Parliament has been asked for its consent on the EU-Israel CAA agreement. However, the Committee on International Trade (INTA) has various concerns regarding this agreement, namely legal concerns about its territorial scope and constitutional concerns about its implementation. Parliament therefore requests the following clarifications:
1. Does the Commission consider that it has the legal authority under Article 9 of the Protocol to reject or geographically restrict the territorial authority of the ‘responsible authorities’ and ‘notified bodies’ under this protocol? If yes, what legally binding assurances can the Comission give Parliament that it will not accept, tacitly or otherwise, that the territorial competence of the Israeli Responsible Authority referred to in Article 9 of the Protocol covers territories brought under Israeli administration in 1967?
2. If the agreement comes into force, how will the Comission be able to ensure that no industrial products manufactured in Israeli settlements in the West Bank or East Jerusalem are certified under the scope of this Protocol?
3. How will the Comission ensure, bearing in mind previous ECJ rulings, that Palestinian industrial products produced in the Occupied Palestinian Territories will not be discriminated against if a request is made for their certification by Israeli authorities under this agreement?
4. While INTA is aware that industrial certification under the CAA does not mean that European customs authorities are no longer required to check the origin of products in accordance with the ‘EU-Israel Technical Arrangement’, it is not entirely convinced that the mechanism in place is foolproof. Can the Commission clarify whether it intends to review or reinforce this mechanism of customs control?