Why did Lord Judd resign?

From a short extract of a Verbatim report of debate on Chechnya at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on January 29, 2003 - "Conflict in the Chechen Republic" - one evinces that a particular, but central and decisive, resolution of Lord Judd read in its original as (capital letters are mine):

“The Assembly believes that the necessary conditions for holding such a referendum CANNOT be met by this date. The Assembly, therefore, calls upon the competent authorities TO POSTPONE THE REFERENDUM AND to take the essential steps to achieve such conditions... ", etc., etc.

An amendment (No. 13), tabled by parliamentarians Slutsky, Rogozin, Fedorov, Sudarenkov and Yarygina introduced the omission of his call for a postponement and changed the word "CANNOT" in "MIGHT NOT":

“The Assembly is concerned that the necessary conditions for holding such a referendum MIGHT NOT be met by this date. The Assembly therefore calls upon the competent authorities [...?...] to take essential steps to achieve such conditions...", etc.,etc.

But at the same time a discussion on an oral sub-amendment which proposed to leave out “MIGHT NOT” and insert the words “ARE UNLIKELY TO” was taking place. A somewhat technical discussion between resolutions, emendment and sub-emendment took place briefly which according to Lord Judd distracted him and, focusing on this sub-amendment, he didn't realize at all the above omission of the referendum postponement!

Therefore he intervened only to support this sub-amendment without saying a word about the omission, which destroyed after all the vital and central point of all his work. The text of the amendent final resolution read:

“The Assembly is concerned that the necessary conditions for holding such a referendum ARE UNLIKELY to be met by this date. The Assembly therefore calls upon the competent authorities [...?...] to take essential steps to achieve such conditions...”, etc., etc.

The day after, the Moscow Times (Friday, Jan. 31, 2003 - "Lord Judd resigns over Chechnya", by Natalia Yefimova, Staff Writer), told about this fact as follows:

"An emotional and frustrated Judd told television reporters that, during Wednesday's vote on the resolution, he had been so concerned with an amendment submitted by the Russian delegation that he failed to notice the omission of his call for a postponement. 'I believe this was a grave and inexcusable error of judgment on my part,' said Judd, who also co-chaired a joint working group of PACE and the State Duma."

Is this credible? How is it that after three years of substantial inactivity and passive alliance with a criminal regime this man suddenly openly tells the truth and says how things really stand but at this decisive moment he inadvertedly destroys his own work and resigns?!? Was this a sincere repentance or was some shabby tactics behind all this?

I don't know and we will probably never know. However fact is, and this is at this point the most important thing, that the majority of PACE thinks that the referendum can take place, and this despite that there is a lack of public security, there are no free pluralist media, there is no freedom of political parties, no public debate, that those who will be allowed to compete for office have been handpicked in advance by the Kremlin and are unlikely to raise objections to Russian forces' repressive behavior in Chechnya, that hat there will be no participation of the earlier elected representatives as Maskhadov and the others, and that the Russian soldiers fighting in the region should be able to vote while people who have been displaced are not.

Again we can observe how this Europe devoid of any fundamental values and principles doesn't dare to rise its voice against the most elementary violations!!!