the Protected Zones of Croatia (UNPAS); b) protection of humanitarian aid convoys in Bosnia-Hercegovina; c) prevention of conflict and monitoring of borders in Macedonia.

This "Protection Force" constitutes an important new departure in peacekeeping strategies. During the Cold War, peacekeepers used to "freeze" international crises in order to maintain the balance of power. Today, UN peacekeeping forces have to take swift action and, as there is now only one superpower, they have the difficult task of respecting international opinion.

With regard to the actual composition and responsibilities of peacekeeping forces, the most important new development, which could be seen recently in operations carried out in Angola, Cambodia, Namibia and Mozambique, consists in non-military actions involving a large number of civilian personnel. Another extremely important aspect, is that on some of these operations the UN mandate covers assisting local authorities to run democratic elections.

Lastly, it must be pointed out that UN peacekeeping operations have not been as successful at a "regional" level. Chap. VIII of the UN Charter states that regional organizations, upon request to the Security Council and in collaboration with same, must assume the resposiblity for putting peacekeeping initiatives into operation.

The EC has no real international policy and no power to uphold democracy in the European Parliament; therefore, it contents itself with maintaining a "political" or, in other words, symbolic presence (ECMM - European Community Monitoring Mission) in the Ex-Yugoslavia. The CSCE initiatives can also be included in Europe's assuming a political rather than active role in the Ex-Yugoslavia.

It is still difficult to predict NATO's role, and also that of the European Union, which is included in the section on cooperation of the Maastricht Treaty on political union.

2. Redefining and restructuring UN peacekeeping forces

The Secretary General Boutros-Ghali put forward a series of proposals in his document "An Agenda for Peace", which the Security Council asked him to present.

The first proposal consists in finally putting into effect Art. 43, and successive articles, of the UN Statute, by forming permanent military contingents at the disposal of the Security Council, which could then impose its authority in situations like the invasion of Kuwait - something it has never been able to do in the past. It would be a question of putting into effect the Statute regulation which provides for a General Staff: the "military arm" of the Security Council and the "Government" of the International Community.

The second proposal puts forward a intermediate solution, that of setting up "Peace Enforcement Units". They would carry out actions designed to prevent crisis situations from degenerating into war. It would be a provisional measure, one that would strengthen rather than radically change UN peacekeeping actions. From an operational point of view, it is most important to have a permanent force available, composed of civilians and police as well as military personnel, all of whom have been adequately trained. In this respect, the Secretary General solicited Member States and nongovernmental organizations to take the necessary steps to fill this requirement, inasmuch as training must not only cover the military aspects but also provide a knowledge of electoral procedures, treatment and assistence required by refugees, and methods for distributing humanitarian aid, etc.

3. Operations carried out by a "Civil Guard for Democracy"

Recent events demonstrate that UN actions are most effective when it comes to solving crisis situations between States; whereas they appear to be increasingly less adequate in complex situations involving guerrilla forces and nongornmental militias (Angola, Bosnia, Cambogia and Somalia).

Nowadays, it is only the humanitarian actions carried out in poor areas in which there is no economic interest (Mozambique, Angola and Cambodia) that are placed under UN leadership. The sponsors of humanitarian intervention could not agree over the crisis in the Ex-Yugoslavia (neither were there any joint interests), which explains the lack of coherent and effective action at an international level up until now.

The humanitarian aid sent to the Former Yugoslavia consists mostly in emergency aid, but this only satisfies a very small percentage of the needs of individuals and groups. Even so,it is difficult to imagine what other kind of aid could be given in zones still engaged in conflict. In those zones where the war has been placed "on hold" (the zones protected by UNPROFOR in Croatia) it is necessary to come up with a different humanitarian approach which encourages local productivity.

In any event, the UN needs to supplement aid distributed via humanitarian actions with programmes to support the local economy, which would restore dignity to these human beings and make them self-sufficient.

The most enlightened proposal in this area is volunteer forces in the service of the UN (see proposal put forward by Sir Brian Urquhart, Chief Officer of the UN).

A strong action to protect human rights, to further democracy and freedom (and plurality) of expression is essential to creating a new world order (established according to principles of democratic representation), but it must be rendered effective by the necessary guarantees and controls. We must promote and put forward a proposal to give the UN the necessary responsibility and operational capacity to maintain a state of equilibrium in the world; to promote a new approach to peacekeeping which realizes that military support is necessary but not enough.

We must strengthen the "right of interference" in a State's internal affairs, as it is just beginning to be enforced. For an international action for the respect of human rights to be effective, it must be accompanied by various forms of humanitarian intervention.

The answer, therefore, lies in combined nongovernmental civilian forces and military forces under the direct control of the UN, which would reduce the "endemic" resistance put up by the peoples in question.

4. Strengthening of UN humanitarian action and proposed structural changes

The growing number of crises involving humanitarian issues, like the ones that beset Somalia and the Ex-Yugoslavia, have slipped dangerously out of the U.N.'s control, owing to ineffective and inadequate international structures.

In the presence of ethnic or civil war, many countries are literally torn apart by requests for autonomy or self-government and fragmentation, in a situation in which there is a very serious risk of human rights and the rules of democracy being violated.

This is often part of a vicious circle of poverty, demographic pressure and environmental damage, necessitating an even greater commitment to humanitarian aid on the part of the UN.

A small amount of progress has been made in the last few years. The GA adopted Resolution No. 46/182 for improving the coordination of humanitarian aid, which lays down the basic principles governing humanitarian aid supplied by the UN, and recommends specific measures to ensure swift and coordinated action in dealing with complex emergency situations and natural disasters.

It was as a result of this that, in April 1992, the Secretary General created a new Department for Humanitarian Affairs (DHA), and an Undersecretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and for the Coordination of Emergency Aid (the former UNDRO and the former Emergency Unit for Africa, Iraq and South-East Asia were absorbed by this new Department). It is the task of the DHA to develop rapid, coordinated actions to deal with complex emergencies, in order to save human lives and to assist in the rehabilitation and development of the countries in question.

Resolution no. 46/182 supplies the United Nations with the necessary coordinating instruments, by dividing the various tasks amongst specialized institutes within the UN "family", which will enable the world body to respond more quickly in difficult emergency situations.

The Department operates in the "grey areas" where political, humanitarian and security interests overlap. Political coordination, policy development and alert functions are carried out in New York, which is in constant communication with the organs of the U.N. and the political, financial and ecoonmic Departments of the Secretariat. The Geneva Office provides operational support and coordinates aid during emergencies, and also coordinates measures for reducing the effects of the disaster.

However, the Department's role is not merely that of a coordinator. When undertaking humanitarian action it is not only necessary to consider the humanitarian emergencies in the light of actual difficultires, but also to combine such action with a more long term effort to deal with the fundamental causes of the crisis and the structural problems involved in development and democracy.

Emergency relief cannot take the form of economic aid. It needs to be linked to development in order to establish solid links between aid, development and democracy.

Besides, in situations where on the spot emergency operations are either limited or negated for political reasons, it is only an humanitarian form of diplomacy that can be effective in reaching the desired objective and in maintaining peace.

All this must be specified in a GA Resolution on the structure of the Department for Humanitarian Affairs, whose principal objective should be that of creating operational units composed of volunteers and conscientious objectors, which would combine to function as a permanent UN force that would keep the peace by strengthening democracies. These individual units would be put at the UN's disposal at any time and under any circumstances, even though based in their own countries.

.ls1

------------------------------------------------------------

Campaign for the abolition of the death penalty by 2000

------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Transnational Radical Party has a project underway called "Hands off Cain - Worldwide Parliamentary Campaign for the Abolition of the Death Penalty by the Year 2000". Before the dawn of the new millenium, we want to see respected throughout the world, the individual's right not to be killed as the result of a sentence or judicial measure - even if issued in respect of the law - and the inclusion of this right in the fundamental texts of the international communicty and of individual countries. An appeal addressed to the United Nations, launched on occasion of the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna last June, and signed by over 60,000 citizens, Nobel Prize Laureates, parliamentarians and celebrities from the international world of culture, requests that the UN take immediate action in order to establish "the right not to be killed" as a new fundamental right of every individual.

The aim is to have a Resolution to this effect passed by the UN. We do not want, and we are very adamant about this, the resolution to be of the same generic or minimalist nature as the many other resolutions regarding the death penalty that have approved, but never acually put into effect. To this effect, we wholeheartedly approve Resolution no. 827 (which many people have already commented upon) passed by the Security Council on 25 May 1993, which states that the death penalty cannot be inflicted by the special Court being set up to judge crimes against humanity committed in the Former Yugoslavia: in fact, how can a country legitimately sentence a person to death, when the international community (to which that country belongs) excludes capital punishment for serious war crimes, such as the genocide actually being carried out in the Ex-Yugoslavia?

This is a step forward and, even though it was achieved "indirectly", it has encouraged us to launch an initiative with a more specific objective: the presentation of jointly- inspired bills with common aims - accompanied by actions to awaken public opinion and the press - at the same time and on the same day in as many different parliaments as possible, which commit the respective Governments to promote this new individual right at the UN.

Another way of successfully achieving our aim would be for everyone to commit themselves to establishing an international "consuetude" which makes it legally impossible for a country to dispose of the life of one of its citizens, even if found guilty of the most serious crime: a concept which would form the basis of all international law. This kind of law, which could be created by a large number of countries committing themselves to international conventions, would prevail over conflicting national laws.

Several areas for action have already emerged regarding this campaign:

1) The United States plays a powerful international role. It is, therefore, essential that we conduct our campaign on this front. We need to put the Clinton Administration to the test by tring to obtain a three- to five-year moratorium, and the ratification of the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights which imposes strict limitations on the execution of minors, pregnant women and the mentally-handicapped. The presentation of motions in all parliaments, asking Governments to "object" to the "reservations" expressed by the US regarding the ratification of the International Convention, could represent the first "confrontation" between abolitionist countries and Clinton's America.

2) A death penalty-free Europe could serve as an intermediate objective to be achieved by 1995/96. To this effect, it is necessary to direct our initiative towards the countries of the Former Soviet Union, the Baltic States, and Russia and Bulgiaria itself, where relevant bills have already been drawn up in parliament.

3) A "Committe to Abolish the Death Penalty in Mediterranean Countries" was set up at the Seminar held by the POPEM (Organization for Peace between the Peoples of Europe and the Mediterranean). This Organization is now organizing a major Convention of Arab and Mediterranean Peoples. A similar initiative could be organized in Africa by the end of 1994.

