WUNRN
COUNCIL OF EUROPE
COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
[20/08/07] The
distribution of power between men and women is still very unequal. This was the
underlying motivation for a milestone recommendation
by the Council of Europe four years ago. The Committee of Ministers agreed on
action for “balanced participation of women and men in political and public
decision-making”. The idea was to open the door for women into positions of
power. The time has come to start assessing the results.
Interestingly, the Committee defined a precise benchmark. It stated that
balanced participation in decision-making bodies meant that the representation
of either women or men should not fall below 40 %.
A survey in September 2005 indicated that only one country, Sweden, had reached
that level in the national parliament, while apart from the other Scandinavian
countries, Austria, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and Spain were not far
behind. In half of Europe, the representation of women was below 20 % and seven
countries had less than 10 % (Albania, Armenia, Hungary, Italy, Malta, Turkey
and Ukraine).
In some of these countries there have been elections since then and the
situation has improved somewhat. However, the pattern is still very clear –
there is a long way to go until the goal of 40 % is reached in our European
parliaments .
The situation is similar in governments. Three countries had reached a complete
balance of fifty-fifty - Austria, Spain and Sweden - while eight governments
had no female representation at all and the average was below 20 %.
The Council of Europe is no exception. In the Parliamentary Assembly no more than 26% of the members are women and in the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities the figure is 27%. Among the Ambassadors in Strasbourg only 13% are women and among the 46 current Foreign Ministers not more than five (11%) are female.
The result is that progress towards gender balance is too slow. What ought
to be done?
The Committee of Ministers in its 2003
recommendation asked for special measures to stimulate and support women’s
will to participate in political and public decision-making. Such efforts are
needed, especially in regions where patriarchal attitudes remain and women are
kept on the sidelines. Social and family policies which help women to return to
work after having children, ensure that women remain in active employment and
feel able to join in on the political debate.
There has been indeed some progress in this regard. For instance, recent
reports from Turkey indicate that some women are themselves seeking political
positions. These are encouraging signs.
However, the Committee of Ministers went further and raised the issue of
quotas. It recommended that member states “consider setting targets linked to a
time scale with a view of reaching balanced participation of women and men in
political and public decision-making.”
This approach is controversial. It has been said that quotas imply a form of
discrimination against those not qualifying. Another argument has been that
those favored through such target-setting might not be respected as fully
competent as they got “help”. It has also been proposed that a target can
merely preserve the status quo if it is not sufficiently ambitious.
Admittedly, positive discrimination can have negative consequences and should
therefore only be used when there is an objective and reasonable justification
for such measures. The underlying idea is however important: to compensate for
a deep-rooted negative discrimination in order to break habits and perceptions
which perpetuate the inequality. Indeed, gender quotas can, in my opinion,
contribute to attitude change and thereby further progress.
Obligatory legal quotas are still unusual in Europe, while it is more common
that countries try various forms of voluntary targets. In some cases the mere
threat of a binding regulation has spurred political parties to rethink their
nomination procedures.
In Spain and some other countries, the breakthrough started inside one or some
of the political parties – for instance through a decision that every second
candidate on the party list for the election should be a women. The list of
nominations for the post of judge to the European Court of Human Rights, should
also now contain candidates of both sexes to ensure a better gender balance.
In these countries it is now rather an electoral disadvantage not to be able to
bring forward a gender balanced list. In fact, gender targets are no longer
necessary; the nomination process has become self-correcting. This is what
should become the normalcy.
Is this important? Yes, very.
• It is a matter of the full enjoyment of human rights and social justice for
everyone.
• It is about genuine democracy. A society where half of the population is more
or less excluded from political participation is not fully democratic.
• It is a necessity in order to avoid the waste of intellectual and other human
resources.
• It would – as the Committee of Ministers put it – “lead to better and more
efficient policy making through the redefinition of political priorities and
the placing of new issues on the political agenda as well as to the improvement
of quality of life for all”.
Thomas Hammarberg
================================================================
To leave the list, send your request by email to:
wunrn_listserve-request@lists.wunrn.com. Thank you.