A/HRC/19/40 E. Michael Hamilton 24. Michael Hamilton, Secretary to the OSCE/ODIHR Panel of Experts on the Freedom of Assembly, stated that the impetus to establish the Panel of Experts on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly had arisen from a debate at the 2003 OSCE/ODIHR Human Dimension Implementation Meeting, which had noted deteriorating conditions for, or a complete failure to protect, the enjoyment of freedom of assembly in several OSCE participating States. Among the concerns which placed freedom of assembly high on ODIHR agenda were instances of harassment of assembly organizers, the arbitrary arrest of participants in demonstrations, the excessive use of force by police to disperse peaceful protests and the detrimental impact on freedom of assembly of measures introduced to fight extremism and terrorism. Such concerns continued to arise in many OSCE participating States. More subtly, it was often the legislative framework providing for the regulation of freedom of assembly that led to inadequate protection of the right. Laws in many countries conferred broad discretionary powers on local officials and law enforcement personnel (leading to arbitrary, discriminatory and disproportionate restrictions); placed onerous bureaucratic and sometimes financial burdens on assembly organizers; unduly prohibited assemblies in particular (often central) locations or at particular times (for example, at elections); or failed to provide effective and timely remedies for those who sought to challenge any restrictions imposed. 25. Mr. Hamilton reported that the Expert Panel had been formed in 2004, and was composed of 10 academics and practitioners, providing regional representation across the OSCE space, appointed for four-year terms by the Director of ODIHR. One of the primary roles of the Panel had been to assist participating States in ensuring that their legislation and practices were consistent with their OSCE commitments and other international standards. To that end, in March 2007, ODIHR published the first edition of the Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly, developed by the Panel of Experts, in consultation with the Council of Europe’s European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), which subsequently officially endorsed the Guidelines in June 2008. ODIHR and the Venice Commission issued a second, updated edition of the Guidelines in 2010. 2 The Guidelines were informed by the relevant jurisprudence – particularly that of the European Court of Human Rights and national constitutional courts. The Guidelines also incorporated examples of good practice where States had demonstrated workable solutions to freedom of assembly dilemmas. 26. The Guidelines set out seven “guiding principles”: (a) the presumption in favour of holding assemblies whereby the right should, insofar as was possible, be enjoyed without regulation; (b) the State’s positive duty to protect peaceful assembly; (c) legality, and the imperative that any restrictions imposed had a formal basis in law (which itself should be compatible with human rights standards); (d) proportionality and the need to ensure that any restrictions were the least intrusive needed to achieve the legitimate aim being pursued; (e) non-discrimination, emphasizing that the freedom to assemble should enjoyed equally by all individuals and groups; (f) good administration, including the accessibility of the regulatory authority and transparency of the process; and (g) liability/accountability for the authorities should they fail to uphold their legal obligations. 27. The Guidelines had spurred legislative reform initiatives in several countries in transition, and had also had traction in more established democracies. Essentially, they were a soft law tool that provides: (a) a reference point for domestic authorities tasked with 2 8 OSCE/ODIHR and the Venice Commission, Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly, 2nd ed. (Warsaw, 2010). Available from www.osce.org/node/73405?download=false.