4) There is also an urgent need to establish a dialogue with the Vatican, especially as the New Catechism containing a thesis on the legitimacy of the death penalty, has just been published. We could begin by going on an abolitionist march to St. Peter's next Easter.

5) Lastly, on 6 February 1993, a Convention was held during the Radical Party Congress in Rome, in order to constitute the "International League for the Abolition of the Death Penalty by the Year 2000". A Promoting Committee was appointed, which set itself the objective of summoning a World Congress to actually found the League within one year. This Congress could give our campaign to abolish the death penalty a tremendous boost.

The project

The Radical Party has devised a project called "Hands off Cain - Worldwide Parliamentary Campaign for the Abolition of the Death Penalty by the Year 2000", whereby we aim to achieve, before the dawn of the new millenium, worldwide respect of the individual's right not to be killed as the result of a sentence or judicial measure - even if issued in respect of the law - and the inclusion of this right in the fundamental texts of the international community and of individual countries.

Initiatives at a UN level

An appeal addressed to the United Nations, launched on occasion of the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna last June, and signed by over 60,000 citizens, Nobel Prizewinners, parliamentarians and well-known figures from the international world of science and culture, requests that the UN take immediate action - by drawing up agreements and developing programmes for promotion at an international level - in order to establish "the right not to be killed" as a new fundamental right of every individual.

The principal aim of this action is to have a Resolution passed by the UN on the initiative of the Secretary General - to whom the appeal will be presented - or the parliaments of a number of countries whose respective governments will undertake to put said Resolution on the agenda of the General Assembly and of the UN Economic and Social Council.

The Resolution cannot be of the same generic or minimalist nature as those already approved by the plenary assembly both of the United Nations and the Economic and Social Council, in 1968, 1971, 1977, 1981, 1982, 1985...

The Resolution passed on 8 December 1997 speaks for all: "the General Assembly, considering Art. 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which affirms that all people have the right to life, and Art. 6 of the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights, which states that the right to life belongs to every human being...

1. Reaffirms that, according to the decision taken by the General Assembly (20 December 1971)... and by the Economic and Social Council..., the principal objective to be pursued regarding capital punishment is to progressively limit the number of crimes punishable with a death sentence, with an aim to achieving the much-desired abolition of this form of punishment..."

In effect, following Resolution no. 827, passed by the Security Council on 25 May 1993, affirming that the death penalty cannot be inflicted by the special Court being set up to judge war crimes committed in the territory of the Ex-Yugoslavia, there is still a need for a more precise ruling which sets specific dates - even if the actual process is more gradual.

How can a country, in fact, legitimately sentence a person to death for murder, when the international community totally excludes the death penalty for genocide and war crimes such as those being committed in the Former Yugoslavia.

In different parliaments at the same time, on the same day...

In order to realize our objective we must organize, at the same time on the same day and in as many different parliaments as possible, the presentation of identical bills or resolutions which uphold the new individual right and commit governments to promoting it at the UN. This action would be supported by public demonstrations in front of the parliaments and by informing public opinion.

In many countries, the death penalty has been abolished for some time or is only provided for in the Military Code during wartime. Nevertheless, we are also conducting our abolitionist campaign on this front. Democratic, liberal and lay activists, and "revolutionaries" advocating a right to life and a life of rights in countries where the death penalty is not imposed, have the basis for a renewed internationalist commitment and institutional leverage, and activists who can give a voice, and bring hope and justice to the thousands of people who have been condemned to death throughout the world, and are waiting to be executed on death row.

An international abolitionist consuetude

Another way of achieving our aim of abolishing the death penalty by 2000 is for everyone to commit themselves to establishing an international consuetudinary law that would make it impossible for a country to dispose of the life of one of its citizens, even if found guilty of the most serious crime: a concept that would form the basis of all international law. This kind of law - made possible by a large number of countries committing themselves unequivocally to international human rights agreements - would be binding for all countries and would prevail, according to international law, over conflicting national laws.

Moratorium and objection to reservations in the U.S.A.

The United States plays a powerful role and enjoyus great prestige internationally. It is therefore essential that we conduct our abolitionist campaign on this front.

It is a question of putting the Clinton Administration to the test by organizing actions to obtain a three- to five-year moratorium of all executions and the ratification, without any reservations, of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, which lays down strict limitations concerning the execution of minors, pregnant women and mentally-handicapped persons. The immediate presentation of motions in all parliaments that bind Governments to "object" to the "reservations" expressed by the United States regarding the ratification of the Convention, would enable abolitionist countries to take an initial stand against Clinton's America.

For a death penalty-free Europe

A death penalty-free Europe could be an intermediate goal of the campaign, to be achieved by 1995/96. It would be possible to devise a parliamentary action at the level of EC contries which have not yet abolished the death penalty; and an action with regard to the Republics of the former Soviet Union that are drafting new penal codes, and countries that are preparing the instruments for the ratification of the European Conventions. We are already conducting a campaign with Amnesty International to abolish the death penalty in the Baltic States. We are aware of the urgent need to embark on an action in Russia and Bulgaria, where we are familiar with the legal situation and know which bills have been drawn up in parliament.

Towards abolishing the death penalty in the Mediterranean and in Africa

A "Committee to Abolish the Deah Penalty in Mediterranean Countries" was set up at the Seminar held by the POPEM (Organization for Peace between the Peoples of Europe and the Mediterranean) in Tunisia, on 16 November 1992. The first objective the Committee has set itself is to organize, within a year, a major Convention that will be attended by countries of the Mediterranean and the Arab world, with the participation of jurists, parliamentarians, associations and political parties. The Committee's second objective is the drawing up of an abolitionist protocol to be signed by all Islamic countries.

A similar initiative could be undertaken in Africa before the end of '94, with the aim of promoting a regional abolitionist agreement. We could start precisely with those countries which are abolitionist de jure or de facto, one of which could possibly finance the undertaking.

An Easter march to the Vatican

We urgently need to establish a dialogue with the Vatican, which could play a decisive role in the abolitionist campaign; especially as the New Catechism containing a thesis on the legitimacy of the death penalty has just been published.

We could begin by going on an abolitionist march to St. Peter's next Easter.

The Rome Convention to found the International League

On 6 February 1993, a Convention was held during the Radical Party Congress in Rome in order to found the "International League for the Abolition of the Death Penalty by 2000": a transnational political body, an instrument for parliamentary and political action, with objectives to be achieved within a specific period.

At the end of the proceedings, in which parliamentarians, jurists and well-known people from the international world of culture took part, the Promoting and Coordinating Committee of the International League was set up, comprising Ramsey Clark, François Fejtö, Mairead Corrigan Mauguire - Nobel Peace Prizewinner - and Nikolaj Arzhannikov - Vice-chairman of the Committee of the Supreme Soviet of Russia on human rights. Elena Bonner Sacharova attended the meeting and declared her support for the International League, as did Mikhail Gorbachev in a written message.

The primary objective of the Rome Convention is the summoning of a World Congress to Found the International League within one year.

The aim of this Congress and the task of the League, is to undertake a powerful campaign of parliamentary action and supporting actions, for the simultaneous presentation and approval of bills or resolutions in all parliaments in which Radicals are present.

------------------------------------------------------------

The rights of national minorities

------------------------------------------------------------

The role of the CSCE, the function of the High Commissioner for national minorities and the setting up of a system to protct the rights of minority groups.

SUMMARY: The final Act produced at Helsinki (1975) was very non-committal, and also ambiguous, with regard to the recognition of national minorities and their collective rights. A real step forward was taken, however, at the second Session of the Conference on the Human Dimension, held in Copenhagen (1990), which established that individuals "choose" to which national minority they belong.

The CSCE Paris Conference (1990), therefore, sought to define the Pan-European institutional situation regarding the rights of national minorites, which appeared to be the Achille's heel of European security. When Slovenia and Croatia declared their independence, a meeting of experts was held at Geneva (July 1991), which declared that "national minorites do not pertain exclusively to a State's internal affairs." It was a fitting declaration at the time. But we had to wait until the Helsinki Summit in 1992 before the High Commissioner's Office for national minorities was created.

It is at this level that we must take action, strengthening the instruments for preventing and peacefully resolving disputes. In short, only the creation of a system like the one provided for by the European Convention on Human Rights drawn up at Strasbourg, can give the necessary importance to the individual's legal right to belong to an ethnic minority and, therefore, to protect this right.

The final Act produced at Helsinki in 1975 was extremely non-committal regarding the recognition of national minorities, especially with respect to their collective rights.

According to the VII principle of the final Act: "The States in whose territories national minorties are present shall respect the rights of the people who belong to these minorities who are equal before the law, giving them every possibility to effectively enjoy the fundamental rights of man and of freedom and, in so doing, protect their legitmate interests in this area." The terms used do not permit the same precise interpretation as those which govern the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (Art. 27).

For example, the term "ethnic, religious and linguistic minorites" in Art. 27 of the Convention is substituted with the more ambiguous "national minorities" in the Helsinki Act.

After some futile attempts to advance the cause of rights and guarantees for minority groups in the Seventies and the Eighties, the final document produced by the Vienna meeting, which was adopted on 15 January 1989, made two innovations: on the one hand, it called for the protection of"ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religous identity of national minorities, and on the other hand, it extended to "people belonging to national minorities or to religious cultures" the provisions concerning benefits related to human contact (emigration and travel abroad), information, culture and education.

In substance, the Vienna document of 1989 extends the indiviual rights inherent in belonging to a national minority to cover the human dimension of the CSCE (third group). It is precisely to uphold these rights that the Vienna document, via the mechanism of said "human dimension of the CSCE", permits intergovernmental requests for and exchanges of information on related issues, including specific situations and individual cases.

A great step forward was taken at the 2nd Session of the Conference on the Human Dimension, held at Copenhagen from 5 - 29 June 1990. A whole chapter in the final document was dedicated to national minorities. The text maintains that there is an interdependence between the rights of ethnic minorities and a democratic political system, and also the role played by nongovernmental organizations,"including political parties, trade unions, human rights organizations and religious groups' in the "attempt to resolve problems regarding national minorities" (par. 30); then it specifies that "belonging to a national minority is a matter of personal choice. There must be no disadvantages inherent in this choice." (par. 32) In other words, it is not a State that determines the existence of national minorities but the individuals who lay claim to them (here, there is an implicit contradiction to Principle VII of the final Act produced at Helsinki).

