The easy part about being the last speaker is that everything has been said by previous speakers. The challenge is that if people are not yet asleep, they will be in the end of your intervention. I will try therefore to be brief, as many things have been said which I fully agree with. I would like to make three points. First, 10 years ago, the communist bloc collapsed and we entered into a phase of transition - what has been achieved since then, where do we stand today and what are the challenges ahead. Second, as has already been addressed by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, in the aftermath of the 11 September attacks, many things have changed around us and will continue to change. How will this impact human rights and fundamental freedoms? Third, respect for human rights and building up of democratic institutions are closely connected to each other, and interdependent with security, long-term stability and economic development. I think this is not stressed enough, I just come from a seminar where there were three working groups on the three topics, democratic institution building, security policy and economic development, and too many people still think inside the box and do not make the effort to connect the boxes together. I think this is one of the main challenges and I will finish by addressing it. It is a symbol that this conference takes place in a city which ten years ago this month was bombed from the sea and from the land and where the citizens of the city of Dubrovnik were living under a constant fear, uncertain of whether their city would be invaded, shelled to pieces or ethnically cleansed. In these ten years, so much development and change has taken place, that today, when we sit here together and walk the streets of the beautiful historic Dubrovnik, all that seems just like a bad dream. But we should think also that a year ago in this month, Mr Milosevic was still ruling the neighbouring country, and today we have for the first time since a decade, since the beginning of the war in the former Yugoslavia, democratically elected government in each and every country of the region. You have a glimpse into the kind of problems but also into the kind of achievements that have been made, but you have also the sense of the need for patience. However, a number of challenges remain. These challenges have to be addressed as we have increasingly done so in the last ten years, through cooperation with the relevant international and regional organisations. I am glad to say that we are in this context in a constant, daily contact on working level both with the Council of Europe but also with the High Commissioner's staff on issues such as trafficking or programme co-operation, and if there is one person who has made possible some of our achievements today, it is Ms Daniela Napoli, who started in 1997 discussing how the EU Commission could support institution and democracy building projects in the OSCE area through the ODIHR. Today, our projects are financed in many places up to 70% by the European Commission, and I would like to express my gratitude. The whole region of Europe or rather the whole OSCE region, has in the last ten years gone through some fundamental political changes leading sometimes to devastation, sometimes to more constructive change. A number of achievements can be mentioned, which have brought some satisfaction and some motivation for us to continue our work: Equally, we have to take stock of some of the concerns and challenges ahead. In the field of rule of law we have noticed encouraging signs in a numbers of countries, bringing their laws in compliance with international standards and an increasing number of requests from many participating States for legal assistance, training for judges, prosecutors, defence attorneys etc. In the field of the penitentiary systems ministries of interior have transferred their powers to the ministries of justice and old structures stemming from the days of the communism have been replaced by structures which are in accordance with Council of Europe and international standards. Certainly, the motivation of joining the Council of Europe has helped a lot to give some pace to these changes. But despite this progress, one of the challenges remains the implementation of new legislation. And despite progress in the field of rule of law, one of the concerns we have in the OSCE region is the lack of independence of the judiciary, and without an independent judiciary you don't only refuse to the individual citizen the recourse to the legal system but you also deter economic development, because predictability is essential for investors, and predictability implies that the rules of the game are set and not changed all the time, and therefore we have to see also that many things that we are doing have broader implications. I will come back to this later. The emergence and development of strong civil society is one of the lighthouses for the future. In many states where there was no tradition of independent NGOs ten years ago, NGOs exist today, and they are developing into a vibrant NGO community, which is at times challenging state authorities and playing a vital role in civic development. This has been one of the successes of our work. Even in countries where NGOs are faced with difficulties and harassment, they do exist, with a few exceptions. It is impossible to suppress completely the emergence of civil society, as it reflects the will and the aspiration of a new and bold generation. We have to nurture and to support this. However, we have seen in the recent two years increasing signs of backtracking on the progress achieved, and more and more NGOs and human rights activists are considered as political opposition and are therefore harassed, at times arrested, at times they just disappear. In the field of freedom of movement/migration we have noted some progress in the former communist regimes where the elimination of the propiska system has been replaced by modern registration systems. However we have also seen the re-establishment of exit visas in many states, which is again not only against individual freedoms but also hampering economic development. Also there are still too many IDPs and refugees in the OSCE area and beyond, and their number is not going to decrease in the near future. A concern for all of us is the situation in IDP and refugee camps which provide an ample ground for growth of extremism and are a source for human rights violations. The international community should therefore focus more on the protection of IDPs. In the field of gender and gender awareness there is for the first time a dialogue emerging between NGOs and governments in a number of States. The ODIHR gender training programmes for ministry officials, police, and other law enforcement officials provides a good example of how the ODIHR can bring added value. There is also some backtracking: in some countries of the region - I think of Central Asia - there seems to have been much more gender awareness and equal opportunities in the Soviet days, probably the cultural factor plays a role here. Finally, there are lots of