First, I would like to report on some ongoing activities of the ODIHR. Then, I would like to make some concluding remarks after five and a half years at the ODIHR, as this is my last comprehensive report to the Permanent Council. Last week I traveled to Skopje to inform the Government of Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia about the forthcoming deployment of the ODIHR election observation mission. I was informed by the Government that the date of 15 September has now been confirmed as the election date and we have now received an official invitation to observe the elections. The authorities have also appointed the Head as well as most other members of the SEC. I had a meeting with the NATO officials in Skopje who are very open to support and co-operation with this mission. These elections will be a democratic test for the FYROM and will hopefully complete the stabilization process. There is at this stage no reason to believe that they will not be conducted in a peaceful and orderly manner, especially if all political actors adhere to a 'code of conduct' for the election campaign that we support very much. The risk of intra-ethnic violence or orchestrated incidents cannot, however, be completely set aside. The deployment of the observation mission is already underway, with the Head of the Mission Mr. Julian Peel-Yates in Skopje and other members arriving next week and, provided we get secondments, a full core team of 17 professionals will be in place by 22 July. Providing we get the secondments, 30 LTOs will arrive during week of 28 July; 15 mid-term observers on 28 August; and finally 750 STOs will arrive during the period of 1-11 September, departing on 17 September. The observation mission will include a good number of parliamentarians from the OSCE, Council of Europe and the European Parliament, as well as 100 STOs seconded by the European Commission. This should however not be viewed as replacing the secondments from the European capitals. I would like to stress this as we are entering holidays and are under heavy strain due to a busy schedule. For the deployment of LTOs, mid-term observers and STOs, the ODIHR depends on generous secondments from the participating States. We will need though more logistics officers than originally planned and I would be grateful for delegations to consider the secondment of two military officers specialized in logistics. I would therefore request you all to motivate your capitals to give us the required numbers. I intend to make another visit to Skopje on 13-16 August to review the progress of the deployment. We have also deployed a small team to Southern Serbia since 4 July in view of the local elections on 28 July. We will deploy 20-30 STOs to observe these elections, to be recruited from the local embassies. We have received the draft for a new and comprehensive electoral code for Azerbaijan, which the Azerbaijani Government had committed itself to when entering the Council of Europe and which should regulate all future elections in the country. We are reviewing it in close cooperation with the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission and it is intended that both the Venice Commission and OSCE will speak with one voice and comment jointly on this draft as well as participate in round table with key actors later in the year. Following demonstrations and increasing instability mostly in the southern part of Kyrgyzstan, President Akaev has taken a number of significant measures in order to deal with the crisis peacefully. These measures have been far-reaching, from the resignation of the Government, including officials from the President's own administration, to the beginning of a dialogue with all political forces and cancellation of the decree number 20 which had made registration of all publishing and printing equipment compulsory and which clearly was an unacceptable piece of law for any democracy (instead, the establishment of an independent printing house, a project supported by the OSCE seems to be underway). Also a number of laws have been put before the parliament such as the law on ombudsman and the law on public demonstrations. Regarding Mr. Beknazarov, I welcome the overturning of his sentence by the court. This signals hopefully the resolution of this case. Most and foremost, the authorities have refrained from the use of force, contrary to what had happened in March in Aksy, leading to the catastrophic developments that we know. President Akaev must be commended for all these measures. However, efforts should be continued, in particular to develop a credible and meaningful dialogue with opposition and civil leaders; it should be sustained, substantial and lead to jointly finding solutions to the present crisis. Also, the root causes for the obvious frustration of parts of the population, mostly in the south, must be addressed with a long-term perspective. Dialogue with civil society is therefore vital. In other words, there is still work ahead. Last, we have been or are presently reviewing new pieces of legislation - on political extremism and political opposition - and while understanding the need to close the door to political extremism leading to violence in the context of the fight against terrorism, we must warn against definitions that are so broad that they could be abused one day against activists which present no threat of violence or terrorism. In the Russian Federation, in the framework of the ODIHR's Chechnya project, we have conducted jointly with the UNHCR and Mr. Kalamanov's office a training of local officials, judiciary, lawyers and staff of Mr. Kalamanov's office. The project began in late May and it will be pursued after the summer. I even hope to extend the cooperation on this project to the Soros Open Society Institute (OSI) in Moscow, with whom I had discussions to this effect during my last visit to Moscow in May. However, I am concerned that the name of the successor to Mr. Kalamanov is not yet known. As we are on the Chechnya topic, I should mention that I have taken note with concern of information relating to the relocation of IDPs from Znamenskoye. I refer to the MSF press release of 9 July, according to which such relocation is not entirely voluntary. We should of course very much support the return of the IDPs, but there should be a choice and security guarantees. On police training issues and following discussions I had with the Secretary General, we have started to support the Police Adviser Richard Monk to allow him to develop and implement swiftly a pilot project in Central Asia and benefit from the ODIHR experience in