Furthermore, this concept avoids the very controversial issue of defining a national minority, and makes it possible to maintain the criterion of belonging individually to a minority group, but with collective rights. The latter are specified as follows: "The individuals belonging to an ethnic minority have the right to express, to conserve and to develop their ethnic, cultural, linquistic and religious identity, in complete freedom; and to maintain and develop their culture in all its forms, while being protected from all attempts at assimilation against their will."

The Paris Conference held by the CSCE from 19 - 21 November 1990, sought to define the situation with regard to Pan-European institutions. The question of national minorities appeared be the Achille's heel of European security. The Paris Charter for a New Europe, which was adopted on this occasion, affirms under the heading "A New Era of Democracy, Peace and Unity", that "the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of national minorities shall be protected, and persons belonging to these minorities have the right to express, to preserve and to develop this identity without being subject to any form of discrimination, and all being equal before the law." The participating States further recognize "the valuable contribution mmade by national minorities to social life" and they express, once again, their "determination to combat all forms of racial or ethnic hatred, anti-Semitism, xenophobia or discrimination against anyone, and also all forms of persecution for religious or ideological motives."

A meeting of experts summoned at Geneva from 1 - 19 July 1991 to discuss ethnic minorities, after Slovenia and Croatia had declared their independence on 25 June 1991, proved to be most opportune and urgently needed. On this occasion, a fundamental principle of international law was upheld: national minorities "do not appertain (...) exclusively to a State's internal affairs." In the second place, the Geneva Report requested all necessary information to be supplied and the monitoring of free elections held in the CSCE, with observers being sent to public elections, at both a regional and local level, and particularly in areas inhabited by national minorities.

Nevertheless, it was not possible to adopt a specfic process of protection, even though three propsals were put forward by neutral and nonaligned countries, the Pentagon and the US.

A process was finally adopted during the 3rd Session of the Conference on the Human Dimension held at Moscow from 10 September to 4 Ottobre 1991, on occasion of which the human dimension process itself was considerably strengthened, and deliberately extended to include "the protection and promotion of the rights of persons belonging to national minorities."

The Office of the High Commissioner for national minorites was proposed by the Dutch and set up on occasion of the 1992 Helsinki Summit. It was conceived as a new CSCE institution and as "an instrument for preventing conflict in the very early stages." Its function is directly linked to the security aspect of the national minorities problem, as it intervenes "when tension created by problems regarding national minorities risks degenerating into a conflict in the territory of the CSCE, and threatening peace, stability and relations between participating States." The human dimension and the legitimation of denouncements made by individuals benefits from the structures of the Office of the Democratic Institutions and of Human Rights, in Warsaw.

Tension involving ethnic minorities can escalate into conflicts that endanger peace, stability and diplomatic relations between member States. The High Commissioner must intervene when the conflict threatens to extend beyond the borders of the State inhabited by the national minority; however, he must refrain from intervening when the conflict is marked by acts of organized terrorism.

The High Commissioner's functions include early warning and early action. Early warning entails a careful examination of the situation and the gathering of necessary information, also by visiting the territory in question, with the State's approval.

These preventive instruments are still very ineffective for dealing with the challenge constituted by national minorities. From the point of view of their overall size and their effect on security, the CSCE institutions could ideally be strengthened on the following three levels:

- by appointing a Secretariat which is equipped with real powers and the means for taking action;

- by establishing processes for rapid peacekeeping actions, with decisions being made by a majority vote or by a small security council with this specific responsibility;

- by developing new instruments for the prevention and peaceful settlement of controversies, such as a Pan-European Court of Arbitration or of Conciliation, which is also authorized to judge on territorial issues, and those pertaining to internal borders and national minorities. It is a question of developing the process of peaceful settlement of controversies, created at La Valletta in February 1991, which has still not yet been adopted.

Even though considerable progress has been made regarding the human dimension of the rights of national minorities, it cannot be denied that the CSCE has adopted an ambiguous attitude in at least two areas, the complexity of which has been fully revealed by the work done earlier by the UN and that which is now being effected by the European Council. On the one hand, the CSCE has never once attempted to define the term "national minority":, preferring a more practical approach. On the other hand, its intergovernmental, and extremely political nature has prevented it from thoroughly exploring ways of reconciling the principles of the Decalogue regarding the inviolability of borders (principle II), the territorial integrity of States (principle IV), the non-intervention in domestic affairs (principle VI) and the self-government of peoples (principle VIII).

Only the introduction of a system, like that of the Strasbourg European Convention on Human Rights, could give major importance, once again, to the individual's legal right to protect his right to belong to a minority group.

------------------------------------------------------------

High Commissioner for National Minorities (Helsinki Act 1992)

The Council wil appoint a High Commissioner for National Minorities. The High Commissioner will ensure a "warning signal" being given and, where opportune, a "timely action" being taken as quickly as possible,with regard to outbreaks of tension involving national minority-related problems, which could escalate into conflicts within the territory of the CSCE, endangering peace, stability or diplomatic relations between participating States. The High Commissioner will avail himself of the structures available at the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) in Warsaw.

- Mandate

The High Commissioner will act under the aegis of the CAF and, for this reason, will constitute an instrument for preventing conflicts in their earliest stage.

The High Commissioner will ensure a "warning signal" being given and, where opportune, "timely action" being taken as quickly as possible, with regard to outbreaks of tension involving national minority-related problems which have still not gone beyond the early warning stage but which, according the the High Commisioner, could degenerate into open conflict within the territory of the CSCE, endangering peace, stability or diplomatic relations between participating States, and requiring the attention and intervention of the Council of Ministers of the CSCE or the CAF.

While remaining within the limits of this mandate, based on the principles and commitments of the CSCE, the High Commissioner shall act according to his own discretion and operate independently of all parties directly involved in the outbreaks of tension.

The High Commissioner will take into consideration national minority-related issues that arise in the State where the High Commissioner is a citizen or a resident, or which involve a national minority to which the High Commissioner belongs, on condition that all the parties directly involved, including the interested State, are in agreement.

The High Commissioner will not take into consideration national minority-related issues in situations which involve organized terrorist attacks.

Neither will the High Commissioner take into consideration violations of CSCE commitments concerning only one individual belonging to a national minority.

In considering a situation, the High Commissioner shall take full note of available democratic and international instruments for dealing with same, and ensure that they are used for the benefit of the interested parties.

In the event that a particular problem relating to a national minority is drawn to the attention of the CAF, the involvement of the High commissioner will require a specific request and mandate from the CAF.

- Sources of Information for Problems Related to National Minorities

The High Commissioner can:

- gather and receive information regarding the situation of the national minorities and the role of the participants involved from any source, including mongovernmental information processes and organizations, excluding those listed in paragraph (25);

- receive specific reports from the parties directly involved regarding developments concerning issues related to the national minorities. These reports can include information on the violations of CSCE commitments with regard to national minorities, as well as on other violations carried out within the context of issues related to national minorities.

These specific reports addressed to the High Commissioner must fulfil the following requirements:

- they must be written reports sent to the High Commissioner, as such, and signed with full name and address;- they must contain a factual account of the developments concerning the state of persons belonging to national minorities; and of the role of the parties involved in these developments which have recently become manifest, in principle, not more than 12 months previously. The reports must contain factual information of which there is sufficient proof.

The High Commissioner will not communicate and will not accept communications from any person or organization that practises or publicly justifies terrorism or violence.

------------------------------------------------------------

EX-YUGOSLAVIA

------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: While we still condemn the ethnic partition of Bosnia, recent developments which tend towards the splitting of this country into three autonomous regions leaves no room for an initiative aimed at re-establishing the original borders.

There are in fact two possible scenarios, which are not antithetical. The first considers the fall of the Belgrade regime to be absolutely essential, also for a democratic settlement of the Bosnian question; the second consists in convincing the international community to establish new rules for peaceful coexistence, which would discourage a country from using violence to further its own causes.

The following are a number of possible options for Radical Party action within the sphere of the above scenarios::

1) Refusing to "recognize" the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia-Montenegro) by exploring the juridical aspects of the thesis of legal severance between the Federative Socialist Republic of Jugoslavia and the Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia-Montenegro); and by launching a campaign to secure an official refusal to "recognize" the Yugoslav Republic (Serbia-Montenegro).

2) Furthering the proposal to place Kosovo directly under the protection of the UN., starting with the Molinari Amendment approved by the US Congress, and in accordance with the requests made by both the Presidents of Kosovo and Albania.

3) Macedonian issue. Undertaking campaigns in the various parliaments for the official recognition of the Republic of Macedonia.

4) Utilizing the motion presented to the Italian Parliament by Radical Deputies, which criticizes UN Resolution no. 838 that recognizes de facto (with a view to de jure recognition) the ethnic partition of the Republic of Bosnia according to criteria of racism and violence.

5) The long period of totalitarian and communist government in Yugoslavia and in Russia has resulted in a loathing for the federative model as a valid form of government. The type of federalism practised in Russia and Yugoslavia was always sustained by the violence of the State. One must, therefore, propose a federative type of constitutional government on the lines of the democratic model that has been adopted in the US for centuries: this is perhaps the only one that will allow different peoples, ethnic minorities, languages, religions and cultures to coexist in a civilized and productive way.

The rapid escalation of the situation in Bosnia, with the international community having generally accepted the territorial gains effected by Serbs and Croats, does not leave a lot of room for an initiative aimed at re-establishing the legal situation that existed in Bosnia, and also on an international front, before the war, as the country will most likely be split into three autonomous regions.

For this reason, there are two possible lines of action regarding the Ex-Yugoslavia issue. The first aims at bringing down the racist and antidemocratic regime in Belgrade, as an indispensable condition for the democratic settlement of the Bosnia question. The second is to bring pressure to bear on the international communicty to establish new rules for peaceful coexistence, which aim at making the use of violence to further one's own cause completely unprofitable We continue to resolutely condemn the ethnic partition of Bosnia.

The following are the possible options for taking action in the ambit of the above scenarios.

1. Refusing to "recognize" the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia-Montenegro)

As well as examining the giuridical aspects of the supposed legal severance between the Federative Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia-Montenegro), we must undertake a campaign to obtain an official refusal to "recognize" the Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia-Montenegro), with the consequent recalling of ambassadors - something that many countries have already done - and the closure of "Serbian" diplomatic seats, which are still operative at the present time.

2. UN protection for Kosovo

It is necessary to develop, at a political and giurdical level, the proposal of placing Kosovo - former autonomous province of the Ex-Yugoslavia, as laid down in the Yugoslavian Constitution of 1974 - directly under the protection of the UN.To this end, the US Congress having approved the "Molinari" Amendment (which contains our requests) and requests already made by the Presidents of Kosovo and of Albania, could be two good starting points.