worrying developments and negative things to be said about trafficking in human beings, but one positive element is that awareness about the problem is raising. Before 1999 almost nobody was aware of trafficking, although the problem had developed over the previous ten years and had already become one of the main challenges in terms of fighting organized crime and in terms of human rights violations. The problem is that there has been too much lip-service and not enough political will; coordinators have been appointed, plans of actions are made in different countries, but nevertheless, it is still considered by many as something which is a necessary evil. We have to remember that this is one of the major sources of income for organised crime, and in this context we have to remember in particular the link between political extremism, terrorism and organised crime to see that this goes much beyond sex trade and prostitution, or people smuggling. I do hope that the fight against trafficking will gain further momentum and credibility in the coming years. A number of challenges remain to be met and it is clear that ten years have not been enough to develop sustainable democracies all over the OSCE area. Sustainable democracy is still a distant concept in many countries. We have to be aware that ordinary people in many countries see market economy and democracy increasingly as a bad word because they are not better off than before. Ordinary people are fed up with seeing a small percentage of the population being well-off, driving luxury cars, while they feel they are in a much worse situation than during the days of communism, with pensions and salaries not being paid and things going from bad to worse every year. This is not the kind of development which will convince the people of the value of a market economy and democracy. We have to see that just having elections, with not enough institution building around it, both before and after, is something which has a tendency to turn the elections amongst the ordinary people into ridicule. This frustration has to be taken into account very seriously, because it can lay ground to all sorts of political changes in the next decade. This explains why, in certain states, as I recently observed in Belarus, there is support for the status quo among a vast majority of the population whether we like it or not. We have to ask why this is the case. The answer is that when the people can only watch certain channels of the television showing them the state of development in the CIS, they believe that in fact they are better off in the structure of the good-old-days. Terrorism. The tragic events of 11 September have now brought the danger of terrorism on our agendas in a totally new way. We face the vast task of eradicating this perverse and evil phenomenon, but equally we have to consider how we can fight against it, without doing exactly what the terrorists have been aiming for, without jeopardizing the basic values which we cherish and hold as pedestals for our societies - democracy and respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms. I want to stress three points in this respect. It is understandable and acceptable under the present circumstances that states need to take action against the rising threat of terrorism through for example emergency legislation. But the fight against terrorism should not be fought at the cost of civil liberties and fundamental freedoms. I think human rights institutions, all of us here, have to be a watchdog. The measures against terrorism should be proportionate, targeted and serve their purpose. Second, a number of countries may be tempted to use the opportunity to crack down on human rights activists or those who are critical of the government. They might try to use the fact that the attention is drawn elsewhere, to try to get away with arresting some journalists who are critical of the government, in the pretext of fighting terrorism, etc. We have to monitor this type of risk very closely. The issue of indiscriminate vengeance has been mentioned by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe. The fight against terrorism is certainly not a fight between civilisations or fight against Islam. We are clearly fighting a very small minority of people who do not hesitate to violate the fundamental principles of human rights. Thirdly, we have to reflect on what we can do in the field of our mandates to help combat terrorism. We should for example address issues which are linked to terrorism through organized crime. Trafficking in human beings, besides being a flagrant human rights violation and a new form of slavery, is the fastest growing crime we are witnessing and the fastest growing source of income for criminal organizations. And we need to stress here the plausible link between organized crime and terrorism. Therefore every success we will have against trafficking will deprive the organised crime from one of their major sources of income. And if you see the obvious link between the organised crime, terrorism and political extremism in many regions, I believe this is an indirect contribution that can be brought by human rights institutions to the global effort. My third point is about the interconnection and interdependence between human rights and democracy on one hand, and long-term security and stability and economic development on the other hand. Such a connection should be stressed at each human rights conference and find a prominent place in the conclusions, because it is still not clear for many. Too many people are still thinking in one dimension, while there are three. Let me give you two examples. Democratic institutions are about building good governance and building a strong civil society supporting it. But everyone agrees that institution building is also essential for long-term stability and security in each country. Now, to have good governance, you need to have a system of checks and balances, therefore you need to have democratic rules of the game, and you need to have elections. It is also through the system of checks and balances that one can ensure that the civil society supports and backs the institutions. Democratic Institutions have to develop their own internal mechanisms to address problems within the State and offer remedies. Thus, citizens will feel empowered and have a sense of ownership of this political system. Any state that disregards these fundamental principles risks to have a disconnection between the government, its institutions and the people of the country, and therefore accept an element of unpredictability and instability in its functioning. The other example is the need to link closely sustainable economic development with institution building because - as I said before - there is a need for predictable environment for the investors as well and rules of the game which are fair and not changing. In turn, strong economic development will create a middle class that is an essential support to any long-standing democracy. I hope that I managed to convince you about the link between security, economic development and democratic institutions. Thank you.