project management and implementation. I will not report in detail on the other election observation missions, as final reports have been distributed to the PC. Let me just mention our assessment of the French presidential election. This has been the first time that the ODIHR made a thorough assessment in one of the oldest democracies, and "west of Vienna", as Ambassador Alekseyev likes to say. Beside the evident message of rejection of double standards that the ODIHR has always sought to promote and will hopefully carry on doing also in the future, one can draw the following conclusions: The participation of election experts from the Russian Federation, Ukraine and Serbia has proven highly beneficial, and should - according to the recommendations of these experts themselves - be extended to other major elections. While the French election process is highly reliable, transparent and professionally administered, the assessment highlighted that some recommendations which we regularly insist on in other participating States, are not always the rule in the old democracies. This is why we made some recommendations in the final report with regard to observers and voter registration deadlines, even though these points may not be a major problem in the French context. This observation mission in France should establish a precedent and lead to other assessments of major elections "west of Vienna". I am grateful in this context for the standing invitation by Germany on observation of their future elections. It would have been my intention to be present there, but the election section is at this point in time so overstretched in terms of personnel and financial resources that this will not be possible. As for the Human Dimension Implementation Meeting, I believe that the finalized review of the modalities can indeed have some positive impact on the Meeting. So far, we have noted a somewhat increased interest and I am pleased to inform you that the key-note speakers will include President Martti Ahtisaari, former President of Finland, who will speak at the opening, as well as Hina Jilani, UN Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders, who will address the closing session. At this stage, we have also noted a somewhat increased interest by the NGOs, than what we have had in the few previous years. I wish to thank Ambassador Kai Eide. Without his determined effort the discussions on a new format would probably still be going on right now. A note of concern, to conclude this first part, about the planned execution of the two brothers, Sherali and Dovud Nazriev, in Tajikistan, despite an appeal under consideration at the UN Human Rights Commission. I call on Tajikistan to refrain from such a step and to decide on a retrial, as the previous one had numerous irregularities. Mr. Chairman, As I said, this is my last comprehensive report to the Permanent Council. Allow me therefore to make some personal conclusions after seven years with the OSCE, including more than five years as Director of the ODIHR. I feel privileged for having had the chance to be with the OSCE at its most fascinating time. Memories of Grozny in 1995, Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1996, Albania in 1997, Pristina in winter 1998, or the crossing of the border to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in June 1999 after the NATO air campaign - without a visa - to meet for the first time with representatives of Serbia's civil society and NGOs, to name only a few examples, will be with me forever. But I also feel privileged because I was able to take over a small office, however full of potential, and after restructuring it with the tireless help of a highly motivated and professional ODIHR staff that I had the luck to recruit, to transform it into an efficient and target-oriented Institution. Today I leave an Institution which is credible, healthy, and operational both in terms of financial and human resources and has achieved professional standards which serve the OSCE beyond the Human Dimension stricto sensu. I hope that the reform process underway will maintain the flexibility and autonomy of this and the other Institutions. When I started my tenure, the ODIHR was not implementing projects and there was not much political will in the OSCE to conduct technical assistance work. Rather, the ODIHR was a seminar-organizer and an institute for election observation. Over the last five years, the ODIHR has expanded its technical assistance work to cover a number of thematic fields - gender equality, migration, rule of law, NGO and civil society work, freedom of religion, combating trafficking in human beings, as well as torture, and now combating terrorism. The ODIHR has developed a number of specialized activities, such as the grassroots democracy programme, and the recent web-based legislation-drafting project. Today, not only does the ODIHR conduct its own project portfolio of technical work, but our staff provides advice and support on Mission-generated projects and to other international organizations in the conduct of their work. This is in addition to the ODIHR staff being a resource base on thematic areas for the Organization and for participating States. Currently, in addition to all this, the ODIHR implements around 100 of its own projects in over 20 countries. All this has only been possible thanks to the generous support of participating States, in form of voluntary contributions, secondments and other, in-kind support to our work. For the voluntary contributions I am particularly grateful to the European Commission, which has become our biggest contributor, as well as to Austria, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Slovakia, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the US. I thank them for their strong support. I have often been asked what is the ODIHR's strategy in the field or democratization or whether we indeed have one. The ODIHR work is partly done through projects, where the ODIHR's approach has always been to build links between civil society and the state; to seek to develop the next generations of leaders; but first and foremost, to work in partnership and build trust in democratic principles. It is important to remember in this era of OSCE reform that project work is not an end in itself but rather a means to an end. Specifically, targeted projects are used to assist States in meeting their political and legal commitments, to enhance long-term security, and to learn how to cooperate better with each other. The secret of our success is the fact that we do not conduct projects just for the sake of doing