(On June 16 1993,the US Congress approved two Amendments presented by Deputy Molinari: one asking President Clinton to bring pressure to bear on the Security Council for the deployment of UN troops in Kosovo; and a second requesting that the Security Council decide to increase the number of CSCE inspectors and observers in Kosovo.

The "protectorate" request was made by President Rugova of Kosovo. (It was one of ten points in the Plan presented by Rugova to mediators Owen and Stoltenberg.)

President Berisha of Albania also presented to these same mediators a six-point plan to resolve the Kosovo problem: one of the points concerns the "Protectorate" request to the Security Council. A second point that the two plans (Rugova-Berisha) have in common is a request that the Security Council only lift the embargo on Serbia on condition that the Kosovo problem is resolved.)

3. Macedonia

We intend to relaunch the parliamentary campaign for the official recognition of the Republic of Macedonia, which has been recognized by very few European countries to date.

4. Balkan Federation

After having been subjected for so long to totalitarian regimes, Eastern Euyrpean countries have lost all faith in a federative system of government. The so-called "federalism" of the communist regimes had nothing to do with the great theory - and practice - of democracy and liberty which was developed, above all, in the United States of America, where federalism has provided the institutional structure that makes the freedom of individuals and of peoples possible. A distrust of totalitarian federalism has plunged the interested parties into a series of civil wars and conflicts between States that no form of "ethnic cleansing" - or racial or religious cleansing, for that matter - effected by terrorizing the peoples in question, will ever be able to resolve: no country can guarantee the exclusion of national, cultural or religious minorities from its territory; no country can apply laws, or regulations, that can guarantee equality to the "residual" minorities. This prepares the ground for civil war and ac

ts of terrorism which can neither be resolved nor stopped.

The only solution, as far as this is possible within the international laws that have been drawn up and enforced to deal with this problem, is to eliminate the negative meaning associated with the word "minority".

We have, in factm to take the opposite approach, and recognize and appreciate the true wealth of all forms of cultural and linguistic pluralism (we are thinking particularly of the pluralistic culture of the Balkan States). And so having learned from the negative experience regarding the Ex-Yugoslavia, we must think about building a "Balkan Confederation" - which is a long and difficult, but necessary job - in which those civilizations and traditions which were formed in the past while the Balkan peoples were being attacked, excluded and killed en masse by others, will be able to merge and grow together. By taking this road, the Balkans will be able to make an extraordinary contribution to the civilization, culture and life of the whole of Europe.

We have no initiatives underway at present, but we hope to form a study group to formulate proposals which will form the basis of our first undertakings.

Lastly, I think it is useful to reprint here a motion presented by Deputies who are members of the Radical Party in Italy, which lists a number of objectives which could be achieved in other parliaments. This motion criticizes UN Resolution no. 836 which "recognizes de facto, and aims at recognizing de jure, the ethnic partition of the Republic of Bosnia on the part of Serbia and also Croatia, according to the criterion of 'ethnic cleansing', that is, by resorting to racism and violence." It requests the Italian Government to solicit an information offensive from the UN, directed at Serbian and Montenegrin citizens; and to break off diplomatic relations with the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)".

MOTION

- Considering that the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)" is responsible for serious international crimes, such as, acts of aggression against Bosnia, genocide of Moslims and gross and systematic violations of human rights in wartime; considering that it appears evident that the actions of Serbian paramilitary units in Croatia and in Bosnia can be attributed to the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)";

- Considering that the agreement on Bosnia-Hercegovina reached in Washington on 22 May 1992, which the Security Council has in part made its own with Resolution no. 836, recognizes de facto, with an aim to recognizing de jure, the ethnic partition of this Republic on the part of the Serbs and also the Croats, according to the criterion of "ethnic cleansing", that is, by resorting to racism and violence;

- Considering that said agreement has once again resulted in an intensifying of military action, particularly on the part of the Serbs, such as, driving the Muslim population out of the territory they inhabit;

- Considering that the Belgrade regime continues to suppress civil rights and repress all forms of political opposition, also within its own boundaries; that the leader of the Party for Serbian renewal, Vuk Draskovic, was arrested and badly assaulted;

- Considering that Serbia is using more and more brutal means of repression against the Albanian citizens of Kosovo; that the disappearance of the Federal Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia necessitates the redefinition of guarantees of self-government made to Kosovo and Vojvodina;

- Considering that UN Resolution no. 713 of 25 September 1991 affirms that "the territorial transformations obtained with violence in Yugoslavia are not acceptable" (no. 8 of the Introduction);

- Considering that Serbs are in the process of aggregating in Croatia and Bosnia, and this process will be continued in "Greater Serbia";

- Considering that UN Resolution no. 757 of 30 May 1992, obliges Member States to reduce the staffs of diplomatic and consular missions in the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)", with the Member States obviously being free to abolish these missions if they so desire;

- Considering that UN Resolution no. 777 of 19 September 1992 stated that "the State previously known as the Federal Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia has ceased to exist" and turned down the request of the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)" to automatically acquire member status at the UN;

- Considering that Opinions no. 1 and 10 of the Badinter Arbitration Committee of the Peace Conference on Yugoslavia state that the principles of international law consider the existence and the disappearance of a State a de facto issue and that the new "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)" is to be considered as a "new State";

- Considering that said Opinion no. 10 of the Arbitration Committee, after having stated that recognition, even though of a declarative nature, is an act of discretion that third-party States can adopt on condition that the State heing recognized respects: the indispensable principles of the ban on the use of force, and the fundamental rights of man and of ethnic minorities;

- Considering that the de facto recognition and the continued diplomatic relations between Italy and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)" would constitute, according to the tradition and the doctrine of international law, recognition in every respect;

- Considering that our Government continues to keep a diplomatic mission open in Belgrade and accepts that representatives of the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)" continue to occupy the premises of the Embassy of the Former Yugoslavian Republic;

- Considering that our Government concedes jurisdictional immunity to the diplomats of that State, on condition that this is reciprocal; that various forms of communication, the contnent of which is similar to that typical of diplomatic relations, are exchanged between our Government and said State; that recently, the personnel of the diplomatic seat of the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)" in Rome, requested on behalf of the latter, the extradition of a Slovenian citizen arrested in Italy for arms trafficking, according to the Italo-Yugoslav Bilateral Treaty on Extradition;

- Considering that the UN Security Council, in constituting the Court for the Ex-Yugoslavia on the basis of Chapter VII of the Charter, indicated that the serious violations of human rights committed in the Ex-Yugoslavia constitute a threat to security and peace;

- Considering, therefore, that the conditions for the recognition of the new State called the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)" established by Opinion no. 10 of the Badinter Committee of Arbitration are in no way fulfilled by that State;

- Considering that the breaking-off of diplomatic relations is one of the measures considered in Art. 41 of the UN Charter, and that it can represent a legitimate counter-measure for the unlawful actions of a State;

- Considering that regular military actions without the support of nonviolent actions and information offensives, of the widespread communication of truth and reality to the peoples and individuals in question, can be thwarted, impeded or even produce the opposite effect, either or in the mid- or long-term

commits the Government

1. to solicit from the UN an appeal and a statement - and their formal cognizance - addressed to the Serbian population and all the citizens of the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)" in order to inform them precisely, and in every way possible, of the fact that the international community will defend its own rights and its own future against years of internal and international conflict, of criminal actions and designs, and all the consequences and international measures that could actually weigh heavily on it in the future;

2. to urge individual member States to move in this direction and take this action, and also the European Union and the CSCE; organizations recognized by the UN, and NGOs (nongovernmental organizations);3. to operate, in any case, where it is directly involved, along the following lines and according to the following objectives;

4. to not endorse, in any place or in any way - even by ommission - the Washington agreement and to formally request the modification of Resolution no. 836;

5. to solicit the UN Security Council to confer a more extensive mandate on UN forces and to adequately strengthen their presence, with the aim of forcing the Serbian and Croatian paramilitary units in action in Bosnia to withdraw; of disarming all the irregular bands, and of stopping the flow of arms and aid to such forces;

6. to solicit the UN Security Council to adopt a resolution, analogous to what was previously decided for Iraqi Kurdistan, aimed at prohibiting military operations from being carred out in Kosovo; and to place this region under special UN military and administrative protection;

7. to urgently get talks underway at the European Political Cooperation offices - following the lead of the European Council meeting in Copenhagen from 21 - 22 June - in order that the 12 might take a decision to impose harsher political sanctions on the Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) by breaking off diplomatic relations;

8. to break off, in any event, diplomatic relations between Italy and the "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ( Serbia and Montenegro)."

Environment

Campaign for the protection of the environment and for ecologically sustainable development in Central and Eastern Europe.

Summary: The question of the environment has become an essential element of any political programme, both for the developed countries and for the less developed and poorer areas of the world. It is now no longer the time for "oasis" environmentalism, for the protection of particular areas or of animal species threatened with extinction. The question of the environment must be incorporated into strategies for international development, democracy, security and co-operation as an indispensable keystone and pivot. The question of the environment has an increasingly global and supernational character, requiring strong international laws and new forms of security between peoples. With regard to the countries of the ex-Soviet bloc, we have a number of projects whose implications are of great interest. These projects form a fully-fledged programme for "sustainable development", and also aim to curb national conflicts by encouraging the peoples of the Balkans (and not only them) to create supernational Institutions a

nd laying down solid foundations for the process of integration and co-operation between Eastern and Western Europe.

Three projects are considered:

1) In the countries of Eastern Europe there are at least thirty nuclear power stations which do not conform to minimum safety requirements and which are technologically outdated, so much so that they also hold back economic development. Two initiatives have been drawn up on this issue: a) the promotion of national energy plans which give priority to the achievement of satisfactory levels of efficiency, directing international programmes of financial and technological co-operation to this purpose; b) the closure of the most dangerous nuclear power stations within the framework of international co-operation programmes. Their closure will also be requested by means of referendums and other popular initiatives.

2) Campaign for the institution of a European Great Rivers and Waterways Community, that is a supernational Authority to run the enormous waterway system centred on the Danube, both from a financial and an environmental point of view. Through the Main, the Rhine, and the connected terminals, this waterway system already links nine countries from the North Sea to the Black Sea, but it could be extended to include France, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia, and also Russia in the future.

This is the most serious and important project concerning the countries of the ex-Soviet bloc, a global project which would centre on the safeguard and the growth of one of the most important ecosystems in Europe and would revolutionize the trade and the entire economy of the whole continent, also renewing contact and civil and cultural relations between its peoples. The project can only be realized if the financial plan is supported by supernational institutions and management instruments, by the institition, that is, of an Authority with supernational powers which would radically update the current, inadequate Convention regarding navigation on the Danube.

