Intergovernmental Conference
25 February 2000
OPINION of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality
to the Committee on Constitutional Affairs
regarding the proposals of the European Parliament for the Intergovernmental Conference
(14094/1999 – C5-0341/1999) –1999/0825(CNS))
Draftswoman: Anna Karamanou
HISTORY OF THE PROCEDURE
At its meeting on 21 September 1999, the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality appointed Ms. Anna Karamanou as the draftswoman.
At its meetings on 24 November 1999, 26 January 2000, and 23 February 2000, the committee examined the draft opinion.
At the last meeting mentioned above, the committee approved the following conclusions with 14 votes in favor and 4 abstentions.
The following members were present during the vote: Theorin, Chair; Van Lancker, Vice-Chair; Anna Karamanou, Draftswoman; Auroi (substituting for Hautala), Aviles Perea, Dybkjær, Ghilardotti, Gorostiaga Atxalandabaso, Gröner, Izquierdo Rojo (substituting for Paciotti), Lulling, Martens, Prets, Sanders-Ten Holte, Schmidt (substituting for van der Laan), Smet, Swiebel, and Torres Marques.
SUMMARY OF THE RATIONALE
INTRODUCTION
Background
The Intergovernmental Conference
1. The conclusions of the European Council in Cologne (June 1999) and the European Council in Helsinki (December 1999) set the framework for the Intergovernmental Conference to be convened in February 2000 in order to address the institutional issues left unresolved in Amsterdam, which must be settled before enlargement.
2. According to the conclusions of Cologne, the mandate of the Intergovernmental Conference will cover three key areas: the size and composition of the European Commission; the weighting of votes in the Council; and the possible extension of qualified majority voting in the Council.[1].
3. The agenda for the IGC approved by the European Council in Helsinki does not substantially expand this mandate. In its resolution of December 16, 1999[2], the Parliament expressed its disappointment and condemned the lack of political vision on the part of the European Council, which limited institutional reform during the IGC to the three outstanding issues from Amsterdam. The European Parliament believes that this reform is insufficient to ensure the effective functioning of an enlarged Europe.
4. The draftswoman of this opinion shares this view and calls on the Portuguese Presidency to utilize, in accordance with the mandate given in Helsinki, the opportunity to add further items to the agenda. The EU must fully take advantage of this opportunity not only to reform its institutions—where, from the perspective of our committee, the goal is to ensure the representation and political participation of women in the community decision-making processes—but also to complete the policy reforms that began with the Amsterdam Treaty, particularly concerning the promotion of gender equality (Articles 2 and 3).
5. The Amsterdam Treaty represented a step forward for women. In its opinion[3], our committee expressed an overall positive view. Equality for women and men has become both a principle and a goal of the Community, and Articles 2 and 3 together provide the basis for an effective Community strategy in this area. Additionally, Articles 137(1) and 141(3) and (4) also represent some progress.
6. Our committee also pointed out certain gaps and declared priorities for the next revision of the Treaty:
– expanding Article 141 to ensure a legal basis for equality between men and women that clearly goes beyond the scope of employment;
– revising Article 13 to establish the prohibition of gender-based discrimination as immediately applicable;
– legally clarifying the implications of including equality for women and men in Articles 2 and 3.
7. Based on this background, the draftswoman of this opinion wishes to focus on the following issues:
– gender balance in the composition of the institutions and bodies of the European Union;
– a clear legal basis for equality in the Treaty;
– avoidance of gender-based discrimination;
– positive actions;
The first issue falls within the current, particularly limited mandate of the IGC, while the others are a logical consequence of the policy changes introduced by the Amsterdam Treaty and should be added to the agenda.
a) gender balance in the composition of the institutions and bodies of the European Union
8. In its resolution of November 18, 1999, based on the report by Dimitrakopoulos and Leinen (A5-0058/1999)[4], the Parliament expressed its views on the method and agenda of the IGC. The main goal should be to strengthen the institutions and make them more effective, transparent, and democratic, through changes in their composition, functions, cooperation, and organization. Regarding the substance of the reform, the European Parliament recommended that the Union be “constitutionalized” and that Europe come closer to its citizens, which in turn is linked to the issue of the Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights.
9. Making the institutions more democratic also means ensuring gender balance in their composition. There is a significant body of international treaties and mechanisms regarding women’s equal access and full participation in power structures and decision-making, to which the member states of the European Union have acceded. We will specifically mention:
– the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW);
– the Declaration and Platform for Action of the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing, 1995);
the Council Recommendation of December 2, 1996, regarding the balanced participation of women and men in the decision-making process[5] which called, among other things, for the institutions and other bodies and decentralized organizations of the European Communities to develop a strategy for achieving balanced participation of women and men in decision-making processes;[6]·
– the 1988 declaration of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe;
the Declaration approved by the member states at the European Conference “Women and Men in Power” in Paris on April 17, 1999;[7].
10. Equality is an integral part of human rights, and the elimination of gender discrimination is a prerequisite for democracy. A democracy in which women—over half the population—are underrepresented in decision-making in the political, economic, and social sectors cannot be a true democracy. The draftswoman of this opinion advocates for the concept of democratic equality, as developed by the Council of Europe, as a means to enrich democracy through the equal contribution of men and women, ensuring the fullest realization of justice and equality within society. [8]The integration of “gender equality” into all Community policies will only become a reality if women participate in the formulation and implementation of these policies at all levels. This, in turn, depends on representation in decision-making bodies and requires the presence of women in responsible positions and decision-making roles.[9].