something, but to work in specific areas of development where we believe we can make a difference and improve the lives of ordinary people in the OSCE region. This also constitutes a contribution to security and stability, which is what this Organization is all about. In one of our most important projects this year, we have undertaken to provide a strategic platform for the OSCE Missions in South East Europe to co-ordinate Human Dimension activities. Just at the time when the OSCE's Kosovo Mission is about to begin institution building activities, we have provided a mechanism for transferring relevant project know-how from the Bosnia Mission. That is added value, this is value for money and this is exactly what we talk about when we talk about synergy. In the field of elections, the ODIHR has indeed become the pre-eminent institution in Europe for election observation missions, deploying 10-15 missions per year, thousands of observers, and fully co-ordinating its activities with other institutions involved in the process. More importantly, our assessments of electoral processes have become an important benchmark for the democratic development of participating States, with a solid reputation not only within the OSCE region, but also beyond. Lately, we had the visit in Warsaw of representatives of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) interested in developing a methodology for observation on the African continent. The intention is to follow up later this year with a workshop. The scope of the ODIHR observation reports have expanded beyond the mere technical aspects of an electoral process. They now include findings, conclusions, and recommendations ranging from the more effective participation of minorities in the electoral process, the more effective participation of women in elections, promoting the rights of domestic observers and other civil society organizations, and more. The ODIHR also provides technical assistance to help implement its recommendations after an observation mission, thus improving follow-up. Here, too, we have established an unprecedented level of co-operation with the Council of Europe's Venice Commission through which we provide joint analysis and recommendations on improving election legislation across the OSCE area. Thus, the damaging competition in the election observation field between various institutions within and between the OSCE and other European institutions has ceased to exist. For the past 3-4 years, the international community has been speaking with one voice on election related issues. Undoubtedly, this has contributed to its effectiveness in pressing for much-needed improvements in many participating States. With regard to the election observation calendar, we have to remember, however, that the ODIHR's monitoring calendar has to be set according to our mandate - independently - and not according to the political agenda of any OSCE actor. An alternative approach could very quickly turn the observation into a political instrument and strip it off all credibility. As you know, the ODIHR is conducting a project on international election standards, on which we will present a status report at the Implementation Meeting on 18 September. International election standards are at the moment scarce and remain mostly undefined; instead of standards one should rather speak of international practices. There is therefore a clear need to agree on a set of norms and also develop them further. This process could eventually lead to a Council of Europe convention and a new version of the OSCE Copenhagen set of commitments. Let us not forget in this context that the OSCE used to have a leading role in setting norms in the field of elections as well as other fields - this normative role should not be entirely forgotten! Conclusion No matter how many hundreds of technical assistance projects international organizations conduct in the field, there is no substitute for political will of the states themselves. Without a real will by states to embark on programmes of systemic reform, we will be forever pointing to oases of reform in a desert of repression and authoritarianism. Yes, we have a number of real successes that we can point to at the ODIHR, but their sustainability remains in political jeopardy, subject to the dedication of enthusiasm of selected individuals. We are still looking at key reformers in limited areas of development. These people are still in the minority within transitional governments. The main challenge for transitional societies really is to ascertain ownership of democratic institutions and to relinquish the remaining traditions, mentalities and methods of their totalitarian past. Too often, democratic changes are limited to organizing a façade of democracy, through organizing elections or adopting new laws. But the fundamental understanding that democracy actually means credible checks and balances, social and ethnic inclusiveness, a truly independent judiciary and an active and participatory civil society is still missing. The first decade after the fall of the Berlin Wall has brought civil wars, inter-ethnic conflicts, questionable elections but also some signs of hope. The second decade after the post-communist order, however, will bring many changes that we need to anticipate. Many states will change their leadership for the first time. What will this mean for the future of the democratic reform? Will we have democratic elections? Will we have a greater commitment to civic empowerment, separation of power between branches of government, or rule of law? Or will it go quite in the opposite direction? This will be a period of potentially great and explosive political turbulences. Will we in the OSCE be ready to meet these challenges? Or will we be condemned to fashionable projects and Potemkin meetings to justify our existence while the real 'crisis management' will be done by other actors? We need to remain creative and flexible, as we are the only organization that is not a club of exclusive members, that promots dialogue and that can still respond rapidly to emerging situations. We need also to remember in this next decade that challenges may emerge in all parts of the OSCE region. Artificially limiting the scope of OSCE concerns and activities to restricted geographical areas reduces the Organization's overall value and relevance. All OSCE States share responsibility for upholding fundamental commitments; in particular those who prevail themselves of being the initiators of such commitments have an increased and historical responsibility in maintaining the credibility of these values.