We will have to draw up bills and resolutions on the issue to present to the European Parliament and to national parliaments, with a long-term programme of initiatives to back the project.

Campaign for the right to information.

Related to the previous point, but of wider relevance, is the conquest of the right of access to information on the environment. The recognition of this right would radically improve relations between the citizen and the public administrations, and would also lead to more modern and efficient administration procedures.

There are two proposals:

1) the presentation of bills in the various parliaments for the recognition of the right of access to information held by the public administration;

2) parliamentary resolutions, popular petitions, pressure on the EEC and on governments for the creation of a common pan-European computer network for information on the environment and on consumers. Proposals for research activities etc., and an international seminar to study concrete possibilities for the promotion of the computer network.

1. PREMISE

1.1. The events of the last twenty years have made the question of the environment an essential element of any political programme. This is true within each country in the limited area of the developed world; but it is also gradually beginning to involve the less developed and even the poorest areas of the world.

It is not a matter, however, of adding a "green appendix" to policies which continue to take a traditional direction. In short, the "oasis philosophy", that is merely the protection of areas and species, is no longer sufficient. The question of the environment must now be incorporated into strategies for international development, democracy, security and co-operation, and must become the keystone or the pivot of these strategies.

The opposition between environment and development, which characterized the initial phases of the environmentalist movements, dominated at the time by primitive ideologies and exclusive concern with the problems of the developed world, now no longer exists. The Rio de Janeiro Conference marked the end of this opposition and, with the elaboration of the concept of "ecologically sustainable development", brought out the need for a new approach.

By its very nature, the question of the environment is global and supernational: it crosses boundaries, limits the powers of individual states, is linked to the development of civil and political rights, requires strong international laws, and radically updates the concept and the practice of security between peoples. In short, it opens up a perspective of enormous importance. There is, however, a serious lack of suitable political actions and instruments. For all these reasons, it would seem to be an ideal area for the intervention of a transnational political force.

1.2. Centred around a number of important environmental questions, the programme of initiatives for the countries of the ex-Soviet bloc has many implications of great interest.

Above all, it forms a fully-fledged programme of ecologically sustainable development in that it aims to create the conditions for a reversal of the economic disaster inherited from the regimes of the past. An increase in the efficiency of energy plans, the development of a continental transport network based on the Danube-Rhine axis, the creation of a pan-European computer network for the exchange of information: the objectives contained in the programme are the essential requirements for a realistic prospect of economic development.

Secondly, the programme aims to curb national conflicts by encouraging the creation of supernational institutions, and lays solid long-term foundations for the process of integration and co-operation between Eastern and Western Europe.

Finally, through initiatives regarding the right to information and to the transparency of public administration, along the lines of the US Freedom of Information Act, it aims to contribute to the development of advanced democracy and of an open, rather than conflictual, relationship between institutions and citizens.

The programme is formed of three campaign projects.

2. CAMPAIGN FOR EFFICIENT ENERGY NETWORKS AND FOR THE CLOSURE OF DANGEROUS NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS

2.1. From the point of view of energy - the basic resource of the economy - the countries of Eastern Europe are faced with two serious problems which prevent economic development and keep the local populations (and also the international community) in a situation of unacceptable risk.

On one hand, there are at least thirty nuclear power stations which fall below minimum safety standards, and which must be closed as soon as possible to avoid a repeat of the Chernobyl disaster. We must also bear in mind the risks of attacks or bombing in the wake of conflicts and wars (the Krsko nuclear power station in Slovenia, for example).

On the other hand, the technologies and the uses of energy are incredibly outdated, a situation which requires urgent initiatives for the promotion of greater efficiency in the production and use of energy. We need only look at the statistics regarding energy intensity (the ratio between energy consumption and gross national product), which in the countries of Eastern Europe are higher than the EEC average by a factor that ranges from 1.5 to more than 2. Without drastic intervention, these countries will have to spend enormous amounts of valuable currency on energy supplies, thus preventing development. Not to mention the destructive impact on the environment and on the health of the people.

2.2. In this framework, we have drawn up two initiatives to be developed at the same time. One aims to promote the launching of national energy plans that give priority to the achievement of satisfactory levels of efficiency, and to direct international programmes for financial and technological co-operation to this end. To achieve this aim we must use the appropriate instruments within the relevant national parliaments and the European Parliament, as well as forms of pressure on international organizations such as the EEC and the G-7. There are also plans for popular petitions, seminars and training courses with the participation of scientific bodies and commercial companies.

The second line of initiatives aims to bring about the closure of the most dangerous nuclear power stations in the ambit of the programmes of international co-operation. The question also has implications in the field of international treaties and institutions, of the links between civilian and military uses of nuclear technology (Eurotom, Treaty of Non-Proliferation), and of co-operation between East and West.

Our action will be based primarily on popular referendums, in conjunction with the instruments of parliamentary intervention available.

The campaign has a wide target: parliamentarians, scientists, public administrators, research bodies, and commercial companies as well as the environmentalist groups and the general public.

3. CAMPAIGN FOR THE INSTITUTION OF A EUROPEAN GREAT RIVERS AND WATERWAYS COMMUNITY

3.1. The aim of this campaign is the institution of a European Great Rivers and Waterways Community, that is to say a supernational Authority with responsibility for running the gigantic waterway system centred on the Danube, from a financial and an environmental point of view. This is a top-priority aim which can become the pivot of the policies of economic development, environmental protection, and civil and political progress in the whole of Central and Eastern Europe.

The Danube is the main axis of a waterway system which, from 1992, through links with the Main and the Rhine, already crosses or runs along the borders of nine countries: Holland, Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania and the Ukraine (with Rotterdam on the North Sea and the Danube estuary on the Black Sea as terminals). This navigable axis considerably reduces (by more than 2,500 kilometres) the ocean shipping routes, from Rotterdam to the Suez Canal. There are short-term and mid-term plans for extensions which would involve France, Italy, Slovenia, and Croatia; whilst in the long-term there are plans for a link with the great Russian waterway, which already links the Baltic Sea with the Black Sea, crossing the whole of Russia from north to south.

This is the most serious and important project regarding the countries of the ex-Soviet bloc. The creation of a unified and integrated transport system in Central and Eastern Europe would, in fact, revolutionize the trade and economy of the whole continent, providing the ex-Communist countries with enormous opportunities for development and for integration with the Western countries.

3.2. However, it will be impossible to achieve this aim if the economic plan is not supported by supernational institutions and instruments for running the waterway system; it is not difficult to predict that the continuation of rivalries between states will cause conflicts and crises that will be difficult to control. The same problem will exist for the protection of the environment.

So far, in the construction of this enormous transport system, environmental questions have been neglected or entirely overlooked, which has caused irreparable damage to the environment and the landscape; the future development of traffic and productive activities will bring even greater risks.

The natural environment surrounding much of the waterway system is amongst the most beautiful in Europe, with many unique ecosystems and important historical sites. Without supernational instruments and policies for their safeguard, the increase in river transport will cause the gradual pollution of surface and strata waters along the entire bed of the waterways as far as the outlets to the sea. This is added to by atmospheric pollution which, through rainfall, filters into the land, pollutes the underground strata and partly flows into the rivers. Finally, there is the question of solid and liquid waste, from industrial, agricultural or urban sources, which is already very worrying.

These problems can only be tackled and solved through the creation of an Authority with supernational powers. The latest proof is the controversy which has broken out between Hungary and Slovakia over the construction of a dam on the Danube, on the border between the two countries, for the Galcicovo hydro-electric power station (Slovakia).

It is therefore necessary to take this opportunity, which is not likely to occur again in Europe, to put into practice the new cultural and political approaches solemnly ratified at the Rio de Janeiro Conference, approaches based on the safeguard of the environment, ecologically sustainable development, and the respect of cultural differences and of the civil rights of populations.

3.3. An international Convention regulating navigation on the Danube is currently in force. It was signed in Belgrade in August 1948 by the Soviet Union, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, the Ukraine, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia; the events of the last few years have undermined it, and a new form of agreement is now essential. It should also be noted that navigation on the Danube has been subject to an international statute for about one hundred and fifty years, and that every important historical change has brought about a renegotiation of this statute: the last time this happened, in 1948, the Soviet Union was the dominant force.

(From the study by Prof. Politi: »The "object" of the Belgrade Convention is substantially limited to the discipline of navigation on the Danube and the execution of hydro-engineering works to facilitate river traffic. In other words there is a lack, within the regime laid down by the Convention itself, of a body of rules specifically adressed to the protection of the environment along the Danube by means of the instruments of control (of the activities carried out on the river and on the territory of the countries on its banks) which are typical of the subsequent development of international law (I refer, above all, to such well-known mechanisms as information and consultation between states, public access to information regarding the protection of the environment, the evaluation of environmental impact, and the continuous monitoring of pollution levels).

Consequently, the duties of the Commission established in accordance with article 5 of Special Administrations referred to in articles 20 and 21 are also restricted to the control of navigation and of closely related activities. The safeguard of the environment is therefore only indirectly a part of the activities carried out by these bodies (and as the result, for example, of any regulations or decisions issued with regard to dam-building work or health inspections of the boats which use the river).

It is therefore evident, in my opinion, that the rules laid down by the Belgrade Convention are inadequate and unable to meet the need for correct and fair economic utilization and for adequate environmental safeguard of the waterway system which centres on the Danube. Especially in the light of the possibility of extending the system and linking it to other basins such as those of the Main and the Rhine, it is necessary to consider the possibility of a radical revision of international legislation on the subject of the utilization and safeguard of the Danube system and of connected systems. This objective would be best achieved through a new international treaty (adhered to by all the European countries potentially involved) rather than through the mechanism of an additional protocol to the existing convention. The use of the latter mechanism could, in fact, raise particularly delicate problems, not only in terms of the geographical area of application (which would risk being circumscribed to the Danube bas

in), but also in terms of the participation of States, which should - at least in principle - be limited to the parties of the Belgrade Convention and the relative "successor" States.

The aim of our campaign is, therefore, to achieve the institution of a European Great Rivers and Waterways Community, along the lines of the European Coal and Steel Community, and to make this body, as happened with the ECSC, the driving force behind a process of economic and political integration of Eastern Europe.