11. Women continue to be underrepresented in decision-making bodies at all levels and within European institutions. The draftswoman of this opinion would recommend revising the relevant articles of the Treaties to ensure balanced participation of women and men in the composition of the following institutions and bodies of the European Union: Commission; Court of Justice; Court of First Instance; Court of Auditors; Economic and Social Committee; Committee of the Regions.
12. Όσον αφορά το Κοινοβούλιο, ο στόχος αυτός μπορεί να επιτευχθεί με την εξασφάλιση ισόρροπης συμμετοχής των γυναικών και των ανδρών στις εκλόγιμες θέσεις των ψηφοδελτίων, προκειμένου να ξεπεραστούν πολιτικά εμπόδια που τίθενται λόγω των διαδικασιών επιλογής υποψηφίων από τα πολιτικά κόμματα και λόγω του εκλογικού συστήματος[10]. Η συντάκτρια της γνωμοδότησης θα συνιστούσε αναθεώρηση των άρθρων 190(1) και 191(ευρωπαϊκά πολιτικά κόμματα).
b) The legal basis for equality
13. The Amsterdam Treaty represented a step forward for women. Articles 2 and 3 provide the foundation for an effective policy, but no article in Section III of the Treaty explicitly outlines measures for achieving and implementing equality in all areas of policy beyond employment and the professional sector (Article 141). The request for a specific chapter in the Treaty dedicated to equality was not accepted by the previous IGC. In order to further expand the existing provisions of Articles 2 and 3, the draftswoman would recommend establishing a unified legal basis for equality between men and women across all areas of policy in the Treaty.
c) Avoidance of gender-based discrimination
14. As stated in the Torres Marques opinion, Article 13 on the avoidance of discrimination is inadequate both politically and legally. Women are not a minority; they represent over half of the population. Gender-based discrimination is structural and horizontal and cannot be grouped with other forms of discrimination. Instead, it adds to other types of discrimination. Furthermore, Article 13 is merely a permissive clause without direct effect, as is the case with Article 12 (avoidance of discrimination based on nationality). Lastly, it allows for measures to combat discrimination based on a process that requires unanimity in the Council and simple consultation of Parliament. The draftswoman of the opinion proposes that a separate provision be included in the Treaty to ensure that the avoidance of gender discrimination has the same legal status as the avoidance of discrimination based on nationality, and that it has direct effect.
d) Positive actions
15. Η συντάκτρια γνωμοδότησης παραπέμπει στις απόψεις που εκφράζονται στη γνωμοδότηση της Επιτροπής για τα Δικαιώματα της Γυναίκας και τις Ίσες Ευκαιρίες σχετικά με το Χάρτη των Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων[11]. Η ουδέτερη από άποψη φύλου διατύπωση του άρθρου 141(4)[12] πρέπει να επανεξετασθεί, σύμφωνα με την πολιτική βούληση προώθησης της θέσης των γυναικών η οποία εκφράζεται στην κοινοτική πολιτική για προώθηση της ισότητας γυναικών και ανδρών (άρθρα 2 και 3 της Συνθήκης ΕΚ).
CONCLUSIONS
The Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality calls on the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, which is responsible for the substance, to incorporate the following conclusions into its report:
1. Calls for a more ambitious agenda for the Intergovernmental Conference and urges the Portuguese Presidency, in accordance with the mandate provided by the Helsinki European Council regarding proposals for additional agenda items, to include the issue of gender equality in the agenda of the IGC.
2. States that balanced participation of women and men in decision-making at all levels is a prerequisite for democracy and social justice, and calls for the amendment of the relevant articles of the Treaties to include the principle of balanced participation of women and men in the composition of the Commission, the Court of Justice, the General Court, the Court of Auditors, the Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions.
3. Calls for a unified and coherent legal basis for equality between women and men to be introduced into the Treaty, covering all areas of policy.
4. Emphasizes that gender discrimination is structural and horizontal and cannot be grouped together with other forms of discrimination; calls for a separate provision in the Treaty to ensure that the prohibition of discrimination based on gender has the same legal status as the prohibition of discrimination based on nationality and that it has direct effect.
5. It emphasizes the need for a close connection between the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the process of drafting it; within the framework of the “constitutionalization” of the Union, it calls for the inclusion of the fundamental right to equality between women and men in community law.
[1] The Conference could also address other amendments to the Treaty, insofar as they relate to European institutions within the context of the above points and in cases where the amendments arise from the implementation of the Amsterdam Treaty.
[2] Summary Minutes of December 16, 1999, Section II, Point 5.
[3] AD/337741 – PE 223.233/final; Rapporteur: Helena Torres Marques.
[4] Summary Minutes of November 18, 1999, Section II, Point 4.
[5] EU L 319, December 10, 1996.
[6] At the same time, it recommends to the member states: “I.4(b) to raise awareness among stakeholders regarding the importance of taking initiatives to achieve the participation of women and men in public positions at all levels, giving particular attention to promoting a balanced composition of various committees and working groups both at national and community levels.”
[7] The statement indicates that European institutions, governments, and political parties must take the necessary measures, including binding and/or encouraging measures, both in the electoral sector and in the appointment of members to advisory bodies involved in public decision-making, with the aim of ensuring balanced participation of women and men.
[8] Council Recommendation of December 2, 1996, Recital 10: “That the poor representation of women in decision-making positions constitutes a loss for society as a whole and may hinder the full consideration of the interests and needs of the entire population.”
[9] Recommendation of the Council of December 1, 1996, Recital 6.
[10] See also Recommendation 1413(1999) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe regarding equal representation in political life.
[11] PE 232.347/final.
[12] In order to ensure full equality between men and women in the workplace, the principle of equal treatment does not prevent member states from maintaining or establishing measures that provide specific advantages, which facilitate the less represented gender in continuing a professional activity or prevent or compensate for disadvantages in their career progression.