To this end, bills and resolutions will be drawn up for presentation in national parliaments and in the European Parliament, and a long-term programme of initiatives in support of the campaign will be realized: popular petitions, international meetings and demonstrations, and the publication of studies and reports.

4. CAMPAIGN FOR THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION

4.1. The recognition of the right of public access to information on the environment, consumers and public administration is the foundation of a society of free, equal and jointly responsible people. The end of administrative secret - the ancient secret of princes, that is the privilege of hiding from the eyes of the subjects - represents a cultural and political advance with respect to the regimes of the past, and lays the foundations for the true democratization of institutions and of society. Only in this way is it possible to hope for rational collective decisions based on information.

For the ex-Communist countries, the recognition of this right would have profoundly innovative effects and would also be a guarantee for the future. It is, in fact, a means to improve relations between public administrations and citizens, making the decisions of bureaucratic institutions both transparent and controllable. At the same time, it serves to make administration more modern and efficient. Finally, we should not underestimate the importance of the right to information for the development of environmental policies and for the responsible intervention of citizens and movements in the control of pollution. From this point of view, the possibility of having access to information in the possession of public administrations would be an enormous help in our campaigns on energy and on the Danube.

The right to information is most fully consecrated in the United States (the Freedom of Information Act) and is recognized to greater or lesser extents in the other Western countries: the European Community has issued a directive on the subject. In Italy, a campaign has been conducted in recent years by the Friends of the Earth, with important results: in 1986 the right of access to information on the environment was fully recognized by the law, and since then more general innovations have been introduced with regard to the administrative procedures and the regulations of local governments. The experience of all those countries which have legislation on the subject has underlined the need for effective action for the development of adequate data bases, for their validation and distribution, with positive effects on the public institutions in general and on the investments themselves.

4.2. The campaign has two main objectives:

a) the presentation in national parliaments of bills for the recognition of the right of access to information held by the public administration;

b) parliamentary resolutions, popular petitions, and pressure on the EEC and on national governments, for the creation of a pan-European data base network on the environment and consumers.

In support of these activities, we are planning adequately publicized sample surveys on the availability of information on the environment in the various countries involved. We are also planning research groups to examine national legislations and to draw up bills; and an international seminar, with the participation of parliamentarians, scientific bodies, commercial companies and NGOs, to discuss concrete ways of promoting the telematic network.

DRUGS

SUMMARY: Of all the Radical Party's political campaigns on the great choices of our societies, for the affirmation of the rights of citizens and against the idea of an "ethical State" which appoints itself as the defender and protector of a presumed "morality" and a presumed "common good", the campaign against the current prohibitionist drug policies is perhaps the most representative.

Our analysis is clear: "prohibited" drugs are in fact on free sale in our societies; the "war on drugs", the prohibitionist policy has failed to achieve its objectives, just as the prohibition of alcohol in America in the 1920s and the prohibition of gin in England in the first half of the 19th century also failed. This policy has brought and continues to bring enormous profits to criminal cartels and Mafia organizations which exploit what is currently the most profitable business in the world.

In the face of this situation, the transnational Radical Party can and must make the battle for a revision of current drug policies one of its immediate priorities. To do this, we must attack the juridical and institutional instruments which determine the choice of prohibitionist policies: the Vienna Convention on Drugs of 1961 (modified in 1972), the 1971 Convention on psychotropic drugs, and the 1988 Convention on the Commerce of Drugs. We must promote a large-scale UN Conference to examine possible new policies. Two parallel plans of action are possible. The first is a campaign to "denounce", in accordance with article 46 and article 30 respectively, the current Conventions. The second is a proposal for emendments to the Conventions which governments could put forward in order to begin a process of revision leading to UN negotiations on the issue. The two strategies are not alternatives; they are complementary.

In the meantime, we must pay great attention to the "harm reduction" strategies which are gaining ground (see the political Declaration of the Extraordinary Conference of Ministers of the Pompidou Group in the Council of Europe, the final Declaration of the pan-European Ministerial Conference on Drugs held in Oslo, etc.) and which must be encouraged, also bearing in mind the implications regarding the battle against Aids: the legalization of the use, or the sale of cannabis and its derivates, the controlled distribution of substitute drugs (but also of drugs, according to projects already in progress), the distribution of syringes, etc...

The possibility and the need to modify the conventions mentioned above are also highlighted by the result of the referendum held recently in Italy: by abrogating the penalties relating to the use of drugs, and also by eliminating the term "illegal" attributed to the personal use of drugs, the referendum result has led the Italian law to be in conflict with the provisions of the Vienna Convention.

In order to bring about a modification of the 1988 Convention, we can follow both the strategy of emendment and the strategy of denouncement. As for the other two conventions, they could by overturned by a denouncement from a number of States, following concerted action on the part of various States, beginning with a forceful request for emendments in an anti-prohibitionist direction.

The anti-prohibitionist policy

Of all the Radical Party's political campaigns on the great choices of our societies, for the affirmation of the rights of civilians and against the idea of an "ethical" State which appoints itself as the defender and the protector of a presumed general "morality", the campaign against the current prohibitionist drug policies is perhaps the most representative.

Our analysis, outlined for the first time in a Congress motion as long ago as 1972, is simple: "prohibited" drugs are in fact on free sale in our countries and in our societies; the "war on drugs", the policy of prohibition which has been imposed at international level for just over thirty years, has completely failed to achieved its aim, just as the prohibition of alcohol in America in the 1920s and the prohibition of gin in England in the first half of the 19th century also failed; the enormous profits guaranteed to the great criminal cartels which have a monopoly on the traffic of drugs have allowed the Mafia organizations around the world to prosper by exploiting what is currently the most profitable business in the world. In the face of this situation, the social and economic costs of the policy of prohibition are devastating: prisons all over the world are full of people sentenced for the use or sale of drugs or for crimes committed in order to procure drugs, and but this has not been matched by any de

crease in the phenomenon. At the same time, it is clear that, in the face of this extraordinary, pointless arsenal of repressive measures, far fewer people die as a result of drugs than as a result of tobacco or alcohol (in the United States alone, for example, every year there are 4,500 drugs-related deaths compared to 80,000 alcohol-related deaths and as many as 390,000 tobacco-related deaths, whilst government sources do not attribute a single death to the use of cannabis or its derivates!).

The failure of repressive policies is equalled by the failure of policies of dissuasion, which aim to reduce the production and the illegal international traffic of drugs. Again according to US government sources, only 1% of the entire world production of drugs is seized, whilst production increases every year instead of falling.

The criminal organizations which prosper as a result of the prohibitionist policies currently in force do not only draw enormous profits from their business - they also obtain increasing power: the power to corrupt those involved in public life, the power to infiltrate, and finally the indirect power to limit the freedom of the people.

In reality, the result of the "war on drugs" is an increasing lack of safety in our cities, an exponential increase in the prison population, and an increase in the risk of Aids and other diseases contacted by exchanging syringes.

In the face of this situation, the Radical Party can and must make the battle for the total revision of the current prohibitionist drugs regime one of its immediate priorites: we must immediately bring about widespread political debate on an issue that has, with significant exceptions, been confined to discussions among experts, and then only to discussions of specific problems which do not address the entire drugs issue.

To do this, we must keep in mind our fundamental aims: the legalization of all psycho-active drugs, with the consequent drastic reduction in their cost, and controlled production and sale of such drugs - in short, the elimination of all economic motives for illegal drug-trafficking.

In order to achieve our aims, we must first of all attack the international juridical instruments which determine the choice of prohibitionist policies: the Vienna Convention on Drugs of 1961, modified in 1972, as well as the 1988 Convention on the Commerce of Drugs. We must demand the immediate international revision of these two documents, promoting a campaign for a large-scale UN Conference on the issue of drugs with the task of evaluating the results obtained so far and of examining alternative policies for the future. In this respect we have two parallel plans of action. The first is simply a plan to "denounce", in accordance with article 46 and article 30 respectively, the current Conventions. If the governments of our countries were to denounce the Conventions, new international negotiations would necessarily have to be opened. It is worth remembering, in fact, that the 1961 Convention constitutes the watershed between the non-repressive policy pursued up to that time by the international community an

d simply regulated by a series of treaties, all abrogated by the 1961 Convention, and the current prohibitionist line corroborated by the 1988 Convention. In reality, a denouncement of the Conventions is a denouncement of the failure of the current policy.

The second is a proposal for emendments to the Conventions, which our governments could present, in accordance with the Conventions themselves, in order to open a procedure of revision that could lead, in this case too, to new negotiations within the UN. The two strategies are complementary, all the more so in that any emendment of the Conventions would overturn their philosophy and would consequently become the starting point for a new international treaty on drugs.

Having indicated our fundamental line, I believe we should also pay considerable attention to the various "harm reduction" options which are slowly gaining ground and which must be supported and encouraged. I am thinking of the legalization of the use, or also of the sale of cannabis derivates, the controlled distribution of drugs and substitute drugs as already carried out in a number of important European cities, the distribution of syringes, etc.

Concerted action for the modification of the current system of obligations (laid down by the international conventions) on the subject of drugs.

1. The system of international agreements

Within the framework of the United Nations, an international system of treaties has been adopted for the regulation of the production and the commerce of drugs.

The Single Convention on Drugs of 1961 consolidated previous agreements on drugs and simplified the international control mechanisms. It lists the substances which must be subject to control and requires member states to consider as criminal offences the violations laid down by the provisions of the Convention concerning the cultivation, production, fabrication, sale and distribution of drugs (article 3). The 1972 Protocol to the Single Convention updated its provisions and insisted on the need for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug addicts. The 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Drugs concerns the problem of the abuse of substances not included in the 1961 Convention. In the case of hallucinogens such as LSD, the 1971 Convention establishes a stricter system of control than that applied to narcotics. The 1988 Convention against the illegal traffic of narcotics and psychotropic substances, adopted during the Conference organized by the United Nations at the end of 1988, came into force in November 1990. W

hilst the previous international treaties were based on the control of particular substances, the 1988 Convention primarily concerns the profits and the techniques of drug-trafficking.

2. Penalties relating to the possession and personal use of drugs.

The Vienna Convention of 1961 allows states to depenalize sanctions and replace them with measures for the re-education and treatment of less serious cases regarding the possession and use of drugs (article 3, section 3; and article 36).

The Vienna Convention of 1988 leaves to the discretional choice of the contracting parties the possibility of dealing with cases of unauthorized possession of narcotics by means of measures other than penal sanctions and of subjecting people to treatment, education, care, readaptation and social rehabilitation measures (article 3, section 4, letter c).

However, article 3, no. 2 of the Convention of Vienna of 1988 (rendered executive by law no. 158 of 5.11.1990) states that "in conformity with the principles of their constitutions and the fundamental concepts of their legislations, each party shall adopt the measures necessary to classify as a criminal offence ("infraction pénale" in the original text), in conformity with their own laws, if the act has been committed intentionally, the detention and purchase of narcotics and psychotropic substances and the cultivation of drugs for personal use."

3. Alternatives to imprisonment for drug addicts.

Having imposed a penal sanction on those found to be guilty of the possession and use of narcotic substances, the above-mentioned international Conventions allow the possibility of alternative measures.

The 1961 Single Convention on Drugs already stated that the parties (the States that signed the Convention) should take into particular consideration the measures to be adopted for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug addicts.

In 1988, with the Convention against the illegal traffic of narcotics and psychotropic substances, it is stated that the parties should adopt appropriate measures to reduce the illegal demand for drugs with the aim of alleviating human suffering.

In 1990, the United Nations adopted the Programme of Global Action adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 23 February 1990, in the course of the 17th special Session devoted to the problem of international co-operation against the production, the supply and demand, the traffic and the illegal distribution of narcotic and psychotropic substances.

This Programme encourages the WHO. to work with governments in order to facilitate access to programmes for the treatment of drug addiction (point 34), to develop "policies for the reduction of the risk and the harm caused by the abuse of drugs, with means of prevention of the transmission of HIV" (section 45).

The Political Declaration of the World Summit on the Reduction of the Demand for Drugs, held in London in April 1990, contains several points which indicate the evolution at international level of strategies regarding the treatment of drug users. The first of these points regards the "need to develop global options (... omissis) which should include programmes for establishing contact with groups of addicts" (section 14).

This new approach is completed in section 15 of the Political Declaration with the statement that since it is not always possible to achieve detachment from drugs in a short space of time, "we must also accept partial objectives in order to avoid further harming the health of drug addicts".

4. The policy of "harm reduction"

Agreements at European level also underline the need to set up harm reduction programmes aimed at drug addicts.

The political Declaration of the Extraordinary Conference of the Pompidou Group in the Council of Europe (London, 18-19 May 1989) recognizes:

a) the maximum priority of measures aimed to attract an increasing number of drug addicts to health and social services;

b) the need to introduce "measures aimed at helping high-risk drug addicts who are not immediately willing (or are unable) to abstain from the use of intravenous drugs in order to reduce the risk of contacting HIV." The Ministers believe that such measures, if correctly applied, are not in conflict with the aim of total emancipation from addiction.

The Final Declaration of the Pan-European Ministerial Conference on Drugs, held in Oslo, also underlines that the programmes offered by Drug Addiction Services can include an approach aimed at "limiting the harmful effects of the abuse of drugs" (point XIX).

In the ambit of the European Community, the Resolutions of the Council and of the Ministers of Health of 16 May 1989 on the prevention of Aids among drug addicts recognize the need, in the formulation of strategies, to consider "not only the final objective of abandonment of the use of drugs, but also intermediate objectives such as the reduction of mortality and of the risk of contacting HIV or other viruses, the reduction of marginalization, etc., the achievement of which should be considered to be of fundamental importance." To that end, the section on "programmes for the treatment of addiction" underlines the need to re-evaluate the various therapeutic options available in view of the appearance and the spread of HIV."

In this respect, the document underlines "the need to consider the launch or the extension of programmes such as personalized treatment with substitute drugs which allow the adoption of forms of assumption that do not involve the risk of infections."

A further section was devoted to the distribution of safe material for injection (section C, point III, of the text agreed on by the representatives of the EC Ministers of Health) and outlined a number of options ranging from free sale to needle and syringe exchange programmes.

As for the Resolution on Aids of 3 December 1990, the member states are invited "to promote, in services for drug addiction and in residential communities, access to immediate intervention and, when necessary, to treatment for HIV-positive addicts and for subjects with clinical symptoms of HIV infections."

Still in the ambit of the European Community, it is worth remembering the "European Plan of Action against Drugs" of the Anti-Drugs Committee; the Council of Europe held in Rome on 13 and 14 December 1990 also underlined the need, in the approach towards drug addicts, to establish intermediate objectives in addition to the primary aim of the abandonment of drugs, taking account in particular of the needs to reduce, through appropriate forms of treatment, morbidity and mortality related to the parenteral use of drugs.

5. Depenalization in Italy as a result of the referendum of 18 April 1993

The experience and the results of the Italian referendum on certain aspects of the system of sanctions regarding the use of drugs are a recent victory in the battle to modify the repressive system stemming from the 1988 Convention.

Following the recent referendum, which was promoted by the Radical Party, the penal sanctions regarding the use of drugs have been abrogated. The use of narcotic or psychotropic substances is only subject to administrative sanctions in the case of refusal to follow, or interruption of, therapeutic and rehabilitation programmes.

In evaluating the admissibility of the text of the referendum, the Italian Constitutional Court did not identify any conflict with the New York Convention of 1961 or the Vienna Convention of 1988.

The result of the Italian referendum, however, means that the use of drugs is no longer classified as "illegal". It would seem, therefore, that the new provision which implements the referendum results (DPR 5 June 1993, no. 171, Official Gazzette no. 130 of 5 June 1993) creates a substantial conflict between the provisions of the Vienna Convention and the situation of the Italian legislation which, in conformity with the obligation pacta sunt servanda, must "adhere" to the international commitment, otherwise the international responsibility of the Italian State will be undermined.

Article 22 of the Vienna Convention of 1971 (rendered executive by law no. 385 of 25 June 1981) also appears to be in conflict with the result of the referendum, which lays down that the personal use of drugs cannot be considered a "punishable offence", least of all through "imprisonment or other penalties involving loss of liberty".

6. The procedure for the denouncement or emendment of the international agreements

It is therefore necessary to work for the modification of the above-mentioned agreements according to the procedures laid down for the purpose by each Convention.

The 1988 Convention allows the possibility both of emendment and denouncement. In view of the length of the process for the emendation of provisions, it could be possible to begin with a request for a denouncement of the entire Convention (article 30), which would take effect one year after the date on which it is received by the Secretary General.

As far as the other two Conventions are concerned, a considerable number of denouncements would lead to the invalidation of the conventions in their entirety and with respect to all the contracting parties (article 46 of the 1971 Convention). Therefore denouncement by a number of States could bring down the present system of conventions following concerted action by a number of States involving modification of the anti-drugs system in an anti-prohibitionist direction. According to the procedures for emendment laid down by the Conventions of 1961 and 1971, any party can propose an emendment to the Convention. The Economic and Social Council of the United Nations (ECOSOC) - which is the organ that manages the conventions - can decide to convene a Revision Conferencene or ask in advance whether the parties accept an emendment presented by a single State. If any State rejects the emendment, the Council can decide to convene a Revision Conference. If, on the other hand, no objections to the emendment are forthcom

ing, then the emendment comes into force for all States eighteen months after it has been circulated. This is evidently a hypothesis that can only be applied to minor emendments.

The 1988 Convention reproduces the same emendment procedure, but makes the original text "untouchable" in that any emendments will be included in an ad hoc Protocol which will be binding only for those States that manifest their explicit agreement on the matter.

As is clear, the procedure for emendation of the Conventions is subject to the "filter" of a majority of the member States of the ECOSOC. Moreover, in the case of the 1988 Convention, emendments can only be binding for all member States if it is adopted by a Revision Conference.

The denouncement of the Conventions by a certain number of States may therefore render the repressive system laid down in them more "vulnerable".

AIDS

SUMMARY: The global response to the Aids pandemia is still inadequate and highly unrealistic. There is great controversy over the interventions and the prevention strategies to be followed. It is necessary, above all, to work towards harm reduction.

1) defence of persons with HIV and Aids, for the defence of their human rights and the rejection of all forms of discrimination; a campaign to convince states to provide better information and an efficient policy of prevention and of control and monitoring of the measures adopted and their consequences;

2) we must encourage the provision of medicines, promote the distribution of condoms, encourage information in schools and in the media, ensure adequate supplies of incontaminated blood in hospitals, implement syringe exchange programmes for drug addicts, guarantee the right to health and information in areas such as Africa and Asia, improve the status of women and their right to safer sex, and reduce the imbalance in investments to discourage mass emigration.

Institutional objectives:

1) The implementation and respect of the Convention on the Rights of Children and the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (UN);

2) Emendment of the UN Convention against the illegal traffic of narcotics and psychotropic substances (1988).

A pragmatic strategy

The first thing which strikes us in discussions of Aids is the rate of growth of the phenomenon. More than 13 million people around the world have been infected since the beginning of the epidemic. The highest number of cases is still in sub-Saharian Africa, with more than eight million, but the greatest increase last year was in Latin America and South-East Asia, each with 1.5 million cases. Altogether, around three-quarters of the people infected have contacted the disease in the course of sexual relations, and heterosexual transmission is increasing. In Europe, the exchange of infected syringes is responsible for one third of cases, 50% more than in the mid-Eighties. Mother-child transmission is also increasing: about one million cases so far.

The following are some of the most serious situations: in Thailand, at the beginning of 1990 there were 50,000 cases of HIV, whilst at the end of 1992 the number had risen to 450,000, almost ten times higher (the assumption of intravenous drugs is spreading in Asia, with the result that there is a proliferation of transmission between heterosexuals who are not addicts); in Zimbabwe alone 600,000 people have contacted the virus; in Abidjan, in the Ivory Coast, between 10% and 12% of the adult population are affected; in Eastern Europe, the economic crisis, the sudden political and social changes, and the movement of entire populations have made it very difficult to implement serious health and prevention programmes, causing a sharp rise in the statistics (WHO figures).

The global response to the Aids pandemia is still inadequate and highly unrealistic, and to approach the phenomenon in a pragmatic way, in a period in which the institutions and the media are clearly less interested, may seem to be an approach that goes against the current. In the light of this general negligence and irrationality, it is not surprising that there is controversy over which interventions and prevention strategies to adopt. It is therefore necessary to promote the use of precautions and universal behaviour in the face of Aids, above all by working towards risk reduction: a clean syringe in exchange for a dirty syringe, methadone instead of street heroin, safe sex rather than abstinence.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN

- intervention in defence of persons with HIV and Aids: their human rights must be respected and no form of discrimination must be tolerated (mechanisms of classification and segregation, like all coercive measures, are unmotivated, whilst we must unfortunately note that in many Western countries acts of discrimination continue to take place in the workplace, against the immigrant population, and against prison inmates). If on one hand persons with HIV and Aids have the right to non-discrimination, governments must also provide adequate information on the progress of the epidemic and must develop adequate prevention programmes: national and supernational bodies must constantly monitor the short-term and long-term consequences of the measures taken.

- provision of the currently used medicines, at reasonable prices, to infected persons, wherever they may be.

- promotion and distribution of condoms among populations (in the absence of completely effective means of prevention, the condom continues to be "the least dangerous means possible").

- campaign for information and education in schools and in the media (in that there are no longer easily identifiable high-risk categories such as homosexuals, prostitutes, etc.).

- provision of guaranteed supplies of uncontaminated blood in hospitals.

- implementation of syringe exchange programmes for users of intravenous drugs.

- campaign for the right to health and to information (whilst in other areas there is some degree of debate on which measures to adopt, in Africa and Asia there is a complete lack of debate).

- improvement of the status of women. In many parts of the world women are not in a position to protect themselves from infection through a mere act of will as they are unable to control or negotiate safe sex, including the use of condoms.

- reduction of the imbalances in investments which ultimately encourage mass emigration, drawing on the experience of the Western world to ensure that countries which are currently in the throes of transformation do not relax their guard.

In short, we must put an end to measures that do not work. We must face up to the reality of risk reduction. We must prevent Aids from becoming like cancer, that is a disease accepted as an act of God, only because those who had the power to do something have lost interest and those who had no power have had no choice.

THE COSTS

At the recent Congress in Berlin, the World Health Organization estimated that it would cost 2.5 billion dollars a year to cause a turnaround in the trend of the pandemia. This expediture (equivalent to a can of coca-cola for every person in the world) must be considered as an investment with potentially enormous returns: not only the direct costs of health spending but also much greater indirect costs, especially the income lost through death or illness. The WHO estimates that an investment 2.5 million dollars a year would mean a saving of around 90 billion dollars in indirect costs by the year 2000.

INSTITUTIONAL OBJECTIVES

Despite the global nature of the pandemia, at the moment there are no international laws on Aids, a sign of the lack of consistency with which the battle has been carried out so far. The absence of a legal framework and of any international body with powers in both health and social terms makes it difficult to identify an institutional objective. However, if we face the question in a pragmatic manner, a number of paths can be taken.

- implementation and respect of the Convention on the Rights of Children and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (UN).

- emendment of the United Nations Convention against the illegal traffic of narcotics and psychotropic drugs (1988), with the aim of introducing a link between Aids and the concept of reduction of health and social risk.

- campaign to give a special mandate to the WHO, and to make the resulting recommendations on Aids strictly binding for member countries.

INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE

SUMMARY: The right to language must now be considered as a "fundamental, explicit, autonomous right, a preliminary requisite for the exercise of the other fundamental rights." This right must be based on the recognition of the principle of the dignity and the equality of all languages. Today, for historical reasons, not all languages enjoy the same dignity and equality: some languages are more important than others, some languages are dominant and others are dominated, some are international and others are local, etc.

Individual countries have produced laws on the safeguard of these principles, sometimes in a praiseworthy manner, at other times in a way that can be criticized. We must uphold and promote the recognition and the juridical consecration of the right to language as an individual and collective right, going beyond article 27 of the international Pact on civil and political rights (1976), appreciable and valid though it is.

Whilst the defence and the promotion of the linguistic wealth of the world must be developed, it is also necessary to select an "international" language. In order to prevent one language from dominating all others, the international language must be "super partes" and "neutral". A language of this type already exists: Esperanto.

In Italy, the Radical Party has set up a parliamentary Intergroup on language and the reform of language policy. Within the EEC, a Task Force has been set up with the aim of presenting the study on Esperanto requested by the Commission on 26 November 1992. There are also initiatives in the ambit of UNESCO. We propose the constitution of "federalist intergroups on language and the reform of language policy" in the various parliaments, and the presentation of policy motions.

The right to language

We intend to uphold, in a political sense, the right to language, which must be considered as a "fundamental, explicit and autonomous right, a preliminary requisite for the exercise of the other fundamental rights".

The right to language is based on two fundamental and interdependent principles: the principle of the dignity and the principle of the equality of all languages.

Unfortunately, for historical reasons which are more or less clear, not all languages are equal. There are important languages, dominant languages and dominated languages, languages which are more or less international and languages which are more or less local.

When governments legislate on the subject of language, all they do is legally plan the use of one or several languages, protecting or promoting more particularly one or several languages more than others, in the attempt to re-establish a more equal cultural balance among the different languages present in their political territory. They do so by creating new rights and new duties of a linguistic nature. If governments really legislate in this direction, recognizing and consecrating the right to language and its two fundamental principles, they are worthy of praise. If, however, they do so in order to protect and promote in a discriminatory or hierarchical manner one or more languages, or, as sometimes happens, the language of the majority, they are anything but worthy of praise.

It is therefore increasingly clear that there is a need to recognize and consecrate, from a juridical point of view, the right to language. It is an individual and collective right which must no longer be considered an implicit right - deriving, amongst other things, from freedom of expression, a fundamental, explicit right - but as a fundamental, explicit and autonomous right, a preliminary requisite for the exercise of the other fundamental rights. Article 27 of the international Pact on civil and political rights (1976), which to some extent recognizes and consecrates the right to language, is an excellent initiative. But we need to go further.

In reality, recognition and consecration of the right to language means recognition and consecration of the "Tower of Babel", the symbol of individual and collective cultural differences and peculiarities. The fact that there are thousands of national and local languages inevitably creates the need for one or more international languages. Latin, Greek, or French in the past, English today, perhaps Japanese or Portuguese in the future - "international" languages, or rather national or local languages which achieve political hegemony over other languages. Is it normal for a national or local language, which is the manifestation of a particular culture, to assume the role of international language? What are the consequences for the other national and local languages and cultures? What are the consequences for the language and the culture which have become international?

In order to avoid the consequences, which are often negative, and not only in the linguistic field, in that any manifestation of hegemony is undoubtedly dangerous, one solution already exists: Esperanto.

Esperanto, a language which in a certain sense is artificial, is naturally an international language, and therefore does not interfere with other languages which are naturally not international and artificially international. From this point of view it is a "neutral" language.

If we really believe in the right to language as a fundamental right par excellence, if we believe in its two principles, the dignity and the equality of all languages, then the time has come to encourage the spread of Esperanto as an international language, without interfering, however, with the vitality of the different national and local languages. In fact the best and most intelligent way of fighting a potentially serious calamity, the "war of languages", is to recognize and consecrate the right to language and the importance of a neutral international language.

(this section is a synthesis of statements made by Pannella and by Prof. Joseph Turi, a Canadian Esperantist: not that it is necessary to acknowledge quotations, but just to let you know where I took these exceptional thoughts from)

In Italy the activity of several Radical deputies has led to the constitution of the Federalist Intergroup on Language and for the Reform of Language Policy, and the Ministry of Education recently set up a Ministerial Commission on the International Language as an Instrument of Linguitsic Orientation and Transnational Communication.

At EEC level, the President of the Culture Commission of the European Parliament, Antonio La Pergola, set up a task force to present, in the near future, the study on Esperanto requested by the Commission on 26 November 1992; at the same an initial group of Euro-MPs has adhered to the plan to form a Federalist Intergroup on Language and for the Reform of Language Policy.

In the ambit of the UN, it is worth recalling that UNESCO has already declared itself in favour of Esperanto in two resolutions (1954 and 1985), which almost all the member states of the organization have so far failed to comply with.

Possible initiatives:

a) Constitution of "Federalist Intergroups on Language and for the Reform of Language Policy" in the various parliaments.

b) Motions of other policy-making instruments in the various parliaments which oblige the respective governments or Education Ministers to comply in full with the UNESCO resolutions and institute a study Commission, along the lines of the Italian Commission, on the Language-Teaching and Communication potential of the International Language.

At the same time, in collaboration with Esperantist groups, militant initiatives could be organized to take place at the same time in various capitals, to call attention to the two resolutions, perhaps on the occasion of the date of issue of the second: 8 November 1993.

A feasibility study could be carried out on the possibility of launching a manifesto-appeal "for linguistic democracy in Europe and the world", to be signed by parliamentarians, Nobel prize winners, and leading figures from the world of art and culture and to be addressed to the presidents of the principal international institutions: the Council of Ministers, the Commission of the European Community, the European Parliament, the Council of Europe, the CSCE...

Choice of initiatives

As I said at the beginning, it is now necessary to decide on furure projects on the basis of this "panorama" of possible initiatives. This is our most difficult and probably most controversial task.

On our capacity to decide, however, we will stake the credibility of the party, its identity as an organization which, unlike the many meritorious NGOs, sees its fundamental purpose not only in the agitation of problems and the theoretical definition of solutions but also in the achievement of precise objectives, the creation of new positive international legislation through the adoption of international laws which are binding for all states, through the democratic reform of national institutions, and through nonviolent political and parliamentary campaigns.

The political instrument for these battles

In order to do all this, the first problem is to create a political instrument - the Radical Party - which is suited and equipped for the task. Our priority continues to be the construction of a party which is not geographically unbalanced as it is at present, with very few members in highly industrialized countries (apart from Italy). It would in fact be vain to think that we could have any effect on the problems of international politics if we are not able to create some pockets, however small, of strong pressure within the countries that have so much influence on international decisions.

It is therefore necessary to add another criterion for the choice of initiatives to be followed: the possibility of carrying them out in also in the most industrialized countries.

Another requirement which immediately emerges as we examine the initiatives outlined above is the operational and information-exchange liaison between parliamentarians in the Radical Party, the members of the General Council and party activists.

All the proposals, in fact, involve highly organized campaigns in the different countries and parliaments, with the necessity for constant and reciprocal exchange of information on the results obtained and on the subsequent deadlines and objectives. Since it is clearly not possible to organize many meetings of the two main party organs (each meeting costs $400,000), it is absolutely necessary to set up an efficient communication network which allows this kind of rapid exchange of information. Otherwise all the work which we have planned during this meeting will be rendered vain.

We have settled on three instruments of information and communication which could be further analysed in the course of this meeting: a weekly or fortnightly news-sheet addressed to parliamentarians in the Radical Party, activists and other parliamentarians interested in our activities; the "Agorà" computer network, and naturally the party newspaper, "The New Party".

This means that we must all make every possible effort to equip ourselves, also in terms of communication technology, in order to become a part of this network which, despite the fact that it is based on sophisticated technologies, can be used without enormous expenditure.